Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6in25i wrote

Reply to comment by Rpanich in Climate activists block main road into The Hague by LaminatedDenim

I’m saying you need to get the voting populace on your side.

>Why does that economic disruption fail but you think the same kind of disruption on a road would work?

Care to answer?

0

Rpanich t1_j6iqakr wrote

> Why does that economic disruption fail

Well, according to your logic, because it wasn’t a sufficient amount?

Or are you saying that politicians don’t care about economic disruption?

What are you calling for?

Because it sounds like you either don’t believe that politicians care about the economy, or that you want protestors to do larger economic disruptions.

0

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6j844n wrote

So you’re only going to answer by asking questions, gotcha.

0

Rpanich t1_j6j8u9p wrote

I’ve simply been asking you to clarify your first message, which seemed to be sarcastically saying that politicians don’t care about the economy, and then turning heel and then claiming you were earnestly claiming that when faced with evidence; which is strange because if so, you seem to be arguing against yourself.

Can you simply clarify your statement and state your stance clearly?

0

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6jbpxh wrote

Where do you think the line between causing economic consequences with a protest and turning the voting group against you lies?

0

Rpanich t1_j6jc794 wrote

Are we answering questions by asking questions now?

−1

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6jk3mz wrote

It’s easy to argue a point when you don’t have one

1

Rpanich t1_j6jm80k wrote

Uh yeah, which is why I called you out on trying to save face when being met with evidence.

The point I made was: voters care about the economy, and that you need to clarify your argument, which you have refused to do.

I’ll rebut your argument once you make one, but so far all I’ve done is fact check you while you tried to save face/ avoided making a clear argument.

−1