all 6 comments

[–]HegeMoney 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

That sombrero wearing dipshit is a shill.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You neither engaged with any ideas, nor refuted the premise.

In fact, defending China online means there's a strong possibility you're a shill. After all, who would defend a genocidal, organ harvesting regime?

[–]HegeMoney 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I am not defending China.

I am unambiguously calling this sombrero dipshit, a shill.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Actions don't occur in a vacuum. Context matters. You're taking the attention off of China and trying to change the subject. That's enough for us to see what you're doing.

[–]HegeMoney 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This "context" is being delivered by a shill.

That's the historical "context" of the presentor.

Actions don't occur in a vacuum. Context matters.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a personal attack, not an argument. Where's your proof? That which is presented without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

I think you just don't like what he's saying, and rather than deal with the facts, you just slap a label on him and call it a day. Depressingly common these days.