Comments by "CynicalBroadcast" (@CynicalBastard) on "The Most Important Reason Why the European Union Will Surely Fail" video.

  1. society is a fiction.
    4
  2. French was still considered a noble language in and around Europe before English ever was...so why can't you just accept that fact.
    2
  3. history shouldn't be ignored. it should just be relevant to the implications of your statement on the world- and no, they aren't. you said, that the Brits, because of the preeminence of their lingua franca being a given within the business world as the ne plus ultra of their dominance, is because of their language being "useful" in business. it's not. it's because of the fact that they spread their language and their culture, so readily. that's the only real reason. it's not because their language was given a historical precedent just because it was spread by way of expansionism. they weren't the business hub of the world then; so the precedent you're trying to claim for them is just inherently crap, that is to say, it's wrong. the US is much more dominant in the business world anyway; that's another reason why you're wrong.
    2
  4. well, you're conflating the notion that the British were successful with the notion that their language is popular now...wtf does that have to do with anything? never mind, i might be way off-base here. i just don't think i see where you're coming from with the "British dominance" schtick- the French have been fine little dandies just the same as the Brits.
    1
  5. but how is that corollary to their dominance? the UK is not the dominant force in this world...clearly not...the US is. are they still British. no. they aren't. don't see how that's hard.
    1
  6. i never said history should be forgotten or ignored. you clearly cannot grasp the English language. which is ironic. i said " you have to forget about history when it's irrelevant to the implications of your statements on the world", not "history should be ignored" -- you seem to be a fool. not i.
    1
  7. my argument is that there is no historical precedent preceding the notion of what you're claiming; that English was a dominant force in the market in the past, or in present, doesn't suggest that their language is more useful in business...it's simply more used. the fact that's predominantly used around the world, says nothing about the dominance of the language over other languages. it just means the language is more prevalent. given that, the historical precedent isn't that English was more useful a lingua franca in business, but that the English had spread it's empire more readily across the globe, making station within business markets around the world, making their language more prevalent. prevalent =/= useful. useful is a relative term. you're simply claiming that English SHOULD be the lingua franca, simply because over time it's spread so much. that's simply relative. not a necessary course of action, or even a relevant one- not presently anyway- and there certainly isn't historical precedent to claim that it's "better" because of the fact of it's spread of usage.
    1
  8. sure it's what you want. you're advocating for it. and it's fine that it's most used, and/or useful...it's just that there's no historical precedent for it being "more used" by it's being "useful"; the notion that it's historically relevant is defunct, considering there's no connection between it's historical usage and it's contemporary usage in terms of it's being "more used & useful"- as i said, it simply was and is more prevalent. the notion that it's more "useful" simply because it was used in the past prevalently is just simply fallacious.
    1
  9. LOL, ok there, stoupty puepty pants. your IQ, schiftyfive.
    1
  10. yea, child, whatever i say, indeed.
    1
  11. i already won the argument by the time i pointed out that your statement on historical precedent was hilariously farcical and irrelevant. all i had to say was, "you should at least have a relevant claim to make, if you're coming to make claims about historical precedent." being that sense and reason can be easily eschewed for such silly claims. you could at least have provided a rationale as to why you think it's relevant. you can't. because it's not. now, baby, you can have WHATEVER YOU WANT...do you want to know a secerret? i can count allll da way up to schiftyfive.
    1