4 ms·

GRT is racist because it's essential premise is that America belongs to white people, who are not the "existing population of [the] country" in any objective se

by foldr 1y ago

GRT is racist because it's essential premise is that America belongs to white people, who are not the "existing population of [the] country" in any objective sense independent of racist ideology. GRTs do not care how long you have been in the US; they only care if you are white. (So people with indigenous ancestry and the great great grandchildren of slaves can go take a hike.) Murder and political assassination are deeply wrong, but are you sure you really want to go down the rabbit hole of GRT apologism to make your point about that?

zahlman 1y ago
> GRT is racist because it's essential premise is that America belongs to white people, who are not the "existing population of [the] country" in any objective sense independent of racist ideology. GRTs do not care how long you have been in the US; they only care if you are white. (So people with indigenous ancestry and the great great grandchildren of slaves can go take a hike.) Feel free to show me the part where Kirk macro-expanded the thought and asserted anything about whiteness having anything to do with a legitimate claim to residency. I don't think he has said anything like that. Part of the reason I don't think he has is that I was literally just watching an extended clip in which he directly addressed a legal Mexican immigrant and asserted unequivocally that the distinction he intended to draw was not based on race or nationality, but on following the immigration rules. > are you sure you really want to go down the rabbit hole of GRT apologism The large majority of people I have seen labelled as subscribing to this theory had, upon examination, views like Kirk's, and not ones consistent with racial supremacy. If you're going to say that the theory requires such an attitude, then you are not working with the same definitions as the person ascribing the theory to Kirk, assuming intellectual honesty. I responded to a person using a definition compatible with Kirk's ideology, using arguments compatible with what the evidence says about Kirk's ideology. To conflate this is to commit the "worst argument in the world" i.e. the noncentral fallacy (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncentral-fallacy-the-worst-argument-in-the-world https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncen...). Edit: I find it rather amazing that someone managed to downvote me in less time than it would have taken to read and properly understand the comment. My understanding is that downvotes are not available downthread when you're having a back-and-forth, so this must have come from a third party that somehow happened to come across this immediately, 8 comments deep.
- fawkesalbus 1y ago
  @zahlman your responses here are amazing and really articulate. I sincerely appreciate the effort. Thanks! Most people around the world who are criticizing Charlie’s philosophy and beliefs have never watched a long form interview with him. Probably picked up a few sound bites or clips from here and there. Also there are many who are blinded by hatred towards him, to the point that they are drawing comparisons between him and Hitler. So it is hard to get through to such people. As someone with Jewish ancestry it is difficult and saddening to see this dilution. Nevertheless once again I appreciate your responses in this thread!
  - zahlman 1y ago
    BTW we don't have @-pings here; I found this reviewing my own comment history. Also, it appears that your comments are being automatically filtered. I don't see especially good reasons for this (although it's clear you've made a throwaway for this specific topic and you're getting a lot of downvotes); consider emailing hn@ycombinator.com about it.
    - fawkesalbus 1y ago
      [dead]

by foldr 1y ago

zahlman 1y ago

> GRT is racist because it's essential premise is that America belongs to white people, who are not the "existing population of [the] country" in any objective sense independent of racist ideology. GRTs do not care how long you have been in the US; they only care if you are white. (So people with indigenous ancestry and the great great grandchildren of slaves can go take a hike.) Feel free to show me the part where Kirk macro-expanded the thought and asserted anything about whiteness having anything to do with a legitimate claim to residency. I don't think he has said anything like that. Part of the reason I don't think he has is that I was literally just watching an extended clip in which he directly addressed a legal Mexican immigrant and asserted unequivocally that the distinction he intended to draw was not based on race or nationality, but on following the immigration rules. > are you sure you really want to go down the rabbit hole of GRT apologism The large majority of people I have seen labelled as subscribing to this theory had, upon examination, views like Kirk's, and not ones consistent with racial supremacy. If you're going to say that the theory requires such an attitude, then you are not working with the same definitions as the person ascribing the theory to Kirk, assuming intellectual honesty. I responded to a person using a definition compatible with Kirk's ideology, using arguments compatible with what the evidence says about Kirk's ideology. To conflate this is to commit the "worst argument in the world" i.e. the noncentral fallacy (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncentral-fallacy-the-worst-argument-in-the-world https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncen...). Edit: I find it rather amazing that someone managed to downvote me in less time than it would have taken to read and properly understand the comment. My understanding is that downvotes are not available downthread when you're having a back-and-forth, so this must have come from a third party that somehow happened to come across this immediately, 8 comments deep.

fawkesalbus 1y ago
@zahlman your responses here are amazing and really articulate. I sincerely appreciate the effort. Thanks! Most people around the world who are criticizing Charlie’s philosophy and beliefs have never watched a long form interview with him. Probably picked up a few sound bites or clips from here and there. Also there are many who are blinded by hatred towards him, to the point that they are drawing comparisons between him and Hitler. So it is hard to get through to such people. As someone with Jewish ancestry it is difficult and saddening to see this dilution. Nevertheless once again I appreciate your responses in this thread!
- zahlman 1y ago
  BTW we don't have @-pings here; I found this reviewing my own comment history. Also, it appears that your comments are being automatically filtered. I don't see especially good reasons for this (although it's clear you've made a throwaway for this specific topic and you're getting a lot of downvotes); consider emailing hn@ycombinator.com about it.
  - fawkesalbus 1y ago
    [dead]