swim

The pictured dude in the article is apparently

Tim Smartt, the lawyer for Jacob Hersant, arriving at court in Melbourne, Australia, on Friday

and not the shithead himself. But I don’t disagree

Three times a day, or, if you can muster it, once a day!

Lol your first one was wrong, bud

Edit: and there were two ways to “get it,” meaning “understand it,” not three. That’s quite a few comprehension errors in your effort to be critical of this post!

I’ve used Red Moon from f-droid for a good while, I like it.

Huh?

The comment is almost illegible. Funny!

I don’t think you understand, because you came out of left field to restate my point as “the only way to bring about systemic change is through Marxism.”

Wtf? Where did I say anything related to Marxism, let alone use the word?

I will reply to your quote:

There are other things like support for social justice and human rights, anti-imperialism and internationalism, desire for systemic change, secularism, opposition to traditional hierarchies, etc. Are you then going to tell me that these characteristics i have outlined are right wing? Or that they are only achievable by being Marxist or Anarchist?

No! Those things are only achievable through anticapitalism! Marxism and anarchism are examples of anticapitalist thought.

“Opposition to traditional hierarchies,” “desire for systemic change,” “anti-imperialism,” and “social justice” are hollow, offensive, and nonsensical when ignoring capitalism.

I’m not a Marxist, and you can call yourself whatever you like, but if you haven’t attained class consciousness enough to recognize that capitalism is a death cult, you’re a fucking liberal.

Friend, take the straight point as it’s delivered: capitalism is a system of oppression, and “liberals” support capitalism.

Leftists call those saying “this system of oppression would be perfect, with only some changes” liberals.

Why did you reply to my comment to restate the first part of what I said?

Yeah, that’s what the comment you replied to starts with.

Your comment makes sense in the frame of “ugly people are allowed to make music,” my comment refers to the “music was better” part of the post.

The ugly people you mentioned don’t support your comment’s argument against the original assertion because their music is terrible, not “better.”

Some music sucked in the boomer’s days, made by ugly and pretty people alike.

But the contention is about music being better, and that’s some bad music.

That’s right.

Like tent poles and aircraft ĥulls. Checks out

That’s correct.

I’m aware, and agree

Well I think you bought “Aluminum Free,” whereas the one on the left doesn’t say that. That brand sells both aluminum-full snd aluminum-free.

If he was a tighter it’d be a different story

… that is there question.

Would you say what you’re seeking is “more intimacy,” up to, potentially, the most possible intimacy?

I would suggest looking at his different interests and getting curious. If you’re interested in the guy, it should be pretty easy to find reasons why this film or that game are endearingly-this-or-that in a way that makes you like and respect him even more.

Then, you bond over it; by trusting his taste (intimacy) enough to check out that show or whatever interest, you now have an opportunity to get deep (intimacy) into what you each individually felt (intimacy) about it, and maybe you felt something in common. That’s some foundation for intimacy.