You've fundamentally misunderstood the entire point
It's certainly possible I did because 3/4 of your examples seemed fairly normal, but you intonation and alcohol example seems far more malicious.
because you're suffering from an excess of nobless oblige.
I'm not taking that because it makes me feel good. It doesn't. It is tactically superior. Fundamentally, the ability to forgive and teach independence/self-sufficiency to the benighted victims who are cast out by the Left's eternal purity spiral is the strongest form of subversion to their cause that exists.
There is nothing better than individual self-interest to upset an asserted collective interest. They, themselves, depend on that to make money.
To my original point, forcing them to feel the consequences of their actions is necessary. Going out of your way to hurt them with consequences you deem inevitable or necessary, regardless of whether they were actually going to have them happen naturally, is a whole different thing that validates their entire narrative about power. That is, 'to seize power and use it against everyone enemies before they use it against you'.
They are overgrown children, and it's long past time we stop playing the adult on their behalf and allow them to suffer the consequences of their actions.
I don't disagree with that sentiment at all, but it sounded like you weren't stopping there. It sounded like you were going further to incite and cause consequences that weren't something they had already earned.
It's certainly possible I did because 3/4 of your examples seemed fairly normal, but you intonation and alcohol example seems far more malicious.
I'm not taking that because it makes me feel good. It doesn't. It is tactically superior. Fundamentally, the ability to forgive and teach independence/self-sufficiency to the benighted victims who are cast out by the Left's eternal purity spiral is the strongest form of subversion to their cause that exists.
There is nothing better than individual self-interest to upset an asserted collective interest. They, themselves, depend on that to make money.
To my original point, forcing them to feel the consequences of their actions is necessary. Going out of your way to hurt them with consequences you deem inevitable or necessary, regardless of whether they were actually going to have them happen naturally, is a whole different thing that validates their entire narrative about power. That is, 'to seize power and use it against everyone enemies before they use it against you'.
I don't disagree with that sentiment at all, but it sounded like you weren't stopping there. It sounded like you were going further to incite and cause consequences that weren't something they had already earned.
If I had used 'smokes too much weed' and 'buy him a bong' instead, I'm guessing you wouldn't have reacted so strongly.