the only times I do the due diligence and online research I should are when I'm trying to win an online argument, so I can relate. Got lucky with a guess this time :)

New to me as well but seems like "editing to add:"

"a bunch of conditionals for my statements" are also known as weasel words. You don't seem interested in learning from this experience.

The issue is that you're constantly asserting your statement without evidence and when people are offering up contradictory ideas you're asking them to present evidence ("that doesn't mean that he's NOT from a billionaire family") which is shifting the burden of proof. You made the claim, you have to prove it, if people put out other explanations also without evidence then they still don't have the burden of proof since the point under debate is the claim that you made. As the person making the claim you must prove it.

It's not meant to be harsh since this is a very low stakes conversation and topic but what you're doing willingly or unwillingly is exactly how misinformation spreads on more important topics, so it's important that you be aware and correct your behavior.

You can't just move the burden of proof on to others like this. You're just spreading misinformation, even if you ultimately turn out to be right what you're doing is unproductive and harmful.

Thanks for the civil response. I can see how you came to that conclusion and to be clear I think violence can become necessary in order to defend a free and fair society but I don't believe that it should be common or expected by default.

Democracy has its problems and my critiques of it come from an egalitarian "left" perspective rather than the might-oriented perspective others espouse here.

The only point I meant to make is that American democracy isn't fair and even its ideal state leaves some people at the margins. In that system violence will always have a place.

The only alternative to democracy is assassination and barbarism? What about consensus building and federation?

Once again you're making a straw man.

And yes, sometimes fascists need to be dealt with with violence, whether the figurehead alone or all of them. I'm not advocating for that to happen today but history teaches us this.

True when will rapists get to come out of the closet. What an insulting comparison.

Oh no I upset the fragile boy

American freedom is the freedom to oppress people on your property. It's individualist freedom not collectivist freedom

Do you expect to have a productive conversation when you frame things this way?

Anyway I'm sure if you vote hard enough the US Empire won't collapse as a fascist echo of itself. Make sure you put your back into it.

You're once again relying on the fact that someone won't find out in order for you to feel that you've gotten away with it. That's not a moral act, that's an immoral act that has gone by unnoticed.

Maybe you're not hurt by me jerking it to you but you'd be hurt by another violation of your identity like me impersonating you to call your mother names and hurt her feelings. Those are both violations of you, and they're ways of using you as a means to a selfish end.

Philosophical moral frameworks which people tend to follow include the idea that human beings shouldn't be used as a means to an end.

We can tweak your example to one where the simulation is of someone that doesn't exist and there'd be even less to call into question, but maybe at that point you feel you wouldn't get the same thrill... That thrill is a sign that you're being immoral.

You're probably young and will hopefully continue to develop mentally and emotionally and will learn empathy, but your views here are problematic.