[maxbond]

I can't say I agree, if someone made a high effort post arguing for eating the rich, I personally would still flag it because I flag all calls to violence, whether they are low effort or not. (Some people say "eat the rich" to mean "redistribute wealth through taxation," if I could tell that's what they meant I probably wouldn't flag it, other people uh, don't. Maybe the recipe you referenced is a policy proposal, let me know if I've misread you.)

[defrost]

How is advocating for eating the rich a call for violence though?

Are you assuming it's a call to kill them rather than a plea to not waste the protein?

The thing many people fail to realise about the Fore people in PNG was that their cannibalism was a mortuary rite of reverance for highly valued in group members that weren't killed for sustenance.

I can quote a paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581657/ or simply say I learnt that first hand 40+ years back as child tagging along on supply runs with Mike Alpers (see Author list).

Now .. given you might have gained a snippet of new infomation, how do you feel about upvoting this comment about eating high value members of society?

[Dylan16807]

> Are you assuming it's a call to kill them rather than a plea to not waste the protein?

It could possibly be such a plea if the implication is that their death is already imminent. Which means it's still advocating their downfall.

This isn't about cannibalism and your comments here are a waste of everyone's time.

[maxbond]

I wasn't born yesterday.

[DonHopkins]

I love babies!

...I just can't eat a whole one.

[defrost]

Hmm - a self evident non sequitur that fails to address a real point about the actual world and the assumptions made by people about both violence and cannabalism.

That's a poor comment from yourself- I'd hoped for better.

[maxbond]

If you'd like a higher quality response, sophistry and performative disappointment isn't the way to get it. I'm not going to give a serious detailed response to an unserious comment, I'm going to find a better use for my time.

[defrost]

I don't follow you at all I'm afraid.

I'm completely serious about the facts here:

* You don't have to kill people in order to eat them,

* I've had cannibals as babysitters in PNG as a child,

* I'm much the same age as Mike Alpers own children who I know from my days in university.

etc.

You claim to not be engaged with such topics because <<violence>> and I've quite accurately pointed out that violence isn't a neccesity here.

Why, exactly, are you having a little tantrum here?

[maxbond]

If you need further clarification about why I don't take it seriously when I talk about a meme about a violent uprising and you pivot the conversation to ritual cannibalism, I encourage you to consult your preferred dictionary regarding "sophistry".

If you want to convince me that you're earnestly trying to have a real conversation, being insulting isn't going to help.