from the videos i watched online -
i can truly attest one thing
and one thing alone:
    ars dialecticis est mort -
  i.e. the art of debate is dead;
nietzsche was wrong
in slandering dialectics -
the most civilised societies
allow dialectics -
  there's no point defending
a "freedom of speech"
when there's no discussion to be had.
street preachers excused -
       what's the point of free
speech when there's no
      "freedom" regarding discussion?
there is no art of poetry,
the only supremacy of art is
the art of discussion -
           but since this "art"
is nowhere in the framework of
a revival, why bother?
what's the freedom of talk,
when all it surmounts to is a
blatancy of a placard?!
              dialectics is dead,
it died with socrates -
       what we're receiving is
an echo-chamber of monologue,
point being:
    i don't even know what
the mongolians are trying to
keep up with...
            and when did
cis- become sis-?
              given the examples,
we are shy of the 26 "unique"
encodings of said speech...
                    never did a kettle
breed a cat...
                        we're done debating,
there's no debating,
  there never was a debate to begin
with...
              we're not going
toi debate, because we are so
entrapped in an ultra-individualistic
crap (yes, i will throw custard
at you) -
         what orwell deemed
cogito duplex (double think)
   has morphed into
an uprising of revisionism:
      coetus cogito (group think) -
how did you expect people to
cling on to the bleaching process
of clinging to pronouns,
when these are being usurped?!
         the art of discussion is dead!
dead! dead! dead!
                  with your nag hammadi
christ 2nd resurrection?!
            iconoclasm gave birth
to the death of dialectics -
       we no longer have effective
measures to study a dialogue -
   we only have examples of
a mistrust in monogamy,
and monologue -
                          i see no future
for the art of dialogue -
                  which is why this lost
art strengthens the position
of the ultra monologist: god.
                      we're not having
a discussion, 1 year to 10 years from
now...
         prior to writing, history must
have been written akin
to a phraseology of claustrophobia -
constrictive -
   suffocating -
                 we wrote to gain
intimacy with thought:
instead we gained the intricacy of
intimidation...
                   whether that be by
thought alone, or otherwise...
      prior to writing history
        history was the lessened &
continually lessing observation
deemed worth "observation",
but of course we exfoliated in our
"demands"...
                 besides the point:
the art of discussion is lost -
  since we have established our worth:
to be none other, than,
  a desire for fictitious tales that lead
to no other discovery, other than
a discovery of a cul de sac.
                 no morning with no
cockerel to croak its adhan -
   i'd revive in the anti-pentagram:
an adhan at morn,
              and an adhan as sunset...
  whatever freedom you give -
shame the freedom of speech
  never allowed the revival of dialectics -
but what can expect,
   given that this freedom arose
from a language that abides by no
diacritical desires -
     where no eye to tongue to breath
speak of diacritical markings be said -
hardly a surprise that
  the art of debate be revived...
          seems easier to club a person
dead, than to squire with his
saber i a duel...
       shame, to be honest...
               the lost art of debate,
which makes all subsequent "debates"
on the internet, a superfluous act of
guilty-pleasure procrastination.