You are way too easily provoked into pointless argumentation.

Incorrect premise. I get furious at your kind racism and it has nothing to do with it what color is involved. You can keep incorrectly assuming skin color has any bearing at all on which kinds of racism I reject but keep in mind, its your cognitive dissonance that gets you upset due to your repeated and willful discrimination and prejudices based on race, which is, ironically, racist.

Okay. Say ur right. It's racist. Why would anyone give a ****? Who is being harmed?

It has changed hugely. In tone, structure and he used to actually have a point eventually.

My objection is not based on who is or who is not harmed. Its based on it being racist. I've never understood people who tolerate or perpetuate ANY racism. If you are going to be an anti-racist you cant discriminate based on skin color, its contradictory. You'd have to accept the premise that its okay to be a racist as long as it does not harm anyone....that's absurd.

The idea of white privilege isn't racist against white people. IT doesn't mean white people need to feel guilty. It doesn't mean white people need to apologize for being white. It's not a commentary on any characteristic of white people. Its just an acknowledgement that being white in the USA today means you are privileged and don't have to face discrimination and other issues in certain areas. Calling it racism and comparing it to talk about the inherent criminality of blacks people is absurd and, ironically, and example of privilege.

So, you are moving the goalpost and declaring victory? You, yourself admitted its was an extrinsic quality or characteristic that applies to white people. Applying a characteristic to an entire group of people, places or things is stereotype.

So it seems like you:

1) have it all figured out
2) view yourself as a completely objective rational thinker whose rigorous disinterested logic allows him to identify the truth
3) are happy to share your wisdom with lesser beings by lecturing them and correcting their errors in thinking

In conclusion, maybe you would be happier in SMP.

Privileged is a characteristic. Then you apply that characteristic to white people thereby stereotyping them. Its insane that you would suggest a racial stereotype is not racist. What the white person feels or should not feel is irrelevant to it being racist. Emotions, psychology, empirical evidence is all irrelevant when it comes to determining whether a racial stereotype is racist because, it simply is. If you do not believe its a stereotype, then we agree to disagree and you can continue your perpetuation of what you to believe not to be racist stereotyping.

Further, people think blacks commit more crime based on empirical evidence, i.e. disproportionate crime committed by blacks. This is one of the arguments brucez made. Its follows the same flawed logic as proponents of privilege do. I speak just as loudly against that kind of thinking as well.

I do not have it figured out but by identifying irrational concepts is a first step.

In one sense it's absurd but when we are talking about the political problem of racism and oppression then it makes a lot more sense. Trying to understand how and why people stereotype in the first place is a good idea and useful in addressing the real political problem but you have to realise who you're talking to.

Really? I just provoked you into arguing with me for seven straight hours because I was bored at work.

You should aim those false accusations at a mirror of derision and ...whatever else stupid crap you always babble about.

No, it's not a stereotype. You can feel free to keep calling it a stereotype, but most of us are going to just assume you are probably a racist and we will probably be correct.

lol @ privileged is a characteristic

What a complete moron

I do not discriminate based on color, I'll leave that to you and your cohorts. I do not need to discriminate to reject racism. Its odd you think you must discriminate based on skin color in order not to be a racist. Again, we get into the cognitive dissonance that's been perpetuated on this form for years....Its not like some of you are interested in rational thought, so when you call me a racist, it akin to you calling me a green bean...having absolutely no contextual or logical accuracy.

I have several points. Are you just saying that to be argumentative or would you like to discuss something?

I'm still curious what happens to a hapless racist who doesn't want to be racist?

I also have a good point about mr Wookies list of demands and the excess of argumentation which leaves an unsettled conflict concerning the topic of this thread.

I am right on point describing a whole host of poster behavior. I also question specific elements that behavior. When it comes to some poster's I question their general authority of opinion on the matter.

So if you were looking for a point. I'll be happy to discuss.

Really- the test is on, who can not stop being derisive and mocking? Empty, shallow, repetitive contention is nut-low nonsense in an unsettled conflict between actual humans and on this topic.

Prove and explain yourselves, your own words and your behavior. take responsibility for why you have been here and persist with your opinion and behavior.

Act like educated folks,so we can tell who can't. I've already put my work down. The conflict is settleable and without further excessive argumentation.

Spank, you gonna make this a 10-straight hour provoke-a-thon?

Is that how incapable you are of controlling yourself?

Who made you in charge of who posts where.? Explain how that is smart behavior please. Why are you excluding people based on politic regular mr wookie style tribes? This is unchained. We can question that. Is it really that smart if you can't give a good reason for doing it?

Who do you think is provoking who? I've illicited several irrational and fallacious comments from you, are you incapable of controlling yourself?

Shallow argumentative accusation of emotion.

Whom

nit.

Yeah, me. I'm provoking you. That's how I did it right there.

Pretty sure "whom" isn't even right in that case, but since you definitely don't know you had to surrender.

That's you being outsmarted.