3 ms·

> 2. that book claims that multiculturalism exists to destroy white culture > If you're going to argue that the above claim is a "lie", you are obliged to show

> 2. that book claims that multiculturalism exists to destroy white culture > If you're going to argue that the above claim is a "lie", you are obliged to show where that lie is. If you're going to claim that Thiel's book states that multiculturalism exists to destroy white culture, then aren't you obliged by your own logic to show proof of your claim? I don't have a horse in this race, but it's irritating to see you make a claim and then say that any contradictor is required to show proof when you haven't actually done so yourself.

pryce 10y ago
I didn't actually claim that Thiels book states the line in question, the claim was actually made by an earlier commenter, presumably based either (a) directly from the book itself or (b) from the phrase in this bloomberg article [1] that is indicated to as a direct quote from the book in question. My point was, edblarey objecting "that is a lie!" and then decrying that multiculturalism is bad is nonsensical. Is the lie that Thiel wrote the book? Its existence is a matter of public record. Does he instead mean that it is a lie that the book makes the claim that "multiculturalism exists to destroy western culture"? Did Bloomberg fabricate the quote? Or does the quote exist but when considered in context mean something different than Bloomberg claims? All of these are certainly possibilities, but we can't hope to divine which one edblarney means because he spent his comment defending the multiculturalism-is-bad angle (irrelevant to whether Thiel made the claim in question) rather than point out how Thiels claim either does not exist, or does exist but has a different meaning in context. [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-21/the-strange-politics-of-peter-thiel-trump-s-most-unlikely-supporter http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-21/the-strang...

pryce 10y ago

I didn't actually claim that Thiels book states the line in question, the claim was actually made by an earlier commenter, presumably based either (a) directly from the book itself or (b) from the phrase in this bloomberg article [1] that is indicated to as a direct quote from the book in question. My point was, edblarey objecting "that is a lie!" and then decrying that multiculturalism is bad is nonsensical. Is the lie that Thiel wrote the book? Its existence is a matter of public record. Does he instead mean that it is a lie that the book makes the claim that "multiculturalism exists to destroy western culture"? Did Bloomberg fabricate the quote? Or does the quote exist but when considered in context mean something different than Bloomberg claims? All of these are certainly possibilities, but we can't hope to divine which one edblarney means because he spent his comment defending the multiculturalism-is-bad angle (irrelevant to whether Thiel made the claim in question) rather than point out how Thiels claim either does not exist, or does exist but has a different meaning in context. [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-21/the-strange-politics-of-peter-thiel-trump-s-most-unlikely-supporter http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-21/the-strang...