Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
!!! 2017 February LC Thread (Political Poo Is Political) !!! 2017 February LC Thread (Political Poo Is Political)

01-12-2017 , 03:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodle Wazlib
that explains why he went after the black actress in ghostbusters and left the white actresses alone
I think there's a reasonable distinction between saying, believing, or doing something racist and being a white supremacist.
01-12-2017 , 03:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marn
Perhaps he thought that only one of them looked like a dude?
It's a pretty common theme among racists that black women look more manly than white women. Look up all the stuff said about the Williams sisters, Michelle Obama, etc. Its not exactly a surprise when racists say black women look like men, it happens a lot.
01-12-2017 , 03:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodle Wazlib
It's a pretty common theme among racists that black women look more manly than white women. Look up all the stuff said about the Williams sisters, Michelle Obama, etc. Its not exactly a surprise when racists say black women look like men, it happens a lot.
Yeah, that makes sense. Then again, she did have short hair and she's pretty big. I've seen her make fun of herself on SNL for her looks as well.
01-12-2017 , 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodle Wazlib
And how many of the white actresses did he call dudes?
Women typically get called dude if they are jacked or they are over 6 feet tall and not super skinny. I think it is quite the stretch to say a man calling a woman a dude is racist - although I am rarely surprised what liberals call racist these days.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodle Wazlib
It's a pretty common theme among racists that black women look more manly than white women. Look up all the stuff said about the Williams sisters, Michelle Obama, etc. Its not exactly a surprise when racists say black women look like men, it happens a lot.
I've never heard of anyone comparing michelle to a man, but I don't think I'd call either of the williams sisters feminine so I could see where some ignorant people would call them dudes.
01-12-2017 , 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marn
Perhaps he thought that only one of them looked like a dude? Is he habitually calling out black women and leaving white women alone or are we going to settle this racism accusation on a sample of one?

I won't deny that he is a professional troll though.
Perhaps he is one of the more popular writers at the bastion of white supremacy in the US, Breitbart. Why do we have to give him the benefit of the doubt what his real motives are when he attacks people?
01-12-2017 , 04:33 PM
Milo is more of a racial opportunist like his 'daddy', a category of people more despicable than a racist.
01-12-2017 , 04:38 PM
Despicable for fomenting racism. What's the practical difference?
01-12-2017 , 04:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Despicable for fomenting racism. What's the practical difference?
The difference being that one can become a racist due to ignorance and misinformation and thus in light of new information, education, and interaction with members of other races, have a possibility of shedding their racist views.

A racial opportunist is aware of all of the information and education but chooses to exploit racial divisions anyways for personal gain.
01-12-2017 , 05:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
I've never heard of anyone comparing michelle to a man
Allow me to free you of your ignorance

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0eb58648638d7

Note he also goes with the "black people look like monkeys" well-known racist trope
01-12-2017 , 05:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marn
Noodle, he called her a dude, that is sexist not racist.

13ball,

I think it is really easy to tar someone by 'guilt by association', so he cited a white nationalist, that seems like is a weak argument. He hasn't actually advocated white nationalism or supported their views. You are setting a pretty unrealistic standard IMO.

I did some searching and he doesn't even seem to talk about racial issues very often. He seems to troll the feminist movement a whole lot though.
I didn't say he was a white nationalist. I said he was minimizing white nationalism and seeking to mainstream ideas like those of Paul Ramsey, Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer. Otherwise, why would he insist there is a "stark contrast" between sites like St0rmfr0nt and sites like American Renaissance? Those sites essentially agree on everything but immediate tactics.
01-12-2017 , 06:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoeba
The difference being that one can become a racist due to ignorance and misinformation and thus in light of new information, education, and interaction with members of other races, have a possibility of shedding their racist views.

A racial opportunist is aware of all of the information and education but chooses to exploit racial divisions anyways for personal gain.
Racial is a tricky term here because my understanding of racial is not directly synonymous with racist.
I take the term how you use it to mean a divisive character who leeches off of the willful zealotry and ignorant prejudices of people. Like a social conflict opportunist.
01-12-2017 , 07:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanktehbadwookie
Racial is a tricky term here because my understanding of racial is not directly synonymous with racist.
I take the term how you use it to mean a divisive character who leeches off of the willful zealotry and ignorant prejudices of people. Like a social conflict opportunist.
Sure i will go with that. Your definition is apt.
01-12-2017 , 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
AFAIK (not very far...) Milo isn't a white supremacist. Certainly not in the way that Richard Spencer is. It's more like he's in the camp that denies that racial discrimination exists and which holds that liberal activism on the subject is reverse racism. Much like he's in the camp that denies that gender discrimination exists and which holds that feminism is the real sexism. I think he tends to focus a lot more on gender issues than race issues.
well named, you're a decent guy and all that, but what the **** made you think you could run your ****ing mouth about this?

Think this **** through! If you have no ****ing idea what Milo writes and are trying to derive his **** secondhand, maybe don't ****ing stick up for him to curry favor with the halfwitted racists who infest this forum?

What is wrong with you? This is why this forum is the way it is.
01-12-2017 , 07:25 PM
MEA CULPA

I was wrong when I called well named a decent guy.


Jesus ****ing Christ.
Quote:
AFAIK (not very far...) Milo isn't a white supremacist.
The internet, in one ****ing sentence.

well named, at the end of the day, your natural ****ing inclination in the face of an argument where FoldN took the pro-Milo side, was that FoldN and Marn were probably right and the dang SJWs were being mean to the nice fellow who just happens to have a habit of saying, believing, or doing something racist.


Think about what that says about you, at like a fundamental level.
01-12-2017 , 07:30 PM
Just because I don't think he's a white supremacist doesn't mean I don't think he's a horrible idiot. I should have clarified, I suppose.

Oh and I was basing my opinion on what I've gleaned from looking at his work.
01-12-2017 , 07:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
Just because I don't think he's a white supremacist doesn't mean I don't think he's a horrible idiot. I should have clarified, I suppose.

Oh and I was basing my opinion on what I've gleaned from looking at his work.
WHY WOULD YOU THINK, given admittedly incomplete information, that FoldN and Marn would be right and Noodle and I were wrong? Do they have a track record that gives you faith in their credibility when they vouch for this guy?

You saw a conversation about a guy you KNEW said/believed/etc racist ****, you knew that you didn't know a lot about him, you saw guys who reflexively deny any sort of claim of racism defending him... what, you thought they were just ****ing due to be right? That the body of work you were unaware of from Milo was just woke as ****?

The dude started a whites only scholarship fund for ****'s sake. Yeah it was a scam and he kept the money, but what the **** else does he need to do?
01-12-2017 , 07:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
MEA CULPA

I was wrong when I called well named a decent guy.


Jesus ****ing Christ.
You forget that you just made up being ok with well named to try to be mean to me.

Well named is a very decent person who tries to be fair minded. Obviously he isn't your cup of tea.
01-12-2017 , 07:51 PM
well named is definitely a decent guy by lefto standards. Maybe a little beta, but nobody's perfect.
01-12-2017 , 07:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kioshk
well named is definitely a decent guy by lefto standards. Maybe a little beta, but nobody's perfect.
Didnt think decency had a left/right component to it.
01-12-2017 , 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
WHY WOULD YOU THINK, given admittedly incomplete information, that FoldN and Marn would be right and Noodle and I were wrong? Do they have a track record that gives you faith in their credibility when they vouch for this guy?
It doesn't generally occur to me to form opinions this way, but as a matter of fact I haven't seen (or don't recall) any posts from you on this specific topic. I don't really understand your tendency to derive these kinds of judgements about the alignments of posters. I stated my opinion and it wasn't based on an evaluation of who was involved in the argument. I generally enjoy your posting and think you are both incisive and insightful, on top of being hilarious. But the way you think about posting as a team sport is a bit alien to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
The dude started a whites only scholarship fund for ****'s sake. Yeah it was a scam and he kept the money, but what the **** else does he need to do?
I didn't know about this. It sounds like it generally fits into his pattern of obnoxious trolling. Anyway, as far as how I identify people as white supremacists, it generally involves them explicitly advocating for white supremacy, white nationalism, or separatism. I'm not sure what is problematic about drawing a distinction between white supremacists and people with more typical racist attitudes, but I'm open to being persuaded.
01-12-2017 , 08:42 PM
Also, I don't think you should question my decency because you might drive me to vote for Trump in 2020. :P
01-12-2017 , 08:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Like, when you say this, are you implicitly arguing he isn't a white supremacist or that white supremacists should be allowed to argue their points without fear of banning? There's this whipsaw between that **** with you people every ****ing time.

I do not think it is an unreasonable rule for a private forum to not want to be Stormfront. Certainly a forum CAN be safe harbor for white supremacists, but you seem to think there's some principle that means every forum should be.
Please name the white supremacists in this forum.
01-12-2017 , 08:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoeba
Didnt think decency had a left/right component to it.
interesting idea. I'd guess the left is much more likely to question the inherent decency of the right than the other way around. My elderly parents are crazy left, so I know there are at least a few good apples in that barrel.
01-12-2017 , 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
Go back to your Reddit safe space then.
Why don't you just stay in P? None of us want you here, your tard up every thread you post in. Even mat told you to eat a dick. Why are you still here?
01-12-2017 , 08:59 PM
I want him here. Stop acting like you own this forum.

      
m