Hypocrisy 2
Day 2,947, 13:47
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by ResouIa
I'm gonna start losing friends everywhere if I keep making these XD But hey. I respect those who call spades spades. Thus, lets get on with it.
I am split between titling this "Hypocrisy 2" and "Hypocrisy: Paul Edition". I can always rename it, so let me know what name you like better.
And by that mention then I think we all know who this hypocrisy article is going to be about. I've been calling him a hypocrite for at least a week now but I've seen him and his double standards flaunt themselves more than I ever saw Artela, and thats in a matter of a week! So he clearly deserves his own hypocrisy article. Lets talk about him folks. Lets talk about Paul Proteus.
This first portion is going to revolve heavily on the topic my recent "eUSA is a Joke" article focused on. The blacklisting of 24 members of the nation has caused quite the dramatic explosion in eUSA. And everywhere I look, Paul is trying to drag out the issue with the most illogical and double standard arguments I have ever seen. He references the law a lot, more than I would ever try to screenshot. But for now let's look at what law he has been repeatidly referring to those 24 members of congress as breaking shall we?
Opposing Congress in Battle Law
Now for some examples of him referencing this law. While I will not show you all of them, I'll show you an example here.
For more examples of this, read The Blacklist Thread or add him. Its been on his friends feed more times than I can count.
Well anyway, he has proudly announced to the world a thousand times that every one of those names on the aforementioned Blacklist Thread. Thats why he voted them all to be blacklisted right?
As you can see, he clearly encourages all congressmen to vote to blacklist everyone that broke the law. Then as I have stated, he did not actually follow that advice himself. He voted yes to also blacklist some folks that broke NO law. Since the most popular example of this is Jude Connors, lets focus on him and take a look at this law again shall we?
As we can see, fighting in the civil war has earned many persons the right to be "Subject to blacklist proceedings". Now is this a good time to mention that no one ever brought to light any evidence that Jude Connors fought for the Civil War? That's right there is NO EVIDENCE THAT JUDE CONNORS BROKE THIS LAW. And yet Paul voted him to be blacklisted just like those that did break this law and encouraged others to do the same. That's very hypocritical to state one thing and do another is it not? Oh wait...that's the DEFINITION of hypocrisy. Nice going, Paul.
Huh, look at that. He didn't say the word "law" this time. He simply said "treason". We very conveniently have a definition of treason up there. So, did Jude Connors commit treason? What did Jude Connors actually do? Jude Connors donated 5,000 CC to the Bear Cavalry Military Unit. How do we know? Well, lets look at a quote from his very keyboard!
As we can see he donated 5000 CC to Bear Cavalry. Did that break a law? Read the law above, it did not. Does that qualify as treason? Well lets read that definition above once more and then ask ourselves a question. If I donate Bear Cavalry 5000 CC right now, and then in the future they use that money to start a civil war, OR they simply start a CW with their own coffers of which my 5k became a part of. Does that mean I committed treason? Did I attempt to overthrow the government if I would have done that? Did Jude?
Illogical arguments. Hypocrisy by the definition. Condoning the blacklist of someone that broke no laws, but donated money to a military unit. This doesn't paint a pretty picture (But The Dark Knight does
😉Hail TDK o7). So lets throw double standards on top of it shall we?
Today as you may know, Tenshibo has attempted to PTO SFP today. I remember a few months back when some fellow ran for PP in USWP without following procedure. They labeled it a "PTO" in which they "defeated". That loyal USWP member was henceforth unwelcome and so he moved to WTP. He quit eRep now, but I'm sure we all remember him. OfficerFriendly.
In this instance, a USWP member has left his party and moved to SFP in order to run for PP. Is that a PTO? Well if the aforementioned example is, this certainly is. And if the former wasn't, then this still could be. Lets take a look at a discussion that stemmed from this.
There he goes about laws again. They are apparently very important to him, even though he helped blacklist a man we have clearly displayed has broken no laws. Yet here we are where not one, but two eUS citizens are doing something that is typically considered extremely despicable, and if was with success? They'd consider it a matter of national security and we'd all unite to stop them. And he says that they shouldn't be blacklisted.
You'll punish an innocent in all cases. But those who are only innocent since they have failed, you don't punish? That's a bit more than hypocritical. Now I admit I have seen Paul be reasonable on certain occasions but revolving around these topics, nothing I have said has been able to release that reasonable person.
All he has done is contradict himself and set double standards. Theoretically this could be viewed as some last-ditch attempt to show him how much of a hypocrite he has been in an attempt to bring a stop to it, but I don't see that happening.
Lets take a look at a fancy shmancy article J.A. Lake has written for us today.
Law & Order
It displays a noble idea. One that would require dedication and activity to bring about. But the success of the idea is not what we are going to discuss, rather it is as the rest of this article is, about our buddy Paul.
Firstly, this is going backwards a touch but I chose to put this here since it was commented ON J.A. Lake's article I felt it appropriate to put it here.
Paul, give it up. We've already displayed that you not only didn't follow the constitution and its laws but encouraged others to punish those that did not break a single law in that constitution as well. Stop trying to act like white knight when your armor is stained by black.
As we can see above. Paul interpreted a system of checks and balances, the real USA's government type, to be "entirely pettiness about not getting your way and not principle". Well I think the founding fathers have something to say about that.
He also accused BSP members of supported it, when only one member- I supported it. That's not even hypocrisy or helping develop the topic, but just a general lack of fact-checking that bothers me. When your facts aren't checked, they're just opinions to be disregarded.
And then he calls me a hypocrite, I ask him why, and he replies with this.
This was his response to me. And this was around when I started writing this article. Lets look at my response to him.
So he has called me a hypocrite, and clearly does not understand what a hypocrite is. Or maybe he does. Maybe he's just so eager to paint me the hypocrite after me calling him one so much that he decided to just create those things that I supposedly said. Maybe he focuses too much on group mentalities and simply blames me for the things the people around me have said, and considers my non-perfect alignment with those around me to be hypocritical, either way its illogical.
Paul, I have clearly demonstrated how hypocritical you have been of late. The double standards you set. How you've stated one thing and done another. What you do with that is up to you. I assume you'll do nothing productive with it however. You'll just continue the hypocrisy and double standards as presented in this article. Go ahead, prove me wrong. It'd earn you a lot of respect from me if you did.
Check out my first Hypocrisy article here: http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/2563468/1/20
Down with hypocrisy!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
This whole meta congress is showing its final day is really fast approaching.
Fixing power for elitists with bogus laws with mistakes in it, at some point bandages dont help anymore and the patient dies.
yes hit pieces on your favorite targets is how you foster in game growth *takes notes*
You sure enjoyed the first one. https://gyazo.com/6886427992da3c4607b78b3d196d0c46
Because it wasn't on a person.
There is a difference.
Thanks for the article shoutout o/
Have an endorsement!
[removed]
Oh dude you're doing player features? Do me next!
You gotta be a hypocrite for a prolonged amount of time first.
You're nowhere near earning one of these 😛
Also lol implying Aramec and the majority of the country have different opinions than me on any of these points.
Having an opinion doesn't make someone a hypocrite. Aramec has always been consistent when he speaks in the moment. Never saying one thing and doing another. Even though I may dislike his opinion at times, very strongly even, I respect him for being a consistent person with his words and actions.
Name one thing I've said that Aramec disagrees with lol
o7
Citation provided for arguments.
Looks like Paul isn't smarter than average bear after all. Or average bear is really stupid.
They do eat garbage...
LMAO!
Don't tell everyone about that. I was drunk.
What, are you actually that dumb? That's a self deprecating joke, Bears aren't smart, I don't brag about being smart on my profiel, how obnoxious would that be, get over yourself
o7
SHOTS FIRED
Voted
USWP motto since 2011... "Laws for thee but never for me!"
★★★★ Baaaa o7 ★★★★
As a member of the USWP that hits close to home
Yet, it's still true!
Who cares I've never been near USWP, and the implications that I, a Lib and then a Fed, have, are laughable
o7
Yeah PTO-ing another party doesn't break any laws.
Yes, assuming that isn't sarcasm, that's a point I was trying to make. Thank you for clarifying.
The point you were trying to make was that what I said was true?
Congress still has the right to blacklist him though
Cause they dont like him, since thats what they have been doing
Yes.
voted
Voted!
Really? I expected better than support of a baseless hit piece.
I expected better than supporting everything happening against SFP. 🙂
Better? If you followed what happened, you'd see that I have been consistent and in the right.
Given you have been less active I'm giving you some benefit of the doubt, but what was done deserves no sympathy, it was wrong for the reasons Resouia neatly screen shotted, though with some mincing of context.
😁)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
I hope you were right and consistent but in my point of view its the other way around.
Sorry, but I dont think I am anywhere near your expectation. Different opinions on the events, you see.
Paul the only thing you have been consistent of is quite possibly actually believing the nonsense you have been spreading around. The more you say something doesn't make it right or correct. I'll proudly where an A on my chest for this witch hunt if you would just stop trying to prove your not what everyone clearly sees
My opinion is not nonsense. And if I've been consistent, as I have, then even if you all disagree you accept this piece is baseless.
And what's the A for, I imagine not adulterer, perhaps the other a word? Because we've known that since you burned out of the Feds nick. Shockingly most people still like me.
Just because pfluffy says you are right doesn't make it so but glad you believe him.
What does this have to do with Pfeiffer?
Beyond confused.
Ironic since you supported one I directed at SFP.
https://gyazo.com/6886427992da3c4607b78b3d196d0c46
That's not ironic at all. I was calling the SFP hypocrites then and now. Somehow you interpreted that as a far more personal attack than I intended.
You lowkey don't understand the wordy hypocrisy, but you seriously don't understand what irony means.
Who said I didn't like you. I do have the ability to still like people while disagreeing with them completely. Something that seem to becoming increasingly rare, but thanks for insulting me nonetheless makes you seem way more legitimate
eh I like you too Nick, but you're mistaken if you think your post is a disagreement with which was purely political. It was insulting, as a human being, I tend to respond in kind.
And my response was to "what everyone clearly sees" of your post.
That was a long article to read. I enjoyed it. o/
if it isnt against the game rules its not against the law some of you by creating fake laws for whatever reason ( i always assume personal gain but thats me thinking the worst of people again ) are the ones breaking the natural laws wich in the end always ends badly since you curtail the growth of the nation by making people disgusted and leaving and creating a joke of a nation
laws are chains to limit peoples actions or to encourage them like Adam Smith wrote if you create good laws you get the best of people if you create bad laws you wrotten them and they become poisenous " its not for the good of his heart that we can expect our daily bread from the baker but out of his own self interest "
i wrotte too much i think i just cared a litle ... feels wierd
i agree, both the game administrators and the game communities should strive to write better laws/rules.
Players can't write Laws/Rules for the game.
they can and they do, Arrden.