A more accurate statement is that I'm not interested in thinking about them with a bunch of people who, by their own admission, are only actually interested in finding opportunities to own people over the internet.
Jeez, get over yourself. No one is in this just to make you look bad; I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're not the focal point of anyone's day here. You posted a series of, let's say,
controversial ideas (beginning with "any candidate should be vested with ultimate power") that people criticized up and down for a variety of reasons, which you largely ignored and then continued insisting on claims like "There are too many laws, it's ruining government." When people asked you
why you think these claims were true and for any proof to back them up, you either didn't provide any kind of support or did supply some kind of evidence that was very quickly refuted as wrong or specious or irrelevant to the claim altogether (e.g. contrary to what you originally insisted, the volume of incarcerations in America has nothing to do with the volume of laws).
I mean come on, you literally googled "how many laws are there" and screencapped the top answer as proof without actually clicking on the link that supplied the answer -- a link that, had you clicked it, you would've realized debunked the very point you were trying to make. And when people called you on it, instead of owing up to the fact that you couldn't even bother to put more than 10 seconds of effort into backing up your own argument, you started getting pissy about it and whining about how people are just looking to own you online (which, even if we accepted that as true, wouldn't that still mean you were being proven wrong? I don't know if any "owning" can happen if the "owning" party isn't, you know, doing any actual owning!).
Critical thinking isn't subjective. All you're doing is throwing out assertions about what's wrong with government and how you think it can be changed for the better, assertions that are pretty outlandish to start with but are further complicated because you either refuse to back up your points, skirt around criticism of your points, or offer explanations that don't make any logistical sense (see: your constantly changing position on who would pass/kill laws, and how, and how often). And then every now and then you'll say you're just spitballing ideas and shouldn't be expected to back them up anyway. Get off the victim complex already. No one's denying you a meaningful discussion of your ideas; you've been getting the meaningful discussion this whole time, you just don't like it because it's not very flattering for you.
