Donald Trump warns of the Muslim Problem

[Seth]

You are missing context and nuance.

You have provided zero context or nuance so he's not to blame.

[Seth]

On the other hand there are those useless idiots who support Trump.

And the useless idiots who don't.

[Seth]

What in the fuck are you babbling on about?

That you don't know demonstrates conclusively the accuracy and truth of tuco's statement.

[Brian Peacock]

Your argument falsely assumes that racist intolerance is never based in rational objective evidence of the inferiority (or unsuitability) of the group being discriminated against. You assume that every race and every group is morally equivalent and must therefore be treated the same as every other group. This is of course irrational, and therefore being intolerant of a racist who holds those opinions for rational and valid reasons is exactly equivalent.

Inferior by what measure? Unsuitable for what?

Why shouldn't every person be afforded the same rights and protections in law regardless of their nominal race-group membership?

What is a 'race' anyway, what are the determining factors of race and how does one determine if a person belongs to one race-group or another?

How is discriminating against someone according to their nominal race-group membership rational and valid if it just reinforces, or relies upon, an assumption that nominal race-group membership is itself grounds for discrimination?

[Seth]

Your argument falsely assumes that racist intolerance is never based in rational objective evidence of the inferiority (or unsuitability) of the group being discriminated against. You assume that every race and every group is morally equivalent and must therefore be treated the same as every other group. This is of course irrational, and therefore being intolerant of a racist who holds those opinions for rational and valid reasons is exactly equivalent.

Inferior by what measure? Unsuitable for what?

Precisely my point.

Why shouldn't every person be afforded the same rights and protections in law regardless of their nominal race-group membership?

We're not talking about law, we're talking about racists.

What is a 'race' anyway, what are the determining factors of race and how does one determine if a person belongs to one race-group or another?

Well, one uses whatever criteria one chooses to use in grouping people together. It's all a matter of constitutionally protected opinion.

How is discriminating against someone according to their nominal race-group membership rational and valid if it just reinforces, or relies upon, an assumption that nominal race-group membership is itself grounds for discrimination?

It depends on the nature of the race-group and it's common characteristics.

[Brian Peacock]

Give us an example of rational, valid racism based on the inferiority of a nominal race-group.

[tuco]

Its arbitrary, any kind of inferiority. What is more problematic is what is rational. Because that is also up to a point arbitrary. the west is the best

[pErvinalia]

You can't really. You can get away with a little bit of vigorous banter. But if it starts getting nasty, then you'll get called on it.

Not really. I reported about six posts and not a fucking thing was done about it.

That's because I didn't personally attack you, like you did to me and others probably about ten or fifteen times.

Regarding Seth, he thinks most people other than right-libertarians and him are Marxists (or are under the sway of some giant Marxist conspiracy).

No, just the Marxists and their useful idiots.

Hence the "conspiracy" comment.

In every debate, when you present a counter fact to whatever the topic is, he has this handy catch all due to his insane conspiracy theory that he can deploy to just totally ignore counter-evidence.

You have never presented a shred of counter evidence.

Still lying I see. You know damn well that I've presented IMF and OECD research and analysis and you've rejected it by ad homming the authors as Marxists. Any chance you could stop lying?

That is, ad hom the author(s) as a Marxist. It's fucking retarded.

So if you're not a Marxist, why do your arguments always align with Marxism one-hundred percent of the time? You know, the whole "redistribute the wealth" rhetoric and your mindless class hatred of anybody who has more than you do thing?

I'm talking about you ad homming the likes of IMF and OECD (and pretty much every author of anything that provides counter evidence to your blocks).

[pErvinalia]

That's looking at it the wrong way. It's the RACISTS who are intolerant. By definition.

Well, not that I expect you to either understand what I'm getting at or articulate a rational response, but...so what?

Is there any fucking chance that you could follow even one argument on this site?!? Tuco was complaining about the intolerance of people who get stuck into racists. So that's "so what?".

[pErvinalia]

You were aiming your vitriol at the wrong target. Being intolerant of racists is not equivalent to racists being intolerant of people because of some trait outside their control.

Why isn't it? Your argument falsely assumes that racist intolerance is never based in rational objective evidence of the inferiority (or unsuitability) of the group being discriminated against. You assume that every race and every group is morally equivalent and must therefore be treated the same as every other group. This is of course irrational, and therefore being intolerant of a racist who holds those opinions for rational and valid reasons is exactly equivalent.

Because there is no such thing as race.

[pErvinalia]

Well, to me it makes no difference if you call my argument idiotic or if you call me idiot. It offends me not either way. What offends me, for example, is banning, for example, alleged racists or trolls or basically anyone who (vocal) majority deems as "unwanted".

Banning is virtually never used here. Suspension, however, is.

Occasionally. Against specific persons and not others who have committed like offenses.

Stop sooking, ffs.

[piscator]

"Sook" comes from сука, Russian for "Bitch".
Therefore, revo is a fucking Communist.

[pErvinalia]

[tuco]

Or fucking a Communist. That would explain a lot

[pErvinalia]

I wish..