5 ms·
Your rhetoric is part of the problem. You want me to absolve right wing extremists for some reason. It is absurd, and it's absurdity is part of its mechanism of
by th0ma5 6y ago
Your rhetoric is part of the problem. You want me to absolve right wing extremists for some reason. It is absurd, and it's absurdity is part of its mechanism of spread. Your inquiring rhetoric is trying to minimize it as absurdity when the ineffectiveness isn't even the point.
- at_a_remove 6y agoNo, the irrationality is part of the problem. I can ask you again and again to describe how this thing might be "racist" and you cannot do so. It is only racist by fiat, as if someone could declare a particular letter of the alphabet racist. That's the absurd bit. I can ask and ask and ask, and you won't answer the question because you cannot. That's the absurdity.
- th0ma5 6y agoI'm not sure why you are supporting a racist symbol, or trying to convince me or anyone reading it isn't racist. Either you like to fight very low stakes or you've given into the rhetoric that causes these things to spread (eg tide pods look delicious so I can see why people would want to do it, but it is obviously stupid). I have conceded that I cannot explain it as racist on the surface, but you cannot accept that it is racist in its mechanism of spread as an idea that it could be racist... Which is racist enough for racists.
- at_a_remove 6y agoI am unsure why you are supporting the irrationality of concepts like "milk is racist," or trying to convince me or anyone else reading that it is racist and that this stance is not utterly irrational, as you have no way of supporting it. Either you enjoy struggling over mintuae or you have given your mind over to people who will program you with headlines ("... and why that's a problem."). Remember, you replied to me. You have conceded that you do not have a reasonable stance, but you will stubbornly hold onto it based on some nebulous tautology that it is that way because someone said it is that way ... which is irrational enough for me to reject it. Only witches support the idea that there are no witches, and we know what to do with witches, don't we? That's the historical precedent for the thought process you're trying to foist upon me. I recollect only a paraphrasing of a routine on how bad propaganda is laughably bad on its surface. It's purpose is not to convince, but to make you admit to yourself you have no reason to believe it, but also realize that you will repeat the propaganda anyway ... or else. Having asserted to me that milk is racist, you will not be drinking it in the future, or purchasing it, I suppose.
- th0ma5 6y agoThis does not follow. You are continuing to say I shouldn't believe that the racists think it is racist when the racists are saying that they see it as racist. If that is what they say they believe then that is factually what they believe.
- at_a_remove 6y agoThat's not what I am arguing in the slightest. "Wouldn't it be funny and enlightening if we could point out how some people overreact and see monsters in every shadow?" is the whole (milk) of it. There's nothing more to it than that.
- th0ma5 6y agoYou pointing out that overreaction is further propagation.
- at_a_remove 6y agoPropagation of something that isn't racism.
- NoOneNew 6y agoNone of the comment you replied to was in the vain of protecting racists. It was about labeling random, unrelated things as racist symbols/acts, then pretending like that's okay to do and to even defend. It's absurd in every sense of the word. First off, you're taking the actions and beliefs of a handful of people (stupid teens mostly in all of these trolled stunts) and applying their "belief" (lame jokes in reality) to an entire demographic. The actions of the few are applied to the many. What you are doing is pretty damn racist within itself. Add in that you want people to alter their normal, everyday actions on the notion of a random group sudden decides, "Hey, this is mine now and everything associated with it is associated with me!" You're also claiming continuing to do said thing and even arguing that they never belonged to said hate group to begin with, makes you one of them. MLk had a thing about judging individuals on their own character, not on the superficial factors of others. That, and you're the one who started the argument in the first place. Don't claim someone is frivolously arguing when you're the one that started it.
- th0ma5 6y agoThis is how racists work though... Make people inadvertently stick up for them.
- at_a_remove 6y agoThis is how witches work, they make people do things and try to trick you into believing they don't exist.
- th0ma5 6y agoI don't think that's a valid retort to what I said. My point is that they make no pretense to argue in good faith.
- NoOneNew 6y agoStick up for them? No, it's about not making false accusations against folks who are not racist. If the KKK held a democratic vote for their next leader, does that make the democratic process, thus popular vote racist? I cant tell if you're trolling or just plain inbred stupid.