It's a terrible comparison, just about in every way.

Chain e-mails are a form of spam. Spam definitely works on the interwebs... hit enough inboxes, you'll get a reply. There's a whole industry working 24/365 filling up inboxes for satisfied cash paying customers.

But even if spam didn't work (which I believe was what you were trying to say), you're still doing that same thingee again.

You are making this counter-intuitive claim that a certain poster style (ala FlyWf) is not effective... or even counter-productive... toward some nebulous cause of anti-racism. That's making an empirical claim about the real world. Instead of making up these terrible comparison... how about citing a study, etc that backs this empirical claim up?

I didn't say I didn't care (although I guess I don't)... but it can't matter if I care or not. The efficacy of a pattern of posting IRL is independent of my existence.

I think most these people easily fall into the latter... they are just over-joyed knowing the 'real truth', unlike the wayward 'sheeple' who need correcting.

Look back at the ACers... you can't actually 'be' an ACer any more than you can make a square-circle... but they just had an overwhelming need to tell us all about voluntary self-pwnership of the NAP and Peeks not Pokes anyways.

Wat... US Libertarianism is out-of-the closet racist.

I was the first one to level the accusation at my online persona, so the confirmation wasn't really needed.

No, y'all just ignorantly and personally blame individuals for systemic problems that we are all responsible for. It's like using a flamethrower to get rid of cobwebs under your house. Y'all connect dots to individual people that really don't absolutely exist as an excuse to get all militant.

Also, y'all uneducatedly believe people should learn according to your arbitrary timeline and by sole threat of aggressive behavior.

Finally, treating people who are relatively uneducated about racism like they are making a moral mistake is simply as uneducated.

Y'all got problems of your own, these are all worse than joking about why people are walking in the street instead of the sidewalk.

So again, it comes down to what people believe is racist, and that varies widely. Is it any surprise the conservative and libertarian crowd think it's transparent that a certain segment of liberals practically, almost religiously define racism as anything not supporting their political agenda? I believe MrWookie, for example, has gone so far as to claim all Republicans are racist. Really?

Of course they have. If you argue to eliminate the social safety net because the lazy welfare queens become dependent on the government teet, but I don't mean everyone becomes dependent, just "those" people, yeah, you are gonna get called racist. Racist rhetoric underlies a large number of political disagreements.

I'm still undecided if what you do is really harmful or just noise.

They (libertarians) almost have to be racist, right?

See now you're being specific. The basic tenets of conservatism don't specify "those" people, it's just unscrupulous politicians who do that because racists votes count the same. Most conservatives don't specify, they could care less what color the welfare queen is.

Not always, but tons of prominent libertarian thinkers are openly white supremacists.

Your exposure to the politics forum as a whole is limited. You have a problem with selection bias.

Your primary motivation for participating at all is a personal grudge. So you also have a problem with emotionally clouded judgement.

ahahahaha

also i think you meant "couldn't care less", but it's more accurate the way you wrote it so don't bother editing

Like duh, that's what the whole conversation is supposed to be about. Take the racist doctrine of Separate but Equal. Now it's always been as racist as it is now... but at one time it wasn't widely believed to be racist.

And so progress was made. How did that happen? Well a big part of that (and the only relevant part ITT) was people calling that racist doctrine 'racist'. And here's a funny thing about how the English language works... in general people who do X are called Xist. Go around nude, you'll be called a 'nudist', go around spewing a racist doctrine, you'll be called a 'racist'. Such is life.

Once again, I'll repeat myself. You are doing it backwards... you are starting with word definitions and trying to force the real world to fit into them. Stop trying to 'define' words... and start thinking about what's going on in the world.

Those conservatives (libertarians are a subset of conservatives) are doing it backwards too. Those people they are calling liberals pick a non-racist political agenda first. Then they identify other agenda, those that happen to be racist, using the word 'racist'. It's not a matter of 'defining' words... it's a matter of not defending racist agendas.

US Republican doctrine is also out-of-the-closet racist. Nobody makes you register as a Republican... you can still vote team elephant. So yeah... if you voluntarily join an organization with a racist doctrine, WTF do you expect people to call you?

What is a basic tenet of conservatism is that the country is in the process of deteriorating compared to the glorious days of the past. It is not a coincidence that a large part of the past's glory is that of a dominant white majority.

i dont know how many times i've had a "conversation" about welfare with a southern republican and pointed out that my mother is actually a welfare queen, as she and my father received food stamps and housing assistance back in the late 60s-early 70s while he was in med school and they were raising their first child. he then went on to pay huge amounts of taxes as a radiologist for the past 40 years and the response from the republicans, 100% of the time, is "well that's a nice story but that's not how the blacks in the ghetto are doing it"

and, having grown up in NC, i'm just supposed to pretend that republicans aren't a bunch of racist bastards despite basically every single piece of real life evidence indicating otherwise?

looooooooooooooool

Foldn, your are dealing with a group of highly partisan anti-conservatives, you are only going to get a biased and derisive perspective about conservatism and individual conservatives from them. Of course they are going to stereotype the whole of their partisan opponents attributes with certain parts. Their partisan stereotyping tendencies are one of the mistakes they make which leads to fallacious accusations of racism.

+inf

This just explains why racists seek to exploit conservatives, and conservatism. Having a common attribute of appeals to tradition is an in-road. But, that does not explain or prove that conservatives or conservatism are generally racist. Not all traditions are racist, not all traditions are fallacious.


For example, I'm conservative about gun regulation. I dream of the glory days of super responsible gun regulation like George Washington would do it and a NRA from 1968. A lot of liberals are conservative about gun control.

And some say wookie has no sense of humour ...

Sent from my SM-P600 using 2+2 Forums

Almost certainly. But I've been around here since before the Bruce fiasco, and was posting in the Mike Brown thread before it as well. Ferguson was what got me more interested in talking about racism of late, and that's a good thing imo. Everyone should. It appears to you that I'm arguing racist postions, because I see a lot of problems with how racism is defined around here, so I argue. Here in St. Louis and elsewhere, among people whom I think are racist and/or in most cases just ignorant and not empathetic, I'm sure I appear to be too liberal because I often take the other side of the arguments where they are lacking.

It is obvious you and those who strongly believe and act as you do think you are simply doing the same thing as previous generations, and moving society in the right direction. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as picking a side or political affiliation, or I would vote a straight Democratic ticket every time.

We're really going to pretend that Libertarianism doesn't have deep roots with the Neoconfederate asshats? Man, who do you guys even think you're fooling with that ****? I was posting youtubes of William F Buckley here just last week.

You are the one pretending that and accusing others of pretending that. This is why deceptive mockery is stupid and uninformative. No identified libertarian is going to give you any credit to believe they are infested with supremacists, because you make yourself an even bigger dick presently compared to some abstract demographic label such as Neo-confederate. Your just another dick who fits a liberal smear label they hear on the youtubes or am radio to them and you offered nothing to anyone to illustrate in the discussion any of the libertarian/white supremacists connections.

The second part is absolutely true, but I fail to see how a person could believe that cream naturally and consistently rises to the top and not believe that disadvantaged people are not inherently flawed.

Hey Foldn, they are gossiping and making accusations about you in the 2016 republican thread. The nature of the content and the accusations that have been made are quite ironic. These shaming, blaming, mocking, labelers think they are all quite super-logical and have exclusive rights to these things SMPers don't. Super ironic.