Colin Moriarty is back

[WolfpackN64]

Aura7541 said:

WolfpackN64 said:

Your argument is basically: You hold a certain word as existant and a carrier of meaning -> I dispute this -> you claim I can't back this up statistically (basically you say I don't know everyone, which is true, but the same is true for you) -> I refer to an absolute authority (an official dictionary) -> you reject the authority and go back to square one.

You're intentionally creating a circle of so called fallacy pitfalls which are nothing more then an abolute rejection of everything I brought forward. Of course, nothing I would bring forward helps. I could throw Oxford dictionary's at your head, you'd play with it like the children you are.

And guess what? If you want to prove that the authority is valid, then you need to argue on the merits of the term as in show me the reason why the dictionaries do not include Regressive Left in the dictionary and why that reason is valid. It always goes back to arguing the merits. This is not a circle I made. This is a circle you made.

You know what? Fine, let's look at the Wikipedia article.

""Regressive left" (also formulated as "regressive liberals") is a political epithet, used as a pejorative to describe a section of left-wing politics who are accused of paradoxically holding reactionary views by their tolerance of illiberal principles and ideologies, particularly tolerance of Islamism, for the sake of multiculturalism and cultural relativism."

And see, there is already a problem. A tolerance of illiberal ideas. Not the holding of them, but tolerating them. As a far leftist, I don't tolerate the far right. I'd ban them outright if I'd had the power to. If anyone would declare their religious law to be absolute and above the law, they'd face the law (and potentially, jail). If the far left fraternizes with people of foreign origin and religion, it would be to fight injustice.