Trump doesn't want immigrants from s***hole countries

Greoric said:
Because they want to be with people that have more in common with them? What about that in-group preference implicates supremacy?
Click to expand...
Again with the purposely obtuse scthick
 
Greoric said:
You see a problem with it, but convenient that you don't see it when every other ethnicity does it. The ethnicity with the very least in-group preference gets the entire focus of racist accusations. How do you square that exactly?
Click to expand...
You gotta speak louder, bruh. I can't hear you up at the front of the bus.
 
Limbo Pete said:
One of those solid gold forum moments.
@PolishHeadlock @Fawlty
Click to expand...

Don't call in other people so you can dip out of making an argument. Nut up and face the point in front of you.

Let's put this in terms that aren't so cloudy for you. If a group of classmates don't want you in their group to hang out, what about that makes them lording over you? In still other words. If a group of people wants to avoid interaction with you, how is there an interaction for them to "oppress" you or how is your position to them one of "subservience"?

@AnGrYcRoW ?
 
Greoric said:
Don't call in other people so you can dip out of making an argument. Nut up and face the point in front of you.

Let's put this in terms that aren't so cloudy for you. If a group of classmates don't want you in their group to hang out, what about that makes them lording over you? In still other words. If a group of people wants to avoid interaction with you, how is there an interaction for them to "oppress" you or how is your position to them one of "subservience"?

@AnGrYcRoW ?
Click to expand...
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

Straw man - Wikipedia
 
Greoric said:
Don't call in other people so you can dip out of making an argument. Nut up and face the point in front of you.

Let's put this in terms that aren't so cloudy for you. If a group of classmates don't want you in their group to hang out, what about that makes them lording over you? In still other words. If a group of people wants to avoid interaction with you, how is there an interaction for them to "oppress" you or how is your position to them one of "subservience"?
Click to expand...
It's called "having friends". Get some.
 
HomerThompson said:
robfordwreckingball.gif
Click to expand...

Imagine that. No argument again.
 
Greoric said:
Don't call in other people so you can dip out of making an argument. Nut up and face the point in front of you.

Let's put this in terms that aren't so cloudy for you. If a group of classmates don't want you in their group to hang out, what about that makes them lording over you? In still other words. If a group of people wants to avoid interaction with you, how is there an interaction for them to "oppress" you or how is your position to them one of "subservience"?

@AnGrYcRoW ?
Click to expand...
He's not trying to dip out of an argument, he's just illustrating how you've been segregated from rationality. But that doesn't mean he thinks he's superior to you.
 
Fawlty said:
I can't believe it took me until 2018 to realize that segregation wasn't about white supremacy.
Click to expand...

Segregation is what we speak of when a single nation-state separates its ethnic groups into distinct entities with different rights and privileges (for example "whites" with full rights, "blacks" with less rights).

Countries being built upon ethno-nationalism, catering to the needs of the ethnic group that founded the nation (while largely excluding others from that equation), well that is the case for most countries in the world outside of the United States.

Are most countries in the world inherently racist? I wouldn't say that. Even though Finland is over 90% "white" and "Finno-Ugric", I wouldn't say that the state is being racist or supremacist. It's just that the state was built in service of the Finno-Ugric folk, and their particular needs, not the service of the African, or the Asian, or the Russian, and so on.

It does not necessarily mean that the needs of the Finno-Ugric reign supreme over the others, universally, it is just that within that particular structure they do. And they need to, so that the people within that structure can live the best possible lives and achieve the greatest amount of welfare that they can.
 
TheGreatA said:
Segregation is what we speak of when a single nation-state separates its ethnic groups into distinct entities with different rights and privileges (for example "whites" with full rights, "blacks" with less rights).

Countries being built upon ethno-nationalism, catering to the needs of the ethnic group that founded the nation (while largely excluding others from that equation), well that is the case for most countries in the world outside of the United States.

Are most countries in the world inherently racist? I wouldn't say that. Even though Finland is over 90% "white" and "Finno-Ugric", I wouldn't say that the state is being racist. It's just that the state was built in service of the Finno-Ugric folk, and their particular needs, not the service of the African, or the Asian, or the Russian, and so on.
Click to expand...
Fair warning, I'm not going to grant any serious time to arguments that ethno-segregation by the state is not racist.
 
Greoric said:
Imagine that. No argument again.
Click to expand...
My argument is that Donald Trump is a racist, and a White Supremacist. My argument is also that one need not have power to be a White Supremacist, because it's a belief system. My argument is also that Trump is very dangerous because he is the fucking President, and also a racist piece of shit.

Your argument is that people who are rty selected can't see the truth of supremacy being a belief system that only exists when you put it into action because you have power over others, and that excluding them from your society based on race isn't racist because only people who are yt6749 selected can see the truth of your mind numbingly stupid arguments shitting up this thread.
 
Fawlty said:
He's not trying to dip out of an argument, he's just illustrating how you've been segregated from rationality. But that doesn't mean he thinks he's superior to you.
Click to expand...

Funny because, I'm the only one here running up against dissonance. Should be easy for him to make the counter point to say why in-group preference is supremacist. That is fundamentally why non-interaction is commensurate with establishing a hierarchy. The separation from reality (and rationality) is the person conflating mutually exclusive terms.
 
Fawlty said:
Fair warning, I'm not going to grant any serious time to arguments that ethno-segregation by the state is not racist.
Click to expand...

It's not as if I give a damn whether you deem the argument to be racist or not.

I'm also not going to grant any serious time to arguments that nationalism by ethnicity is somehow "immoral" and racist. I bet that you and many others here, whining about it, have preached about the needs for a Kurd state, among others, Palestinians and such.

Why argue for a two-state solution for Israel, if you think multi-ethnic entities are such a brilliant idea? Shouldn't a population have the right to self-determination?
 
Last edited:
Greoric said:
Funny because, I'm the only one here running up against dissonance. Should be easy for him to make the counter point to say why in-group preference is supremacist. That is fundamentally why non-interaction is commensurate with establishing a hierarchy. The separation from reality (and rationality) is the person conflating mutually exclusive terms.
Click to expand...
Let me make sure I understand your position. Do you claim that ingroup preference and supremacy are mutually exclusive?
 
Greoric said:
Funny because, I'm the only one here running up against dissonance. Should be easy for him to make the counter point to say why in-group preference is supremacist. That is fundamentally why non-interaction is commensurate with establishing a hierarchy. The separation from reality (and rationality) is the person conflating mutually exclusive terms.
Click to expand...
{<doc}{<doc}{<doc}{<doc}





<{MingNope}>




{<jordan}
 
Greoric said:
OK so how are the groups of friends that I'm not associated with supreming over me? How are they lording over me if I'm excluded from their group?

@tonni @HomerThompson
Click to expand...
Depends on whether they are pushing you out of the classroom or keeping the good seats to themselves, or whether or not they just pack up and leave and never talk to anyone else ever again forever
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,317
Messages
55,550,149
Members
174,825
Latest member
doubleEYEpoke

Share this page

Back
Top