But it's objectively true Palin was purposely citing the 14 words and I'm the dumbest person alive for not thinking so.

This is actually fun and too easy.

Consistency of logic is not your strong suit.

No of course there's no universal objective standard. But

a) either you're being meaningless or you mean something when you call something racist. That can be legitimately questioned and disagreed with.

b) others can disagree with you because of a misunderstanding about 'meaning'.

Neither of these have anything to do with tone (policing or otherwise).

Literally nobody suggested that and your butthurt over this entire discussion is clouding your judgement super badly.

Like, look at the strawman you just constructed and now look again at how happy you are with yourself over it. Jesus.

BTW, has anyone pointed out that Trump didn't actually say this sentence as written? In fact, what he said was very similar but was also certainly more than 14 words.

LINK

OK, but can they call me a denier of reality for disagreeing with me?

So yeah OK that's basically the headshot.

(v) ChrisV is wrong*

*Not gonna be results-oriented, basically a fan of his process, still think he'd be a good mod, that going anywhere?

Jesus you're still stumbling, based on a balance of probabilities it's likely true. "Objectively true" implies that we 100% know for sure.

I'm pretty sure I said the opposite. Like, that's my entire point almost.

It would be a pretty dumb insult and would backfire horribly but in the context of this, yeah it's "fine". Maybe that clears things up.


p.s. "Uncle Tom" is especially dumb because what people think the character did in the novel is not actually what he did, but I just assume they're using "Uncle Tom" as a stand-in for "House Negro" or something similar.

When I get accused of racism the only thing that concerns me is whether the posts I made that would lead someone to make that accusation actually SHOULD lead someone to make that accusation. If in fact it would logically follow from certain of my posts that I might be a racist it would bother me if someone (assuming they were a regular two plus twoer) FAILED to accuse me of racism based on those posts, even though that accusation happens to be factually incorrect.

You like to use the term strawman but clearly have no idea what it means.

I'll admit I find your ignorance funny.

I checked the video to see if the remarks changed when delivered, but nope, exactly as Vecernicek (in the WH transcript) wrote.

This reply is probably wasted on you specifically, but the hurt was saying the person is of such sufficiently low character that they would brutalize their own people in order to kowtow and curry favor with their authoritarian overlords.

That's the insult! And it's a pretty big and offensive insult!

And history has shown there's nothing uniquely Jewish about that concept, and, in fact, it would be pretty racist and antisemitic to imply that Jewish folk were the only people that succumbed to that behavior. But, in every similar scenario in recorded history there have been people playing their version of a 'kapo'.

A strawman is when you build up an argument to smack down that the person you're accusing of having made that argument didn't actually make.

That's exactly what you just did to Wookie.

I'm glad you're enjoying yourself and everything but it's kinda sad to see your posting descend to ikestoys level tbh.

Similar to how sensible decisions are reached in the game poker.

It is effectively calling Yuv a race traitor and as such is operating on the keklord level. I will opine, loosely and unauthoritatively, that there is a difference between throwing that at Jared Kushner and throwing it at Yuv. And the barrier to entry for throwing it at Kushner is almost certainly being Jewish. Maybe Fly even is Jewish, I have no goddamn idea.

tl;dr don't call people that, if you're curious as to whether you have kapo-privileges, you don't. Stop defending something Fly did that Fly himself will likely not bother defending.

I mean, there is nothing uniquely African-American about dehumanisation. That fact is not good news for The Ancient And Venerable Order Of People Who Can't Say The N-Word And How Is That Fair.

Garden-variety or full on KKK-style?

Doesn't mean much. The misquote doesn't originate with youngcons. They probably cribbed it from Breitbart.

We're not a hive-mind and I'm not "defending" Fly. I cringed and winced at Fly's post because it was so wildly off the mark as it pertained to Yuv.

I will say though that some scholars are going to experience some severe life upheaval when they find out etymology isn't a thing anymore.

Just to give some cultural reference, there are no Hebrew rap song with the K-word.

The only Jewish people who use that phrase are ultra right wing and mainly ultra religious (Haredi) and even then it's extremely rare. Like, no Jewish person would use that to describe Kushner and if they did they get shred to pieces.

David Friedman is a raving lunatic and he was called Anti Semitic for his disgusting comments.

Also --

http://forward.com/opinion/363003/ka...jewish-n-word/

But tbh I so rarely heard that word used to insult people, that it's a non-issue usually.

Sigh. OK, I mean, I dunno. And as I said, I actually don't much care. You gonna be a mod or not? Any rumblings in the pipeline?

Of course you're defending him. The other thing I don't even understand, like, from various forum-historical stuff I gather it's a shot, but I don't really get it. Etymology is a collection of facts, the ongoing accrual of which is an inevitable outcome of the continuing emergence of neologisms. It won't stop being a thing until there are no more speakers of language. We're all still alive and therefore, so too is etymology.

Well clearly it could never be the Jewish N-word, if only because black people don't innately use the N-word to insult each other. That the politics surrounding the uses of the respective words don't mutually translate doesn't mean a specific analogy drawn between them is innately invalid. Based on what you're saying, clearly there isn't a 1:1 analogy to be drawn; we are nevertheless entitled to draw the best analogy we can, which in this specific instance I maintain is a white person using the N-word.

We know you don't mind racism as long as it's from the left.

In my opinion it had nothing to do with the word "Kapo". It could have been about burning in an oven or about poison gas or w/e. It was about using the holocaust as a tool to intentionally offend a Jew. Using it in an attempt to show them what it feels like to be on the other side of some transgression isn't a good excuse because this offense is not just against the particular Jew, but all Jews. In this particular case though, Yuv having grown up surrounded by relatives who lost their entire families in the camps does make it more poignant.

I'd rather have let this drop and am past being offended, but 5ive seems to have focused on word used in many posts and I wanted to address that.

Citation needed on the bolded.

And come on, I put "defending" in quotes for a reason.

Lo(l) how the mighty have fallen.