"SEND HER BACK!" Will they defend this?

WilliamSeger said:
I think it's just the innate defensive response when people feel that their group is threatened by another group. But that doesn't mean that we as a society can't learn the difference between rational responses to real threats and chauvinistic xenophobia.
Click to expand...

Of course, but that doesn't change the innate nature of this sort of behaviour.

I mean, the need for reproduction is probably the most innate thing we have and yet we don't typically seek to hump one another nonstop.
 
Diversity has increased.

The situation has become grim.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

Diversity made the situation grim.

This has been another episode of Simpleton Logic!
 
Belz... said:
Of course, but that doesn't change the innate nature of this sort of behaviour.

I mean, the need for reproduction is probably the most innate thing we have and yet we don't typically seek to hump one another nonstop.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that's presidential behaviour.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Diversity has increased.

The situation has become grim.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

Diversity made the situation grim.

This has been another episode of Simpleton Logic!
Click to expand...

"Day 42. Supplies are running low. I can no longer find a proper American steak or potato in the stores, they have been overrun with with churros and kimchi and cheeses other than 'Processed American Cheese Food.' The living envy the dead."
 
NWO Sentryman said:
Cute Anecdote, but that does not explain how a society is stronger for becoming more diverse. The United Kingdom has become more diverse, but I have yet to think of a time post-WW2 that it has been this divided, and that's before Boris Johnson takes office.
Click to expand...

Post says: "Cute Anecdote"

Follows that up with...a personal anecdote.

Neat.
 
plague311 said:
Post says: "Cute Anecdote"

Follows that up with...a personal anecdote.

Neat.
Click to expand...

No, I am comparing historical and present eras. British society, despite its growing diversity is far more divided and fractured than it has been since the Second World War. I mean, looking at the blatant race baiting from the Tory party since 2013 and the Faragian Juggernaut, not even Enoch Powell has gotten as much traction as Farage has.

And America right now is in an even worse bind, and Trump is only an expression of it.
 
NWO Sentryman said:
No, I am comparing historical and present eras. British society, despite its growing diversity is far more divided and fractured than it has been since the Second World War. I mean, looking at the blatant race baiting from the Tory party since 2013 and the Faragian Juggernaut, not even Enoch Powell has gotten as much traction as Farage has.

And America right now is in an even worse bind, and Trump is only an expression of it.
Click to expand...

what metric are you using to measure dividedness?
 
The Great Zaganza said:
what metric are you using to measure dividedness?
Click to expand...

picture.php
 
NWO Sentryman said:
No, I am comparing historical and present eras. British society, despite its growing diversity is far more divided and fractured than it has been since the Second World War. I mean, looking at the blatant race baiting from the Tory party since 2013 and the Faragian Juggernaut, not even Enoch Powell has gotten as much traction as Farage has.

And America right now is in an even worse bind, and Trump is only an expression of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I'm commenting on the fact that you're basing it on nothing more than your beliefs. You haven't actually provided any evidence that it's far more divided, or that any such division is based on diversity. You're just....making the claim. That means nothing at all, since it's not being supported by anything.

We could easily claim that any such division could just be the result of more people existing and it would be just as likely to happen if everyone were white or black or green.
 
NWO Sentryman said:
No, I am comparing historical and present eras. British society, despite its growing diversity is far more divided and fractured than it has been since the Second World War. I mean, looking at the blatant race baiting from the Tory party since 2013 and the Faragian Juggernaut, not even Enoch Powell has gotten as much traction as Farage has.

And America right now is in an even worse bind, and Trump is only an expression of it.
Click to expand...

Yup, no division in the 60s, 70s or 80s.
 
I'm beginning to get the "gotcha" of the narrative here.

Ideological Side 1: Inclusiveness.
Ideological Side 2: Divisiveness.

Groups which are excluded by Side 2, naturally, have a tendency to drift over to Side 1 because... spoiler alert... people like people who consider them human beings worthy of existing. Ideological Side 2 then uses this as proof that we are divided.
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
Just as straightforward as Zig's reasoning that AOC uses the term "concentration camp" and so did a nutcase who did something bad, so she has incited his actions. Your argument has a distinct advantage in the first premise, which does not seem to apply in the AOC story.
Click to expand...

It's not just a "distinct advantage", it's a disqualifier.

Ocasio-Cortez does not advocate violence.

Trump advocates violence.

Just because he did not advocate violence in this particular incident doesn't mean that it wasn't a contributing factor.

I think we've gone in circles on this long enough. In sum, the cop's post was bad. I don't regard it as a serious threat to AOC's safety and I don't think it was intended as such, but it was way out of line for a police officer. I don't see any clear connection between Trump's "love it or leave it" rhetoric and this post. Could be there, of course, but there's just no evidence from our limited vantage. Hence, it is not a particularly relevant example of the potential harm from Trump's recent diatribes (which harm you and I both agree is real).
Click to expand...

I disagree, but I am content to leave it there.
 
Belz... said:
Yeah but she said "concentration camp" and this one dude used the same term when committing an act of violence. Clearly she's responsible, right?
Click to expand...

Sadly that's... yeah pretty much exactly what is being argued.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
poneringturtle appears to have been mocking you.
Click to expand...
Not me, the guy I linked. Don't even try to pretend I wrote that. I don't even think race is a valid categorization system for Human beings in the first place. Much less a valid excuse for treating them differently...

That answer criticizes the treating differently part while still holding fast to the myth that race is real. So it exists on the slippery slope of what caused the racism in the first place, which led to the affirmative actions, which is also racist. That sort of answer exists in a continual loop where racism never gets solved, only the preferred race changes.
 
Last edited:
Red Baron Farms said:
Racism is real, race isn't. d'oh
Click to expand...

You defined "racist" as "anyone who even thinks race is a real thing." You linked to a Scientific American article that says, "Today, the mainstream belief among scientists is that race is a social construct without biological meaning." Your definition says that those scientists are racists. Is that what you intended? If not, d'oh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom