Badjacketing would be misrepresenting, manufacturing or lying about a person to paint a bad image of them. I literally linked to the thing they just posted, and are doing… nothing about any of that is false or misrepresentative. Just because it makes them look bad and you don’t like it, doesn’t make it “badjacketing”.
Engage with what is being said instead of trying to appeal to some reddit-tier fallacy argument.
if we’re quoting handbooks, then doing a “both sides are bad” is right out the alt-right handbook.
And lets see… a “leftist” in “leftist spaces” making plays from the “alt-right handbook”, misrepresenting them as “leftist” opinions to fracture coalition… what would you call a person like that? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
no one is saying “both sides”, as though there are only two. we’re talking about what harm reduction is, and whether voting qualifies. it does not.
Removed by mod
badjacketing isn’t allowed here.
proving you don’t read and huff your own farts.
Badjacketing would be misrepresenting, manufacturing or lying about a person to paint a bad image of them. I literally linked to the thing they just posted, and are doing… nothing about any of that is false or misrepresentative. Just because it makes them look bad and you don’t like it, doesn’t make it “badjacketing”.
Engage with what is being said instead of trying to appeal to some reddit-tier fallacy argument.
Engage with what is being said instead of trying to appeal to some reddit-tier fallacy argument.
calling it a psyop is straight out of cointelpro handbook.
if we’re quoting handbooks, then doing a “both sides are bad” is right out the alt-right handbook.
And lets see… a “leftist” in “leftist spaces” making plays from the “alt-right handbook”, misrepresenting them as “leftist” opinions to fracture coalition… what would you call a person like that? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?