<Snipped quote by SleepingSilence>
I dont agree with the characterisation that I 'hate' any particular person, or I'm hating on something for no good reason. I dont agree with libertarians, how passionate they are means nothing to me, trump supporters are passionate, sanders supporters are passionate. Neo-Confederates have an 'interest' in politics. Tumblrites have 'enthusiasm'. This is all irrelevant to me, I dont personally hate anyone I don't know but I disregard the libertarian movement just as you may very well disregard the anita sarkseesian thing.

Disliking a movement politically isnt the same as 'hate' we need to stop throwing that word around.

It certainly does appear that way, I mean you hate a video game because you think it MAY of created a few extra libertarians. That just seems too extreme for your dislike to be a mild annoyance level. XD And yes you're correct passion isn't always translate to usefulness. But, its a hell of a lot better than people who do the opposite.

I don't like Anita Sarkseeian because she HAS NO passion, she doesn't care about video games, she doesn't play them. She has no passion in what she does. Her goal is to make money. She scammed all of her supports out of money. Disregarding her opinions, she's not a good person. I may dislike Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. But I do understand the difference between Sanders genuine desire to improve the world, how he sees it, and Hillary wanting her foundation to have more press. It reminds me of a debate between The Young Turks and Sam Harris. Where Sam Harris had to explain 2+2=5 is mathematically more correct, than 2+2=100. TYT couldn't grasp the idea, and said no both were equally wrong. I think that's kind of where we are right now.

<Snipped quote by Weird Tales>

I dont hate anyone that I dont know. But I dislike the ideology with the movement just as you probably dislike SJWs or whatever.

On a side note I hate the way that libertarians try and pose as 'centrists' because they are pro-gun rights and pro-weed or whatever.

just because they aren't classic democrats or republicans doesn't mean they are in the middle the spectrum is wider than that, they are 'freedom mongers' usually anarchist hipsters who want to keep a free market. Nothing balanced about that.

I'm a centrist, I don't need need some road hating, vaping, gun toting, Meninist, Gary Johnson voting, race revisionists stinking up my political position.

Once again, I must say. A lot of SJW's (at least far far more of them.) Speak very rudely and aggressively to others, I mean when literally everyone is sexist,racist,homophobic,transphobic,ablest and god knows what else...is their main overall message. How CAN you say something that outrageous, in a polite manner?

That is false. Libertarians DO NOT, claim they are centrist. Their economy values may lean right or left. But it usually always means that most of their social views are liberal. Independents and Moderates make those claims, and yes usually most of time...no one is "in the center". And Libertarians do not equal Anarchists. I mean you're dislike seems to be from lack of knowledge of them, forgive me.

Calling them a bunch of names, also does not tend to show that you don't hate a group, because demonizing an entire group seems quite hateful to me. They also don't hate roads. Like that's someone I simply cannot understand saying with a straight face. Or saying meninist or race revisionist for that matter...-.-

I mean despite that people laugh and say "HA you think without a shit load of people FORCING you to spend money, that people would WILLINGLY give THEIR MONEY? To people who have ideas? OR even give money for their medical bills that aren't theirs. HAHAHAHA. Who would even?" *shows them kickstarter and gofundme and how fricking successful it is* >.> I mean seriously...most people will want roads...so people will pay for upkeep of those roads. (And no political system is perfect and its bound to have some kind of flaw...)

So question, do you want guns banned? Because that is absolutely not a centrist belief. Most Leftists and democrats don't even support that here.

vaping is a libertarian thing? i always associated it with bland inner-city liberal types.

Their are certain Libertarians do seem to actually be the "Give me drugs" party. Where that's the only issue they care about. But it's certainly not the majority. And it also seems to be a US only thing. At the same time, you don't have to do something to think it shouldn't try to be banned and forced out of people's hand. (their's a lot of gray area here, and its kind of hard to debate. Without going on forever. >.>)

@Dynamo Frokane you don't sound like a centrist, you sound like an SJW who are anything but centrist.

And how are libertarians meninists? Jesus that makes no sense dude. You sound like that awful writer who ruined Angela with her Tumblr feminist crap

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

It certainly does appear that way, I mean you hate a video game because you think it MAY of created a few extra libertarians. That just seems too extreme for your dislike to be a mild annoyance level. XD And yes you're correct passion isn't always translate to usefulness. But, its a hell of a lot better than people who do the opposite.

I don't like Anita Sarkseeian because she HAS NO passion, she doesn't care about video games, she doesn't play them. She has no passion in what she does. Her goal is to make money. She scammed all of her supports out of money. Disregarding her opinions, she's not a good person. I may dislike Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. But I do understand the difference between Sanders genuine desire to improve the world, how he sees it, and Hillary wanting her foundation to have more press. It reminds me of a debate between The Young Turks and Sam Harris. Where Sam Harris had to explain 2+2=5 is mathematically more correct, than 2+2=100. TYT couldn't grasp the idea, and said no both were equally wrong. I think that's kind of where we are right now.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

Once again, I must say. A lot of SJW's (at least far far more of them.) Speak very rudely and aggressively to others, I mean when literally everyone is sexist,racist,homophobic,transphobic,ablest and god knows what else...is their main overall message. How CAN you say something that outrageous, in a polite manner?

That is false. Libertarians DO NOT, claim they are centrist. Their economy values may lean right or left. But it usually always means that most of their social views are liberal. Independents and Moderates make those claims, and yes usually most of time...no one is "in the center". And Libertarians do not equal Anarchists. I mean you're dislike seems to be from lack of knowledge of them, forgive me.

Calling them a bunch of names, also does not tend to show that you don't hate a group, because demonizing an entire group seems quite hateful to me. They also don't hate roads. Like that's someone I simply cannot understand saying with a straight face. Or saying meninist or race revisionist for that matter...-.-

I mean despite that people laugh and say "HA you think without a shit load of people FORCING you to spend money, that people would WILLINGLY give THEIR MONEY? To people who have ideas? OR even give money for their medical bills that aren't theirs. HAHAHAHA. Who would even?" *shows them kickstarter and gofundme and how fricking successful it is* >.> I mean seriously...most people will want roads...so people will pay for upkeep of those roads. (And no political system is perfect and its bound to have some kind of flaw...)

So question, do you want guns banned? Because that is absolutely not a centrist belief. Most Leftists and democrats don't even support that here.

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>
Their are certain Libertarians do seem to actually be the "Give me drugs" party. Where that's the only issue they care about. But it's certainly not the majority. And it also seems to be a US only thing. At the same time, you don't have to do something to think it shouldn't try to be banned and forced out of people's hand. (their's a lot of gray area here, and its kind of hard to debate. Without going on forever. >.>)

I think he has some insecurities and is reassuring himself

<Snipped quote by SleepingSilence>
I think he has some insecurities and is reassuring himself

That doesn't add much to the conversation -.- Refrain from personal stuff mate. It doesn't help. XP

@SleepingSilence I think that your comments about SJWs arent too different from my comments about libertarians, you dont agree with the movement so you poke fun at them. You can say the majority of SJWs are rude and calling 'everyone' racist/sexist whatever but the reality is you havent met enough SJWs to make a overall comment on their behavior as I haven't met enough libertarians to justify saying they are ALL the way I say they are, but I'm generalizing to point out an issue with the ideology. And some libertarians do consider themselves centrist, they refer to themselves being in 'the middle' of left and right wing politics.

@Dynamo Frokane you don't sound like a centrist, you sound like an SJW who are anything but centrist.

And how are libertarians meninists? Jesus that makes no sense dude. You sound like that awful writer who ruined Angela with her Tumblr feminist crap

Some libertarians are meninist/MRA types, feminism clashes with their idea of freedom. Now please summarize why I am and SJW and how you've come to this conclusion, because you seem like you are just trying to label anything that doesn't agree with you as an SJW.

I have no idea who Angela or this tumblr writer is, I dont follow tumblr as much as you do it seems.

And yeah, saying I'm insecure is just a dumb ad-hominem attack that I wont justify with a response, troll harder Andy Rand.

@SleepingSilence Oh and for the record I never said I hated bioshock for any reasons, I said creating libertarians is another reason not to forgive it. But there are plenty of reasons why I dont forgive bioshock, that are totally non political.

And I'm sorry but your passion argument isn't really holding up, your perceived idea of someone elses passion isnt a good thing just because you say it is. It depends on what the person is pushing. Anita Sarkeesian does make a lot of innacuruaces with her assesment of some games, wether or not shes passionate about these views make no difference to me, if she was shouting more and holding her fist up while talking I wouldn't have any more respect for her, that's not how you make a point.

And to answer the side question I dont live in a country where guns are allowed, I dont really care what the U.S. does with their guns its not my problem. I called libertarians 'gun toting' because they make cringey tough guy memes like this:

@SleepingSilence I think that your comments about SJWs arent too different from my comments about libertarians, you dont agree with the movement so you poke fun at them. You can say the majority of SJWs are rude and calling 'everyone' racist/sexist whatever but the reality is you havent met enough SJWs to make a overall comment on their behavior as I haven't met enough libertarians to justify saying they are ALL the way I say they are, but I'm generalizing to point out an issue with the ideology. And some libertarians do consider themselves centrist, they refer to themselves being in 'the middle' of left and right wing politics.

<Snipped quote by Weird Tales>

Some libertarians are meninist/MRA types, feminism clashes with their idea of freedom. Now please summarize why I am and SJW and how you've come to this conclusion, because you seem like you are just trying to label anything that doesn't agree with you as an SJW.

I have no idea who Angela or this tumblr writer is, I dont follow tumblr as much as you do it seems.

And yeah, saying I'm insecure is just a dumb ad-hominem attack that I wont justify with a response, troll harder Andy Rand.

You make it sound like MRA is a bad thing, and I have never seen libertarians who call themselves MRA. Libertarians are anti SJW, but that doesn't make them MRA. Also are you aware that meninism is satire?

@SleepingSilence I think that your comments about SJWs arent too different from my comments about libertarians, you dont agree with the movement so you poke fun at them. You can say the majority of SJWs are rude and calling 'everyone' racist/sexist whatever but the reality is you havent met enough SJWs to make a overall comment on their behavior as I haven't met enough libertarians to justify saying they are ALL the way I say they are, but I'm generalizing to point out an issue with the ideology. And some libertarians do consider themselves centrist, they refer to themselves being in 'the middle' of left and right wing politics.

@Dynamo Frokane Not in real life. Maybe. But...I've seen enough of them online, and their you tube videos of their opinions. Tell me what libertarians on youtube say they hate roads? FIND ONE that's popular. I'll wait. Want me to find SJW's that say everyone is _____ and have a bunch of views. I can certainly do just that! Some may have in fact have "centrist" economical positions. But it's clear most are pro personal freedoms on social issues. They're a clearer political position to me than some alternatives that are so vague they barely mean anything...

Also I want you to find me ONE that's a race revisionist...Because using Meninist and that words, are literal buzz words with absolutely no fact or evidence backing it up.

I have no idea who Angela or this tumblr writer is, I dont follow tumblr as much as you do it seems.

And yeah, saying I'm insecure is just a dumb ad-hominem attack that I wont justify with a response, troll harder Andy Rand.

Also if you claim that you don't follow tumblr, don't claim that they're passionate to me. That seems mighty contradictory, admitting you know nothing about something yet proclaiming such a thing, like you do.

And I won't defend personal attacks, which include you calling a other person a name right back...two wrongs don't make a right.

@SleepingSilence Oh and for the record I never said I hated bioshock for any reasons, I said creating libertarians is another reason not to forgive it. But there are plenty of reasons why I dont forgive bioshock, that are totally non political.

And I'm sorry but your passion argument isn't really holding up, your perceived idea of someone elses passion isnt a good thing just because you say it is. It depends on what the person is pushing. Anita Sarkeesian does make a lot of innacuruaces with her assesment of some games, wether or not shes passionate about these views make no difference to me, if she was shouting more and holding her fist up while talking I wouldn't have any more respect for her, that's not how you make a point.

And to answer the side question I dont live in a country where guns are allowed, I dont really care what the U.S. does with their guns its not my problem. I called libertarians 'gun toting' because they make cringey tough guy memes like this:

You make it sound like it needs to confess it's sins. XD But I can't say you can't find political leaning in games, movies and music sometimes obnoxious or I'd be a hypocrite. But I can nearly guarantee it didn't make anyone change their political opinion...

My argument that naivety is better than malicious intent. Is basically a fact or I don't know many that would disagree...And 2+2=5 and 2+2=100 and one being more right than another is also a literal scientific fact. I admitted that both may lead to problems. Also passion doesn't always equal lunatic. Not quite what I'm going for here...

Also, despite most memes in general being cringe. That has some absolute fact to back that up.

"In studies involving interviews of felons, one of the reasons the majority of burglars try to avoid occupied homes is the chance of getting shot. (Increasing the odds of arrest is another.) A study of Pennsylvania burglary inmates reported that many burglars refrain from late-night burglaries because it's hard to tell if anyone is home, several explaining "That's the way to get shot." (Rengert G. and Wasilchick J., Suburban Burglary: A Time and a Place for Everything, 1985, Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.)

By comparing criminal victimization surveys from Britain and the Netherlands (countries having low levels of gun ownership) with the U.S., Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck determined that if the U.S. were to have similar rates of "hot" burglaries as these other nations, there would be more than 450,000 additional burglaries per year where the victim was threatened or assaulted. (Britain and the Netherlands have a "hot" burglary rate near 45% versus just under 13% for the U.S., and in the U.S. a victim is threatened or attacked 30% of the time during a "hot" burglary.)"

TLDR: Basically we get robbed less in USA, especially hot burglary (meaning robbed while still home.) Because people fear getting shot.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

You make it sound like MRA is a bad thing, and I have never seen libertarians who call themselves MRA. Libertarians are anti SJW, but that doesn't make them MRA. Also are you aware that meninism is satire?

You will agree just because you havent seen them it doesn't mean they dont exist.

I think we can agree that there are libertarians who are also men's rights activists, that's not a stretch of the imagination.

Yes I know meninist is satire, youve both seem to have taken that joke rant a little too personally. I thought SJWs were supposed to be the sensetive ones.

And yes I think some MRA's are passive aggressive reactionary assholes, just like some feminists, I'm egalitarian, I don't have to side with either one.

@SleepingSilence Okay thats a tad nitpicky, I know tumblr has angry SJWs on it mainly from other people's anecdotes, that's not the same as following it, especially not enough to know about some person angela and some writer who ruined her career, If you're looking for hypocrisy you will have to search a little harder.

Funnily enough, I don't get my 'libertarian experience' from popular youtubers, its not a big ego trip like youtube feminism or trump supporters. The libertarian's I meet are in real life debates, youth panels, speakers corner, and non publicised discussions on facebook or twitter. I dont think libertarians are about getting on youtube and hoarding views like that.

And this guy is a race revisionist libertarian.



Jared Taylor is a controversial figure but hes a still a self described libertarian.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

You make it sound like it needs to confess it's sins. XD But I can't say you can't find political leaning in games, movies and music sometimes obnoxious or I'd be a hypocrite. But I can nearly guarantee it didn't make anyone change their political opinion...

My argument that naivety is better than malicious intent. Is basically a fact or I don't know many that would disagree...And 2+2=5 and 2+2=100 and one being more right than another is also a literal scientific fact. I admitted that both may lead to problems. Also passion doesn't always equal lunatic. Not quite what I'm going for here...

Also, despite most memes in general being cringe. That has some absolute fact to back that up.

"In studies involving interviews of felons, one of the reasons the majority of burglars try to avoid occupied homes is the chance of getting shot. (Increasing the odds of arrest is another.) A study of Pennsylvania burglary inmates reported that many burglars refrain from late-night burglaries because it's hard to tell if anyone is home, several explaining "That's the way to get shot." (Rengert G. and Wasilchick J., Suburban Burglary: A Time and a Place for Everything, 1985, Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.)

By comparing criminal victimization surveys from Britain and the Netherlands (countries having low levels of gun ownership) with the U.S., Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck determined that if the U.S. were to have similar rates of "hot" burglaries as these other nations, there would be more than 450,000 additional burglaries per year where the victim was threatened or assaulted. (Britain and the Netherlands have a "hot" burglary rate near 45% versus just under 13% for the U.S., and in the U.S. a victim is threatened or attacked 30% of the time during a "hot" burglary.)"

TLDR: Basically we get robbed less in USA, especially hot burglary (meaning robbed while still home.) Because people fear getting shot.

EDIT: and your mnaking another blanket assertion you cant say that movies games literature have no effect on someone's political leanings, do you realise how many people became libertarians after reading Atlus Shrugged or George Orwell's 1984?

And how many people became anti war after watching platoon or saving private ryan?

Powerful forms of media can inform opinions, not everyone's but to say no ones is a little short sighted.

Naivety and Malicious intent is not the same as passion and non passion, you realize you can be passionately malicious right? and you can also be passively naive? Don't compound those things, you can't assert that 'many would agree that its a fact' not when you are making leaps of definition like that.

I agree that passion doesn't equal lunatic, and non passion also doesn't equal cold calculating lex luthor figure, this furthers my point on how irrelevant it is to a political ideology, 'Passion' is theatrics which contribute to the cult of personality, how much you like or want to side with an individual, but logically it doesn't really matter.

And those gun stats are fine, I just said I'm not making a an anti gun argument, this is why I think youre sensitive and lumping me in with some leftist gun banning hippies, I just told you I dont give a shit about the U.S.A.'s gun policy, dont strawman me sir. I said the meme was cringey and thats was my explanation for using the 'gun toting' comment. I dont have to have stance on gun rights to realise that a meme is a cringey attempt to look tough.

<Snipped quote by Weird Tales>
I think we can agree that there are libertarians who are also men's rights activists, that's not a stretch of the imagination.

And yes I think some MRA's are passive aggressive reactionary assholes, just like some feminists, I'm egalitarian, I don't have to side with either one.

That doesn't make those word synonymous though. So it's practically meaningless...its equivalent to saying some leftists agree with Hitler...Even if that's a case...That should not be made into an argument that even MOST are. Because you DO NOT make a generalization if MOST or a large number doesn't fit into it. Also both of those movements do not act the same.

@SleepingSilence Okay that's a tad nitpicky, I know tumblr has angry SJWs on it mainly from other people's anecdotes, that's not the same as following it, especially not enough to know about some person angela and some writer who ruined her career, If you're looking for hypocrisy you will have to search a little harder.
[/quote]

I mean...I could point out something hypocritical you've done rather easily. But it's not my point. And I didn't state that. I said that was mildly contradicting.

And this guy is a race revisionist libertarian.



Jared Taylor is a controversial figure but hes a still a self described libertarian.

1. I'm already aware of Stefan Molyneux and I can guarantee he isn't that buzz word. Unless you're describing Charles Murray...Can you throw me bone and tell me specifically what they said and why it's what you describe...I'd rather not watch a 38 minute video if there's one or two specific points that you find to be a problem. :/

2. Well doing mild research of my own, I'm going to assume you mean Charles Murray. Because both their names come up for something called "Race Realism." And I'll admit I know jack shit about either of these two...But I think, the fact they need to go on other people shows, speaks volumes for how popular or commonplace they are...To be fair...you could probably always find a small group of bad apples anywhere. So maybe that was a bad challenge. BUT, I did say one popular one...and it doesn't appear that they're very popular individuals.

I don't want to debate something I don't know the main point of, but I can at the same time say these are outliers and shouldn't be considered apart of the whole movement. (*See first point made.* >.>)

@SleepingSilence Calling someone andy rand isnt the same as calling someone insecure, but that depends on your definition of an insult so whatever.

and Charles Murray and Jared Taylor have huge academic profiles and have written books and have their own very popular websites and are cited by many race revisionists, again I said your point about being 'youtube popular' isnt a very good indicator for how 'well known' someone is. Not everybody notable has enough free time to upload a funny and or compelling 15 min video every week. You asked me to find you ONE libertarian race revisionist and I found you two and yes they are both very well known. You dont sell thousands of copies of a book without being popular. And they dont have their own shows because like I said not everyone has time for their own shows, these are both old respectable academic men.

And I didn't say they spoke for the entire movement, but you were asking me to justify my position on what I said about libertarians and notable figures are race revisionists, road haters, (roads are a socialist construct remember) and gun toters, I'm sure there are many who arent but the loud voice of the few will drown out the quiet voice of the many, similar to your nasty SJWs who get all the screen and press time because they are inflammatory.

Okay, sidenote, here's a new annoyance: people who use the word SJW.

Anyways, right-libertarianism is a sham.

As long as there are men who - by tyranny of private property - are able to restrict the flow of the resources needed for human survival, there is no freedom. The men who own the resources lord it over those who do not. They exert influence over their lives and - on threat of death - can require the common people to produce excess wealth (see: capital) in exchange for basic human needs. In this way, no man has autonomy over his own body.

He does not choose to be a slave to those who own the resources that he needs to survive.

Individualism is a front for economic oppression. Individualism does not provide liberty for all people, it provides liberty for the few who have power and who have the resources necessary to keep that power (see: Bourgeois). These people are free, but all other men are made slaves to them.

When economics are laissez-faire, the bourgeois strengthen their hold over the people, through the state. If the state can't regulate the economy then the economy regulates the state. Those with economic power elect people with political power and they both benefit eachother. In so doing, the people loose whatever little power that had left in the Republican system and are now subject to plutocracy. The bourgeois are free to use the organs of the state - the police, the military, and the justice system - to further their own ends and maintain their power.

Okay, sidenote, here's a new annoyance: people who use the word SJW.

Its not my favorite word by any stretch of the imagination, but what word do you suppose we use instead?

EDIT: I agree with your deconstruction of the "tear down the government for freedom" philosophy, anti-state molyneux fanboys are so short sighted, and seem to know zero about profit undercutting, security privatization and monopoly laws.

<Snipped quote by MoiraEl>

Its not my favorite word by any stretch of the imagination, but what word do you suppose we use instead?

Idk maybe site specific schools of thought, instead of grouping conflicting ones together under a made-up label with no historical or significant value.

@MoiraEl Okay thats fair I was only really saying SJW to draw a parallel to describe what it means to disagree with a movement. That's just a term i seen get thrown a lot around in this thread when members are attacking something. I find SJW somewhat vague myself, technically nuclear family traditionalists are also SJWs.

EDIT: and your mnaking another blanket assertion you cant say that movies games literature have no effect on someone's political leanings, do you realise how many people became libertarians after reading Atlus Shrugged or George Orwell's 1984?

And how many people became anti war after watching platoon or saving private ryan?

Powerful forms of media can inform opinions, not everyone's but to say no ones is a little short sighted.

I think it's you making blanket statements. XP While it's less than you probably think. I never said media cannot change or shape some part of your opinions. I said Bioshock of all things, is not likely one of those things that created libertarians. ;)

You realize you can be passionately malicious right? You can't assert that 'many would agree that its a fact' not when you are making leaps of definition like that.

"Also passion doesn't always equal lunatic. Not quite what I'm going for here..." - Me a mere post ago.

Moving on. <.<

Fine, saying that particular part is a fact, may not be the perfect word to use...but your completely ignoring the main point of my argument. Even if two things are wrong, one thing CAN be MORE wrong than the other.

How much you like or want to side with an individual, but logically it doesn't really matter.

And those gun stats are fine, I just said I'm not making a an anti gun argument, this is why I think youre sensitive and lumping me in with some leftist gun banning hippies, I just told you I dont give a shit about the U.S.A.'s gun policy, dont strawman me sir.

I don't honestly think this is going to get us anywhere. So just fair warning I'm probably going to agree to disagree with your overall statement and leave it at that. I really should be doing other things, beside this. But calling me sensitive is why this next statement needs to happen.

@SleepingSilence politically I don't agree with you but...

Getting into the weeds and going off topic. (though it encapsulates my point.) I've literally never had anyone politically right (or centered). EVER do this to me. People that bring politics into personal or things not related. Are the very definition of passion in a negative way. Caring SO MUCH about differences of opinion you HAVE the desperate need to cast them down before you're able to admit you like/agree with something they say. I don't think I should be having a debate of "Logic Prevails Above All Else" when Meninist is being used like its a real thing. And yes you say you see that its a joke, but if you agree that not even half of libertarians have all those opinions you previously stated. Why even say it? :/

Also this is getting mildly too long for me to continue this much longer. -.-

@SleepingSilence Calling someone andy rand isnt the same as calling someone insecure, but that depends on your definition of an insult so whatever.

And I didn't say they spoke for the entire movement, but you were asking me to justify my position on what I said about libertarians and notable figures are race revisionists, road haters, (roads are a socialist construct remember) and gun toters, I'm sure there are many who arent but the loud voice of the few will drown out the quiet voice of the many, similar to your nasty SJWs who get all the screen and press time because they are inflammatory.

ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"vicious ad hominem attacks"

Both fall under the same category. Calling someone a asshole may be more offensive than a jerk. But they both apply to not helpful.

Though SJW's comparsion, I argue is apples and oranges. Because its not a few. They believe this in general and I say, you cannot realistically, nicely express that everyone is oppressive.

@MoiraEl I won't get into debating this...because I'm done enough already...So, I agree to disagree with that general statement.

But I will point out, most people that fall under this category believe this statement is a positive one. I mean I don't really like people using it like the new opposition to "you must be a republican" like an insult equal to calling someone a Nazi...But it's the internet...and both sides use the term. Whether negative or positive. :/