

There’s no assumption. They literally listed two purity tests that they themselves use, directly after saying that they never see anyone use purity tests
There’s no assumption. They literally listed two purity tests that they themselves use, directly after saying that they never see anyone use purity tests
I quoted an entire sentence exactly. They didn’t say “I like pancakes”, they said “You can’t compromise with waffle-eaters”
You cannot compromise with a bigot
To reiterate the comment you’re responding to, you’re reducing a complex world to a binary choice. Everyone that has ever existed is bigoted to some degree, therefore no compromise is possible ever?
Yeah, the comment above is kind of a hilarious example of cognitive dissonance. “I’ve never seen purity tests, other than these tests for ensuring purity”. Blanket statements like that are rarely used in good faith.
100%, I’m hoping that AI will result in capitalism eating itself up entirely
AI art isn’t theft, so the rest of your question falls apart.
In regards to sharing art, it’s trying to fight technological progress and it’s bound to lose. Copyright is dead and that’s a good thing. We shouldn’t simp for legal systems pushed by and that benefit large corporations over creators.
It can be true that something is both an important right and used unethically by people that don’t actually care about the topic. See Rainbow capitalism as a very related example. Nutomic is right that identity politics are used to create division among the working class, because anything that can create division will be used to do so.
deleted by creator