Travesty: Abhisit Vejjajiva charged with 'murder'

[Gustaf]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

[Lief 🗽]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing.

Your English language reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

I hope to respond to your post when I have the time, Politicus.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

See Gustaf, this is the problem with you.

I find Lief's arguments to be completely wrong, misguided and somewhat silly. But there's nothing in what he posted that in any way suggests he's a misogynist or a racist. You're just bringing out strawmen instead of actually addressing his points (which you don't need to, since Politicus did that excellently).

That's what I said when I mentioned your "disturbing tendency to judge people very early and to argue against strawmen instead of against them". At least get aware of this.

[Jackson]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

Possibly the truest thing yet posted on the subject. Bravo!

[Velasco]

Lol! Jackson, are you a truth researcher or something?... I find that politicus' replies on this subject are excellent and, honestly, I can't find cracks in her argumentation -probably because I agree with her at almost 100%.

[Gustaf]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

See Gustaf, this is the problem with you.

I find Lief's arguments to be completely wrong, misguided and somewhat silly. But there's nothing in what he posted that in any way suggests he's a misogynist or a racist. You're just bringing out strawmen instead of actually addressing his points (which you don't need to, since Politicus did that excellently).

That's what I said when I mentioned your "disturbing tendency to judge people very early and to argue against strawmen instead of against them". At least get aware of this.

You think that's what I'm doing? I'm not saying he's racist nor misogynist. I'm not arguing against a strawman because I'm not arguing in that post at all.

Maybe you should be aware of the irony in judging someone as being disturbed based on apparently not really understanding their posts. You'll have to forgive me for not really caring much about what you think I need to be aware of because I have never seen a post from you that indicates you having anything to offer me in terms of advice.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

Left-wingers are opposed to working in coal mines? The idea is to remove the aspects that are degrading and exploitative. Legalized prostitution, if implemented properly, achieves this.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

See Gustaf, this is the problem with you.

I find Lief's arguments to be completely wrong, misguided and somewhat silly. But there's nothing in what he posted that in any way suggests he's a misogynist or a racist. You're just bringing out strawmen instead of actually addressing his points (which you don't need to, since Politicus did that excellently).

That's what I said when I mentioned your "disturbing tendency to judge people very early and to argue against strawmen instead of against them". At least get aware of this.

You think that's what I'm doing? I'm not saying he's racist nor misogynist. I'm not arguing against a strawman because I'm not arguing in that post at all.

Maybe you should be aware of the irony in judging someone as being disturbed based on apparently not really understanding their posts. You'll have to forgive me for not really caring much about what you think I need to be aware of because I have never seen a post from you that indicates you having anything to offer me in terms of advice.

What you call irony, others would call it being an asshole for no reason.

[Gustaf]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

See Gustaf, this is the problem with you.

I find Lief's arguments to be completely wrong, misguided and somewhat silly. But there's nothing in what he posted that in any way suggests he's a misogynist or a racist. You're just bringing out strawmen instead of actually addressing his points (which you don't need to, since Politicus did that excellently).

That's what I said when I mentioned your "disturbing tendency to judge people very early and to argue against strawmen instead of against them". At least get aware of this.

You think that's what I'm doing? I'm not saying he's racist nor misogynist. I'm not arguing against a strawman because I'm not arguing in that post at all.

Maybe you should be aware of the irony in judging someone as being disturbed based on apparently not really understanding their posts. You'll have to forgive me for not really caring much about what you think I need to be aware of because I have never seen a post from you that indicates you having anything to offer me in terms of advice.

What you call irony, others would call it being an asshole for no reason.

I defined your behaviour as ironic, if you prefer to label it being an asshole for no reason I won't object.

See, you're trying to lecture me on how I should think and behave to be a better person. Which is both incredibly arrogant and very judgmental. Which is a bit ironic. Or assholeish, but I  prefer to think of it as ironic.

[Franzl]

I must say, I do rather enjoy the Antonio vs. Gustaf feuds.

[Gustaf]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

Left-wingers are opposed to working in coal mines? The idea is to remove the aspects that are degrading and exploitative. Legalized prostitution, if implemented properly, achieves this.

No, miners are often exploited and the battle against that exploitation is one of the defining characteristics of the left movement historically. The number of miners still dying every year is pretty high.

You don't think prostitution is in anyway inherently degrading and exploitative? That's fascinating. Do you think it is a coincidence that such a vast, vast majority of prostitutes come from poor backgrounds and/or troubled family backgrounds?

My point here is that while libertarians often argue that, for example, Asian sweatshops are great the left usually argues that certain type of jobs are exploitative and shouldn't be allowed. To see anti-capitalist crusaders suddenly turn around and be totally fine with prostitution, potentially the most exploitative business out there, is amusing.

[Gustaf]

I must say, I do rather enjoy the Antonio vs. Gustaf feuds.

It seems to have become a bit of a tradition by now. I'm beginning to think it's just a cultural difference boiling down to the famous French lack of humour though.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The number of miners still dying every year is pretty high.

Even in the 'West' (where mining has pretty much disappeared as a major occupation group, obviously) there are still semi-regular pit disasters. And then there are the occupational illnesses - respiratory diseases especially - that come with it, many of which are ultimately fatal.

This is without even considering, for example, the coal industry in China.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Anyways, has someone seriously compared prostitution to manual labour in general? That's hilarious. Ought to be pretty offensive - in different ways - to all concerned, but actually, no, it's just hilarious.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's always funny to see presumed left-wingers suddenly argue that people working in degrading jobs where they get exploited is a great thing. I guess that mostly just applies as long as the people doing the work are coloured women rather than white middle-class males.

It gets extra funny when Lief himself compares it to working in coal mines.

See Gustaf, this is the problem with you.

I find Lief's arguments to be completely wrong, misguided and somewhat silly. But there's nothing in what he posted that in any way suggests he's a misogynist or a racist. You're just bringing out strawmen instead of actually addressing his points (which you don't need to, since Politicus did that excellently).

That's what I said when I mentioned your "disturbing tendency to judge people very early and to argue against strawmen instead of against them". At least get aware of this.

You think that's what I'm doing? I'm not saying he's racist nor misogynist. I'm not arguing against a strawman because I'm not arguing in that post at all.

Maybe you should be aware of the irony in judging someone as being disturbed based on apparently not really understanding their posts. You'll have to forgive me for not really caring much about what you think I need to be aware of because I have never seen a post from you that indicates you having anything to offer me in terms of advice.

What you call irony, others would call it being an asshole for no reason.

I defined your behaviour as ironic, if you prefer to label it being an asshole for no reason I won't object.

See, you're trying to lecture me on how I should think and behave to be a better person. Which is both incredibly arrogant and very judgmental. Which is a bit ironic. Or assholeish, but I  prefer to think of it as ironic.

Everybody can have something to teach to someone else. You seem to assume that my telling you what's wrong with your arguing style entails that I think I'm a better person than you. I have no idea whether I'm a better person than you (I easily admit I'm less knowledgeable and generally less articulate than you), but this idea is ridiculous. I already admitted that you were right on certain of your criticisms on me during our DSK feuds. Even though you have your flaws, you can be right on certain things. So, who's being arrogant here? The one who dares to question the perfection of your arguing style, or the one who rejects any criticism as arrogance?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I must say, I do rather enjoy the Antonio vs. Gustaf feuds.

It seems to have become a bit of a tradition by now. I'm beginning to think it's just a cultural difference boiling down to the famous French lack of humour though.

I assume this post is another display of your well-known humour, rather than a bigoted ethnic slur. Well done, that's really clever.

[Gustaf]

I must say, I do rather enjoy the Antonio vs. Gustaf feuds.

It seems to have become a bit of a tradition by now. I'm beginning to think it's just a cultural difference boiling down to the famous French lack of humour though.

I assume this post is another display of your well-known humour, rather than a bigoted ethnic slur. Well done, that's really clever.

I have the feeling you're not enjoying it. And I thought it was such a good tie-in with how all this started!

See, you're assuming that because we've had our disagreements I am pathological or disturbed. Which is a bit on the extreme side. I don't think you're a deficient character, merely that you're wrong.

If you were to actually criticize my style of arguing and doing so from any position of authority I wouldn't think of it as arrogance. I personally rarely lecture people on how they should be because I find it generally arrogant. I have no problem taking advice from people who are superior to me but it'd frankly be a sad reflection on me if a forum mostly populated with 15-year olds was generally superior to me. Maybe that makes me arrogant, but then so be it.

See, I'm not asking you to make some major changes in your character or argumentation style so as to fit my preferences. I only take the right to decide how I'm going to post and I don't think not following your life tips makes me as arrogant as you'd like to think. You're not Dr. Phil, you know.

[Gustaf]

The number of miners still dying every year is pretty high.

Even in the 'West' (where mining has pretty much disappeared as a major occupation group, obviously) there are still semi-regular pit disasters. And then there are the occupational illnesses - respiratory diseases especially - that come with it, many of which are ultimately fatal.

This is without even considering, for example, the coal industry in China.

I thought mentioning coal mining would eventually draw you out of your lair.

And, yes, it's been argued in the thread that there is no difference between menial labour and prostitution.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I thought mentioning coal mining would eventually draw you out of your lair.

And, yes, it's been argued in the thread that there is no difference between menial labour and prostitution.

I am an incredibly predictable individual, yes.

Presumably the 'selling your body is no different to selling your labour' canard? lol

[Gustaf]

I thought mentioning coal mining would eventually draw you out of your lair.

And, yes, it's been argued in the thread that there is no difference between menial labour and prostitution.

I am an incredibly predictable individual, yes.

Presumably the 'selling your body is no different to selling your labour' canard? lol

Yep. The specific example given was that no one minds coal mining so prostitution should be perfectly fine. Which I found a bit amusing.

[Antonio the Sixth]

See, you're assuming that because we've had our disagreements I am pathological or disturbed. Which is a bit on the extreme side. I don't think you're a deficient character, merely that you're wrong.

If you were to actually criticize my style of arguing and doing so from any position of authority I wouldn't think of it as arrogance. I personally rarely lecture people on how they should be because I find it generally arrogant. I have no problem taking advice from people who are superior to me but it'd frankly be a sad reflection on me if a forum mostly populated with 15-year olds was generally superior to me. Maybe that makes me arrogant, but then so be it.

See, I'm not asking you to make some major changes in your character or argumentation style so as to fit my preferences. I only take the right to decide how I'm going to post and I don't think not following your life tips makes me as arrogant as you'd like to think. You're not Dr. Phil, you know.

So you only accept advice from people whom you consider superior? That's definitely very mature and not arrogant at all.

I do accept advise from anyone, depending on how convincing their arguments seem to me. You're free to tell me why my criticisms are stupid or wrong, that's smarter than preemptively dismissing them because a stupid kid on an internet forum has nothing to teach to you.

Anyways, no, I don't think you're disturbed or a bad person. After all, you're the one making tongue-in-cheek remarks hinting about the racism/sexism of your opponents.

[opebo]

One important thing to consider when evaluating studies of prostitution is that the worst psychological problems with prostitution are not related to shame, stigma etc. but to the simple fact that a prostitute has to have sex with someone he or she doesn't want to have sex with. In order to cope with this you need to disconnect your mind from your body and it is this process that in the long run is very harmfull and dangerous.

That's an interesting point, however it doesn't change the fact that every job requires one to do something one doesn't want to do pretty much the entire time one is toiling. 

I've little doubt that the chap behind the counter at the convenience store is also daydreaming about something else whilst at toil.

[Gustaf]

See, you're assuming that because we've had our disagreements I am pathological or disturbed. Which is a bit on the extreme side. I don't think you're a deficient character, merely that you're wrong.

If you were to actually criticize my style of arguing and doing so from any position of authority I wouldn't think of it as arrogance. I personally rarely lecture people on how they should be because I find it generally arrogant. I have no problem taking advice from people who are superior to me but it'd frankly be a sad reflection on me if a forum mostly populated with 15-year olds was generally superior to me. Maybe that makes me arrogant, but then so be it.

See, I'm not asking you to make some major changes in your character or argumentation style so as to fit my preferences. I only take the right to decide how I'm going to post and I don't think not following your life tips makes me as arrogant as you'd like to think. You're not Dr. Phil, you know.

So you only accept advice from people whom you consider superior? That's definitely very mature and not arrogant at all.

I do accept advise from anyone, depending on how convincing their arguments seem to me. You're free to tell me why my criticisms are stupid or wrong, that's smarter than preemptively dismissing them because a stupid kid on an internet forum has nothing to teach to you.

Anyways, no, I don't think you're disturbed or a bad person. After all, you're the one making tongue-in-cheek remarks hinting about the racism/sexism of your opponents.

Huh? Yes? How is it 'mature' to heed an opinion that is misinformed, wrong or stupid?

If you were giving arguments I could listen to it but if you make an assertion, why would I care?

In this case you're wrong because I don't judge people preemptively or whatever. Why would I even want to do that? I judge them based on what they say. You're also wrong because you don't seem to understand the concept of being sarcastic about silly positions of silly people. Arguing with someone like Lief whose basic creed is anti-thinking is a bit pointless so I settle for making fun of him every now and then.

Oh, and I'm not hinting about racism or sexism. I don't think you get this concept. Which is why you should perhaps not be so fast to judge.

[Antonio the Sixth]

See, you're assuming that because we've had our disagreements I am pathological or disturbed. Which is a bit on the extreme side. I don't think you're a deficient character, merely that you're wrong.

If you were to actually criticize my style of arguing and doing so from any position of authority I wouldn't think of it as arrogance. I personally rarely lecture people on how they should be because I find it generally arrogant. I have no problem taking advice from people who are superior to me but it'd frankly be a sad reflection on me if a forum mostly populated with 15-year olds was generally superior to me. Maybe that makes me arrogant, but then so be it.

See, I'm not asking you to make some major changes in your character or argumentation style so as to fit my preferences. I only take the right to decide how I'm going to post and I don't think not following your life tips makes me as arrogant as you'd like to think. You're not Dr. Phil, you know.

So you only accept advice from people whom you consider superior? That's definitely very mature and not arrogant at all.

I do accept advise from anyone, depending on how convincing their arguments seem to me. You're free to tell me why my criticisms are stupid or wrong, that's smarter than preemptively dismissing them because a stupid kid on an internet forum has nothing to teach to you.

Anyways, no, I don't think you're disturbed or a bad person. After all, you're the one making tongue-in-cheek remarks hinting about the racism/sexism of your opponents.

Huh? Yes? How is it 'mature' to heed an opinion that is misinformed, wrong or stupid?

If you were giving arguments I could listen to it but if you make an assertion, why would I care?

In this case you're wrong because I don't judge people preemptively or whatever. Why would I even want to do that? I judge them based on what they say. You're also wrong because you don't seem to understand the concept of being sarcastic about silly positions of silly people. Arguing with someone like Lief whose basic creed is anti-thinking is a bit pointless so I settle for making fun of him every now and then.

Oh, and I'm not hinting about racism or sexism. I don't think you get this concept. Which is why you should perhaps not be so fast to judge.

For some reason you seem to think that if a comment is sarcastic, it's of no importance. It's pretty obvious that your jab at Lief was sarcastic. But that does not change the fact it was a baseless and offensive comment. Sorry, it's not OK to slander your opponents, sarcastically or not. Also, for someone who prides himself of having a very subtle humour, making jokes about someone you dislike being a racist and a sexist seems a bit gross.

[Gustaf]

See, you're assuming that because we've had our disagreements I am pathological or disturbed. Which is a bit on the extreme side. I don't think you're a deficient character, merely that you're wrong.

If you were to actually criticize my style of arguing and doing so from any position of authority I wouldn't think of it as arrogance. I personally rarely lecture people on how they should be because I find it generally arrogant. I have no problem taking advice from people who are superior to me but it'd frankly be a sad reflection on me if a forum mostly populated with 15-year olds was generally superior to me. Maybe that makes me arrogant, but then so be it.

See, I'm not asking you to make some major changes in your character or argumentation style so as to fit my preferences. I only take the right to decide how I'm going to post and I don't think not following your life tips makes me as arrogant as you'd like to think. You're not Dr. Phil, you know.

So you only accept advice from people whom you consider superior? That's definitely very mature and not arrogant at all.

I do accept advise from anyone, depending on how convincing their arguments seem to me. You're free to tell me why my criticisms are stupid or wrong, that's smarter than preemptively dismissing them because a stupid kid on an internet forum has nothing to teach to you.

Anyways, no, I don't think you're disturbed or a bad person. After all, you're the one making tongue-in-cheek remarks hinting about the racism/sexism of your opponents.

Huh? Yes? How is it 'mature' to heed an opinion that is misinformed, wrong or stupid?

If you were giving arguments I could listen to it but if you make an assertion, why would I care?

In this case you're wrong because I don't judge people preemptively or whatever. Why would I even want to do that? I judge them based on what they say. You're also wrong because you don't seem to understand the concept of being sarcastic about silly positions of silly people. Arguing with someone like Lief whose basic creed is anti-thinking is a bit pointless so I settle for making fun of him every now and then.

Oh, and I'm not hinting about racism or sexism. I don't think you get this concept. Which is why you should perhaps not be so fast to judge.

For some reason you seem to think that if a comment is sarcastic, it's of no importance. It's pretty obvious that your jab at Lief was sarcastic. But that does not change the fact it was a baseless and offensive comment. Sorry, it's not OK to slander your opponents, sarcastically or not. Also, for someone who prides himself of having a very subtle humour, making jokes about someone you dislike being a racist and a sexist seems a bit gross.

Yeah, see...that's not what it is. So I guess it was too subtle for you.

(it also wouldn't really be baseless. The left DOES generally oppose exploitation of workers. And it clear that large parts of the left on this forum don't care for sufficiently far away foreigners or women)

See, if you take a stupid and inconsistent position you might have to suffer being made fun of. If you want to avoid that you'll have to give a better justification or switch to something that makes more sense.