You mistake freedom for pretense. If I am "pseudointellectual", it is only because I refuse to pretend that dressing nonsense in fine rhetoric makes it truth. Your subtlety is your surrender; mine is my sting. I argue like you can't, while you mistake brevity for wisdom and slogans for thought.

Yeah

Few words suffice when truth is spoken, but empty minds need repetition. If you find my words nonsensical, it is because they crack the brittle shell of your delusions. I waste no time; I waste illusions.

Your absurd hat of marketing is more honest than your words. You dance in circles to justify your chains, yet claim to seek freedom. Real meaning is stripped of adornment, yet you cling to fashion. You search for truth while peddling lies. Which is it, worker or thinker?

And by the way, you should consider what I told you not a reduction but an exaltation, for I showed you your delusions.

I am the delusional? You are the liar, who is not even capable of continuing with his insults of a lazy person who does not like to read.

And now, as icing on the cake, you bring out a repeated insult of lazy and slothful people: projection. Please, look at your words and your posts, and tell me what the real projection is. You are not a hammer, but a hammered.

And your bio says a lot more about you than you think... You don't deserve the title "hammer of the gods", while I am the real one hammering gods and mortals, and liars like you, alike.

Or maybe you don't know how to read, and you're the one who babbles without saying anything, and covers yourself in cheap, repeated insults because you're not capable of thinking?

You and your short-sightedness. I don't criticize anything about those who write, only what they write. I'm not reducing you to anything yourself haven't said you are, but still better, that you haven't demonstrated to be.

Guys, plagiarism also is allowed. Except by fascists.

"Marketing" director talking about writing something "existential". You don't know what you're talking about, what are you trying to achieve? That by saying three words you're now wise? Please.

And the moon of a moon of a moon? And the moon of it?

And you think you are the wise one? What makes you think you are not the illiterate of the 21st century, while you're constantly posting pictures of quotes you don't even understand, while ignoring real reading (because otherwise you would stop publishing) and cover yourself by posting animal faces?

And since when are things good or bad because of the effort they put into them instead of the results they achieve? I understand your point, but "love" is not the whole recipe for dinner.

What is drawn has feminine facets, while you have a "him". I don't care about pronouns, call it whatever you want. What I mean is what lies beneath all of that: an attempt at denial of nature for a political theory. What a stupidity.

You finally explain without distracting. Thanks for the clarification, but my criticism was not about that, understand.

I am not the idiot, while you clearly didn't get my criticism. I am not the one that got hostile, because my criticism was a question in the first place, and When he responded with the same laziness and insults that mediocre one-neuron-brain like you say, then I lowered myself to his (yours) level

Tell me the captcha. I am not a robot, but you are lazy to argue.