what is this new trend/cult where zoomers mindlessly echo boomers saying that everyone in this generation gets too offended about everything?
at times, there could be a real issue that needs to be discussed and mindless NPCs (mostly right wing zoomers) echo that you need to loosen up and "chill".
inb4: you're a leftist cuck. im not. im a political observer
how do you respond to this?
why did our generation have to be so gay? literally and figuratively
>having emotions and reactions to the environment is gay
the problem is that zoomers will never know to express their emotions and just mindlessly follow what their e-celeb on youtube tells them to do
>at times, there could be a real issue that needs to be discussed
Historically it's the soiz who prevent discourse by claiming everyone who disagrees with their position or who voices an opinion they don't agree is a nazi or bigot.
Could you perhaps provide a more indepth example?
when did emotions ever matter? emotions literally stifle progress
Was Andy Warhol robot, or merely gay? The historical record seems contradictory on this.
hahahaha this is actually very thoughtful. Thanks for having a good mind user.
the endpoint of any progress is an emotional one.
example stability or security.
i can see why you think that: like how tempting emotions cause loss of productivity.
but that is not how you think about emotions.
I'd disagree with that. If anything it's extremists that prevent discourse. As for now, those retarded corrupt fucks up in Washington is the main problem.
>le enlightened centrist maymay
I dunno, I vaguely recall people saying he had sex with girls while others have said he was asexual or simply didn't partake, and he very well could've been gay.
Makes you wonder why we put so much faith on historical records from thousands of years ago when we don't even know simple facts about a guy from ~30 years ago.
it could be any social issue that the left cares about.
a good example is pewdiepie using racial slurs to bring in viewership. he is the biggest "jew" i have ever seen. using controversy as a means to bring in revenue.
how can you support a person who says racial slurs that could scar a viewer who just wanted to watch fun content?
there was mass hysteria with zoomers saying that it was "just a joke" in both cases.
mind you i really like louis ck who often uses very demeaning politically incorrect language but in the right context.
Can't anyone find a political stance without being shit on?
Anyway, I personally abandoned hope for the West. The "right" and the "left" talk such different languages that they can't even fight each other anymore. Though I believe that the empire of the West can be saved, I also know that there are many criteria for failure it has ticked, and though things like a decline in religion are for the better, I think that we need to get experimental, but still remain strict, if we want to maintain a steady empire forwards.
maybe you do actually need to chill out though
>mind you i really like louis ck
oof
>posting Warhol
>not a leftist cuck
cough, sure thing.
I'm far from a centrist, to be totally honest, I feel the same way about centrists that believe they're enlightened. I just hate corruption, which should be natural for the commoners to argue against.
At least he has a point though, zoomers get just as angry about dumb shit that honestly is really pointless in the long run.
>what is this new trend/cult where zoomers mindlessly echo boomers saying that everyone in this generation gets too offended about everything?
They're right, social media and clickbait culture encourages us all to generate offense from the slightest grievance and even an idiot can tell how destructive it is to any real discourse.
Well, you started this thread predicated on the idea that you wanted to have a discussion about a topic, but were prevented from doing so because people told you to chill out. Based on what you just described, you don't want to have a discussion. What it appears you actually want is to display outrage/indignation at the possibility of someone else getting offended at the content, of all things, produced by a screaming idiot Swede.
On one hand, if you were personally offended by what he said, that's not really grounds for discussion as only you can decide how you choose to react to things. "I am offended," is more of a statement than a point for debate. On the other, the idea that you're getting upset on the behalf of other potentially offended parties means, to my interpretation, that you're trying to browbeat others into silence with the hypothetical opinions of a third party. Indignation by proxy doesn't really constitute a good foundation for an argument.
you are missing the point.
it was not about me getting offended.
it was about how people reacted to injustice, just saying that it was a joke giving the abuser more power.
Precisely what injustice are you referring to? Be specific.
>you're a leftist cuck
You're a leftist cuck
>it was about how people reacted to injustice, just saying that it was a joke giving the abuser more power.
The fundamental disagreement is that you're using this words for activities which don't rise to their meaning.
Overactive compassion becomes servility.
This was one of the points I was going to drive to here: But you worded it much more succinctly. I'll wait for the other user to respond and state his case, though.