×
Create a new article
Write your page title here:
We currently have 2,399 articles on Polcompball Wiki. Type your article name above or click on one of the titles below and start writing!



Polcompball Wiki
Polcompball Wiki
2,399Articles
  Recent changes

Am m Refutes All Your Points

(Redirected from Am m Refutes Your Points)


Try to convince me of anything and I will try to refute your point, feel free to suggest categories in the comments. Also all alts are hereby banned.

Example

  • - I believe in x opinion.
    • - Why x opinion is bad.
      • - Ok

Economics

  • - Refute all of my Economic Policies
    • - Neoliberalism maximises suffering and decadence more than any other time or country in human history (except maybe Pol Pot Cambodia or Maoist China), therefore, it is an objectively terrible economic system
      • - Have you actually read my economic policies? i know that Neoliberalism isn't aways good, that's why i would use Essential regulations, Better Land management and Welfare to minimize it's bad effects while maintaning it's good parts.
        • - I haven't read your page in a while and when you just link Third Way as your economic system it's not very helpful for criticism. Anyway, even in capitalist countries with all these regulations, such as Canada, there is still massive wealth inequality and hedonism, so these regulations don't help
  • - Capitalism and Leftism is bad only distributism counts
    • - I agree with you, but I have to refute your point, so: Distributism hasn't been properly tried, only theorised, so it's unknown if it's a good system
      • - It would probably work out because there is a private initiative, it has everything to work out
        • - It's not definitive to work though

State

  • - The government should be run by those who smell the worst
    • - Smelling bad is bad therefore they should not run the government
  • Venatrixism - my gay uncle, Benjamin Hood should lead the entire world under a one world am m government
    • - He would get inevitably couped and replaced with a shit world leader, therefore this would be bad
  • - the monarchy must be restored in Brazil and instituted in the world
    • - I agree with you, but I have to refute your point, so: If what you mean is hereditary and semi-constitutional or absolute monarchy (which is what I assume it is), this could lead to an incredibly idiotic leader who would go mostly unchecked, which would be disastrous.
      • - It is not one of these types, it is a monarchy that has a parliament but does not have a constitution, in fact it has a code of laws which is basically a penal code and a constitution at the same time and the parliament would be divided into three chambers of nobles, commoners and clerics all of them would have the power to present proposals and if the monarch does not accept this, he will have to hold a referendum and the code of laws, most of it is fixed clauses except for those parts that it is not known whether they should be abolished, such as c4pital punishment
        • - Referendums even, then, are bad, as the common people generally have terrible opinions, and are usually not educated enough to make good decisions

Nation

  • - ultranationalism is necessary for a nation to survive
    • - Most modern Western countries survive though they aren't ultranationalist, they have lost their culture but they are still surviving as nations
  • - Arguments against my Policy involving Diplomacy, Immigration and the Nation as whole ?
    • - Intervention is a shit idea which has only led to countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya becoming much, much worse, as well as funding opposition in countries such as Syria. Civic nationalism makes no sense (e.g. a mouse born in a stable isn't a horse, and besides immigrants have no connection with the land they come to, unlike people who stay in their countries of origin). Also the Levant doesn't belong to a religion but to the Levantine people, so Zionism is bad.
  • - nationalism is bad because it is derived from the enlightenment
    • - Not everything derived from the Enlightenment is necessarily bad, just because some things from it are, doesn't mean everything is.

Social

  • SkeletonJanitor - Pederasty is literally ok and should be widely accepted by modern day ethics, since it's not pedophilia
    • - Any relationship between adults and children is pedophilia
  • - chud rights are human rights
    • - Human rights are not implicit within even any religion or atheist beliefs therefore they don’t exist therefore nothing can be human rights
      • - All humans (whites) are children of God and as such should be treated with grace and dignity also, chud power!!!!!!
        • - Grace and dignity aren’t human rights
  •  Comrade Phil Thought - Progressivism is bourgeois and capitalist. I mean look at companies during pride month (and in recent years, year round). Social progressivism is capitalism decaying.
    • - I agree with you, but I have to refute your point so: Wannabe communist countries such as Maoist China were revprog, so progressivism isn't inherently capitalistic.
      • Borker >Communists
        >Mao
        lol
        • - Dengism isn't Maoism, Mao actually implemented some communist policies such as collective meals, ofc he wasn't perfectly communist but closer than most and that was his goal
          • Borker He wasn’t really ever a communist, the 1954 Chinese Constitution explicitly protects private property and ownership over the means of production.
            • - I was unaware of that. In that case I'll change my answer slightly
  • - Gives an argument against my Philosophy
    • - Hedonism inevitably leads to the mental destruction of a person, in particular, porn and casual sex and psychologically addictive and ruin sex for people, also eugenicism ruins beautiful things such as autism, also none of your ideology whatsoever is Christian, unlike what it says, and deism isn't Christianity
      • - But i acknowledge this, and so, i advocates for making the treatment of these addictions free of charge and provided by the government, as in my opinion, banning these things only increase the number of addicts rather than the reverse. and my Eugenic policy is mostly based on making the Brazilian population more intelligent, and people of Autism are not necessarily dumb, there are a plenty of autists that are actually smart. and even thought i acknowledge that i'm just a Deist who prefers Christianity rather than other religion, i still believes that Jesus is the son of God, so to speak.
        • - 1. You're openly a porn addict, so you should stop 2. I wouldn't call that eugenics per se as eugenics has negative connotations 3. Why not follow the word of Christ then, especially if He is the Son of God
          • - 1. i'm trying to stop being a porn addict, i'm planning to only watch porn 1-2 times per week. 2. I believe that there should be a limit of children dumber persons should have, thus making me an eugenicist. 3. My religion is kinda complex. i think that until the Old Testament, God had absolute power, but he decreased it's power to only judge people after the dead, while giving karma to the people at the life. so practically, it's a mix of Christianity, Deism and Agnosticism.
            • - 1. Genuinely a commendable effort 2. It’s still not trying to eliminate a neurotype though, just stupidity 3. None of that is agnostic, but the other parts make sense
  • - I think racism is bad and everyone deserves respect
    • - I agree with you, but I have to refute your point, so: Gypsies

Technology

Philosophical

Religious

  • - Jews le bad
    • - I have met Jews in real life and they are not le bad
      • - But but Jews control world governments n sheet
        • - There are two Jew world leaders out of 212 (including unrecognised countries) as far as I know, which is 0.94% of world governments
  • - Perennialism is true
    • - If multiple religions claim to be the singular correct religion, then they can't all be correct, by definition

Other

  •  Comrade Phil Thought - If America can invade Iraq twice for no reason, and Israel occupy Palestine, then Russia is completely right and justified to perform a special military operation in Ukraine.
    • - I agree with you but I have to refute your point, so: Wars doesn't justify other wars, the pretext for war can't be another war but a valid and legitimate reason, besides Ukraine isn't the USA even though they are allies (also put this in National next time)
  • - You are based and gigachad
    • - I am beyond based and gigachad
      • - Darn
        • - I can refute any point
  • - Arguments against Wage Caps for Politicians.
    • - Politicians shouldn't exist, politics is inherently corrupt and serves the will of money, the only solution is either absolute monarchy, technocracy/noocracy, or anarchy (all theocratic).
      • - Ideally i thinks the same, but what's about honest countries like Denmark and politicians like Teddy Roosevelt?
        • - An honest politician is so rare it's not even worth considering, and just because Denmark is considered the least corrupt country doesn't mean it isn't
  • - Regarding to colonizing the Americas, The British and the Dutch should had joined forces together instead of the British being friends with the French, instead of the British and Dutch fighting each other, and instead of the Dutch having to give away the New Netherland colony to the British.
    • - The British and the French were definitely not friends, and anyway, the Dutch didn't have nearly as much of a relevant presence as the British, it was inevitable that the British would take New Netherland
  • - This page is titled "Am m Refutes Your Points"
    • - No it isn't
  • Bro changed the title to troll him
    • - Yes, but I have to refute this, so: I changed the title to make it a valid refutation.
  • - you aren't an anidiotoncrackist
    • - I agree with the minuscule aspect of reactionarism for anidiotoncrackism, therefore I am a factional anidiononcrackist
  • - Brazilian Liberalism is a terrible ideology
    • - My ideology is still in the process of reformatting therefore I can't describe any ideology as terrible currently
  • - You aren't a Killer Kittyite
    • - I am an environmentalist, so I am a factional Killer Kittyite
  • - You aren't a social void-wing post-libertarian and don't have a 50 word long paragraph on it
    • - This is why I am a social void-wing post-libertarian. Labels are meaningless, and therefore, I can be whatever I want, including a social void-wing post-libertarian, even if I don't fit the definition. Anyway, I am a post-libertarian, so I am still technically a factional social void-wing post-libertarian, so you're wrong. [1]
  • - Refute this Ideology i made with my Alt
    • - It is basically your ideology, which I already refuted throughout the page
  • - You haven't molested children
    • - While I haven't in this Universe, if you believe in alternate universes, then I may have in those
      • - Blud actually found a way to refute it without saying "I did"
  • LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL - Hi
    • - Incoherent argument, instantly refuted
  • - Disown this chad's whole argument
    • - Has a skull emoji in the title, opinion instantly invalidated
  • - The Brazilian government must sponsor a secret operation by the intelligence service to harass, kill or threaten with death corrupt politicians to make them resign their position.
    • - Brazil is too far gone
  • - Q
    • - Incoherent argument, instantly refuted
  • - Refute this entire ideology: Dr Pepperism
    • - Anti-Christian, opinion instantly invalidated
  1. ↑ Exactly 50 words.
Retrieved from "https://pcbwiki.net/index.php?title=Am_m_Refutes_All_Your_Points&oldid=458043"