Liberalism is Dead and Evangelicals Don't Deserve It Anyway

[chair]

RE the link that [MENTION=5868]chair[/MENTION] posted:

In the event that his name should turn red in the proximate future, I wish only to note that I didn't report it. :idunno:

Once again demonstrating that Trad thinks it's just the naughty words that make a racist.

 

[Nihilo]

hehe!
Had an extra "n" I needed to use up before it spoiled.

:chuckle: We have a compost pit, in case we're too late.

 

[Town Heretic]

You know why kmoney, Town Heretic, Arthur Brain or Anna Benedetti refuse to take the anti-white racism that I've been bringing up seriously? Because it doesn't fit into the SJW power politic.

Rather, I refuse to take you seriously because you don't warrant it. Your bias forces you to play word games to find distance between you and the ugliness at the root of your corruption, which compromises you both intellectually and morally.

Anna Benedetti told me to stop whining and called me a white boy (which is, for the record, HIGHLY racist), regardless of the anti-white racism in question.

Calling you a white boy isn't racist. She'd have to be of another race and the remark would have to be issued to imply a superiority on her part by the difference between you. That's the floor.

When I demand a white ethnostate based purely on pragmatic grounds

There's nothing pragmatic about your position.

,that is not inherently racist

And that's just a lie. It's rooted in that same belief in superiority I noted was absent in anna's remarks.

So far as I can see, she banned me for essentially three things I did in the posting:

1. I wrote (JEW!) next to the names of actual Jewish people.

Right. You "yelled" Jew repeatedly after listing names. The anti-Semitism is impossible to miss. But if one were inclined to strain in that direction your next point would undo the effort.

2. I asserted that Wall Street is infested with Jews.

Infested. No mistaking that one.

I am willing to admit that these are all offensive things to say. Here's the thing, though: they aren't inherently objectionable, and they aren't patently untrue.

Yes, Trad, they are...except to bigots. You're as incapable of understanding that in your present state as a sociopath is of understanding emotional truth in others.

Because, believe it or not, I'm neither ignorant nor unreasonable.

All evidence to the contrary, young man. Rather, you're ignorant of your ignorance and its impact on your thinking.

Then why shouldn't I post youtube links to Johnny Rebel songs just to spite her?

Because it would preclude your ongoing attempt to slime the site. Just a guess, mind you.

I'll get banned regardless, because, after all, "racists" are bad, right?

Yes, Trad, they are. They're morally compromised and intellectually twisted by that corruption. God help you.

 

[Traditio]

How are you going to decide for all Western countries?

I can't even decide for one. I have literally no institutional power.

I am fully aware that the ethnostate idea is a pipe dream.

Which makes it especially bizarre that people are reacting in such a hostile fashion against the idea.

Because, apparently, ideas are particularly dangerous when it is virtually impossible that they will actually be realized in practice.

And good luck changing the constitution. Have you got the support for this?

Nope!

I gather that Jews get special attention, while Hindus and Muslims don't.

Jews are a coherent racial/ethnic category.

And that's not even my words.

That's what Sherman apparently thinks.

Because, apparently, noting that people are Jewish is racist.

That apparently means that Jews are a race!

a) everybody self-identifies as white. Would that give you the white ethnostate you are dreaming of?

In my view, that would be the best case scenario.

Because, again, your actual race isn't the problem. The problem is racial strife. The problem is the fact that we have political racialization.

That's the problem.

b) Much more likely: 70 or 80 million blacks refuse to identify themselves as white. Along with millions of Jews who refuse to reject their identity, millions of Hispanics who refuse, and quite likely many many millions of lily pure whites who won't identify themselves as white, because they disapprove of the whole thing. So you have in the ballpark of half the citizens of the USA refusing to identify themselves as "white" in your game.

And, in my view, they would all have to be deported, because they are part of the problem of political racialization.

So now you have to deport 100 million people. How are you going to do it?

Lots and lots of ICE officials who self-identify as white.

 

[Nihilo]

As I understand you, you are saying that TOL is a bastion of free speech just so long as you know how to frame what you are saying in the correct manner.

It depends upon your meaning, but I can agree with that.

But that's not what free speech is.

I see your point. I was talking about how to evade the censors.

At any rate, Sherman made it perfectly clear that it's not my framing that she disagrees with. It's specifically the "antisemitic commentary." She doesn't like the fact that I'm talking about Jews.

My anti-black rhetoric was apparently fine.

But lay off the Jews!

Never mind the fact that my "antisemitic" rhetoric wasn't really that objectionable if you think about what I said.

That does sound arbitrary, but you admitted to racebaiting, so you do know this is an inflammatory line. But you're point is that inflammatory speech is speech, and free speech must include inflammatory speech.

 

[Traditio]

Rather, I refuse to take you seriously because you don't warrant it. Your bias forces you to play word games to find distance between you and the ugliness at the root of your corruption, which compromises you both intellectually and morally.

You are accusing me of playing word games, Town Heretic?

Calling you a white boy isn't racist. She'd have to be of another race

lain:

But I'm the racist. Right.

Not the SJWs.

Me.

Definitely me.

I'm the racist. :nono:

and the remark would have to be issued to imply a superiority on her part by the difference between you. That's the floor.

So the implication of superiority is necessary for racism?

Great. Then you must admit that nothing I've said in this thread is racist.

Except perhaps for my comments about Jews.

Because, on your definition, I could easily be construed as a Jewish supremacist.

And that's just a lie. It's rooted in that same belief in superiority I noted was absent in anna's remarks.

lain:

Have you read the thread?

Somehow, I get the feeling that you haven't read this thread.

Right. You "yelled" Jew repeatedly after listing names. The anti-Semitism is impossible to miss. But if one were inclined to strain in that direction your next point would undo the effort.

Being an antisemite is not objectionable on liberal grounds. Even if you add the "BOO!" emote next to each case of "JEW!" (which actually wouldn't be accurate: I'm actually a big fan of Bernie Sanders, Jew or not), that still wouldn't make it inherently objectionable on liberal grounds.

Infested. No mistaking that one.

Yes, I intentionally chose the word "infested" because I like being edgy.

But you can't really disagree with the truth of the statement, can you? Do you deny that there is a disproportionate representation of Jews on Wall Street?

Yes, Trad, they are...except to bigots. You're as incapable of understanding that in your present state as a sociopath is of understanding emotional truth in others.

Why are they inherently objectionable on liberal grounds?

Because it would preclude your ongoing attempt to slime the site. Just a guess, mind you.

I'm here entirely for my own entertainment.

Thus the reason you get the brunt of my "racist" musings.

Being censored detracts from my entertainment.

 

[Traditio]

[MENTION=5868]chair[/MENTION]

Addendum.

If you think that it's racist to assert that Jews are a coherent racial/ethnic category, you should probably disagree with Sherman's decision to ban me on the basis of my "racist" commentary about Jews.

 

[Traditio]

But you're point is that inflammatory speech is speech, and free speech must include inflammatory speech.

The community that cannot tolerate a provocateur is, by definition, a community that does not value free speech.

Given the fact that free speech, as a liberal value, is central to what constitutes "American values," the admins, as well as many of the users, of this site are deeply unAmerican.

 

[Traditio]

Ignore.

 

[Traditio]

Ignore.

 

[Town Heretic]

You are accusing me of playing word games, Town Heretic?

Sure. When you try to excuse a thing by finding a context that affords you expanded opportunity instead of grappling with it that's playing games with language to avoid responsibility. I use language to clarify and address issues. You use language as an excuse for the inexcusable. You're a bit like the fellow in Sling Blade who would say horrible things and then hide from them with, "Just kidding."

But I'm the racist.

Yes, Trad. You are the racist, the one who feels superior and desires to separate on the point.

Me. Definitely me. I'm the racist.

Yes, Trad. You're the racist. You're the guy separating people by race. You're the kid with a history of disparagement rooted in that particular. You're the nutter who can't come down that hard on Hitler. You're the fellow who isn't embarrassed by playing those music videos. You're the kid whose words conflict with his own faith.

You're morally and intellectually corrupted. Yes. You, Trad.

So the implication of superiority is necessary for racism?

Racism: 1 :a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race - Merriam Webster

You aren't just feeling superior, Trad. You're wanting something done about your mistaken belief.

Except perhaps for my comments about Jews.

Because, on your definition, I could easily be construed as a Jewish supremacist.

No, Trad, you couldn't. Because no one who believes Jews to be superior would describe their disproportionate success as an infestation.

Yes, I intentionally chose the word "infested" because I like being edgy.

That's not how you spell stupid or racist, but it is how you illustrate it.

But you can't really disagree with the truth of the statement, can you? Do you deny that there is a disproportionate representation of Jews on Wall Street?

I don't know that to be true. How many people are "on Wall Street" and how do you close the definition?

I'm here entirely for my own entertainment. Thus the reason you get the brunt of my "racist" musings.

And only someone with that profound problem would find the exercise of racism that forces him to disconnect it to his faith entertaining. Only someone with serious emotional issues would find entertainment in attempting to manipulate others in such a negative fashion for his amusement.

Two things I'm certain of, Trad. You're in spiritual crisis. You're intellectually compromised. The two feed one another and insulate you from the help you need. I think you understand it on some level. I suspect that's partly why you try forum suicide by mod.

 

[Tambora]

Yes, Trad. You are the racist, the one who feels superior and desires to separate on the point.

Sooooo ........ feeling superior to other races is racist, but feeling inferior to other races is not racist?

 

[This Charming Manc]

Sooooo ........ feeling superior to other races is racist, but feeling inferior to other races is not racist?

Short answer yes that it right

Longers answer. Probably feeling inferior is not good either, feeling inferior is probably generates activity that looks like racism but is motivated by something else, often inferiority is the feeling racists what to generate in other people, maybe what some white people get scared of is a reaction form people of colour when they feel someone is trying to make them feel inferior.

 

[Tambora]

You aren't just feeling superior, Trad. You're wanting something done about your mistaken belief.

Aren't YOU feeling superior to Trad and his 'mistaken' belief?
Don't YOU want something to be done to Trad and his 'mistaken' belief?
Aren't YOU wanting to separate yourself from Trad and his 'mistaken' belief?

So, being an intolerant bigot that wants separation and to do something with those 'other' folks is OK as long as it is not about color?
Cause that's what you are doing to Trad.
You are telling Trad that since his beliefs do not square with yours, then he needs to go and you want no part of him in your community.
And then you act as if your brand of intolerance is morally superior to Trad's brand of intolerance.
What happened to diversity?
I thought the agenda of the left was to welcome diversity no matter how disagreeable some might think it is.

Trad shares his belief that he would be happier in a white ethno state.
Trad hasn't harmed a single soul in his life for his belief.
Your reaction .................... WE DON"T WANT YOUR KIND HERE!
:angrymob:



Me, I readily admit I am intolerant to a lot of things.
I don't believe diversity and tolerance of all others is the answer.
There are religions and cultures that I want no part of.
Just like you do.
Just like Trad does.

 

[Traditio]

Diversity just means "anti-white." The Left believes in diversity when it comes to casting black actresses to play vikings in movies, or when it comes to refusing to hire white people at the BBC.

 

[Tambora]

Short answer yes that it right

Longers answer. Probably feeling inferior is not good either, feeling inferior is probably generates activity that looks like racism but is motivated by something else, often inferiority is the feeling racists what to generate in other people, maybe what some white people get scared of is a reaction form people of colour when they feel someone is trying to make them feel inferior.

But if I, a white person, decide that I am inferior to blacks (for whatever reason), then have I not essentially just made blacks a superior race, and thus made them racists because they are now the superior ones?
Anyone that feels inferior to another is automatically making the other superior to themselves.

If there is not a way to distinguish (measure) superiority, then superiority is really nothing but a belief within one's own mind.
And therefore racism is only in your mind and doesn't really exist.