What’s up with chuds and slippery slope fallacies?
>>534089600>if we're honest about racial minorities, everyone will become hitler
>>534089600Leftards just try to shame normal people out of pattern recognition.
>>534089600It's not always a fallacy
>>534089600Slippery slope isn't fallacy.
>>534089797>>534089912Also this. If you operate by morals, it's a perfectly reasonable question to ask what else is morally permissible if you permit taking just a little bit of property.
"Slippery Slope" is not and never was a fallacy. Every single "slippery slope" predicted in my lifetime has turned out to be right, especially the ones related to faggotry. The income tax is a good object lesson though, it shows how the progressives introduced a tax "on the rich" that came to only really oppress the middle and lower classes by making them waste their time and money filing taxes that should never have bene levied upon them.
>>534089600>We just wanted to get marriedMore like the slippery slope fact.
>>534089600>making reasoned predictions is a fallacyactually it's a sign of intelligence, nigger
>>534089600>slippery slope fallaciesSilly buzzphrase used to disregard valid objections.And if I were an American I wouldn't even mind that tax if I was certain it was going to help my people and not just go to fund my replacement and line the pockets of third world fraudsters, in the current state of things I'd rather billionaires keep it.
>>534089600>slippery slope fallacies>fallaciesThere's nothing fallacious about it. The slope is in fact slippery as fuck and sooner or later you're going to find yourself in a heap at the bottom of it if you keep fucking around. Many before have done so and many more will do so after you as they refuse to heed the warning or recognize what the broken heap of humanity is piled up at the bottom.
>>534090236It is a fallacy when you can't establish causal connection between whatever 2 things you're trying to connect.
>>534090554But we can. So no fallacy, yes, dumb-dumb?
>>534090554the connection is between normalizing something (in this case government taxation on income) which makes it acceptable and then paves the way for further normalization. If anything the Slippery Slope should be a law of human society, rather than a fallacy, it's what always happens. Taboo->normalized->radicalizedit happens every single time.
>literally call yourselves "PROGRESSIVES" because you progressively work towards your end goals>someone points out what your end goals are>"ummm that's akshually a slippery slope fallacy okay?"
>>534089600I say California should pass it because there's zero chance any appeals court, or of all the Supreme Court of the United States will even look at any case arguing it's unconstitutional. Just like all the Non-Taxpayers cases.Are they really going to shut down California's law for being a Direct Unapportioned Tax, when that's exactly what the Income Tax is?
