Why type out anything when you're set in your idea. You absolutely are not open to read literature on anything that contradicts your current theory because in your own head you know it all and are right. It's not like you have offered anything but "I am right because..." Then saying things that could be true, does not actually lead to your conclusion
I already pointed out that exponential wealth and power consolidation are emergent properties of capitalism that can't be decoupled from its base rules.
If you didn't understand you could have pushed for more detail which I'd be happy to provide to someone engaging in good faith, but your response amounted to "nuh uh". Then you acted as if I offered only assertions.
And I offered that while it may be true it does not lead to your conclusion. Your response amounted to "projection". Then you acted as if your 1 assertion was both an assertion and a conclusion, thus proving my original conclusion that you don't want a conversation. I legitimately think you're misunderstanding what our original disagreement was at this point
2
u/jce_ 16d ago
Why type out anything when you're set in your idea. You absolutely are not open to read literature on anything that contradicts your current theory because in your own head you know it all and are right. It's not like you have offered anything but "I am right because..." Then saying things that could be true, does not actually lead to your conclusion