- Joined
- Jul 2, 2013
- Messages
- 31,961
- Reaction score
- 27,979
Complete!
You scored 10 out of 16!
The average score was 10.
You scored 10 out of 16!
The average score was 10.
It's pretty eye opening that the KKK was more moderate than practically any modern liberal newspaper where calling for genocide "in the name of justice" and "violence in the name of peace" ha become the norm. It shows how urgently we need coutnerbalance. Thanks for this joseph.
We also need to make an example out of joseph as a person. Stupidity is punishable.
“Who is Responsible for the Crime Wave?”
Needless to say, a title you could find 5,000 versions of from a hundred different newspapers.
The mere fact that both the KKK and Breitbart (and thousands of other media outlets) have questioned the (unspecified) origins of an (unspecified) crime wave was enough to convince Joseph of their similarity
Joseph if this is the cognitive level you're operating at, do you genuinely believe its beneficial to society for you to be involved in politics at all? Aren't you kind of just in the way?
No, it's not.
I apologize if you're being ironic. If not, that is an incredibly stupid exercise given the completely antithetical positions, histories, and experiences of black and white citizens
True. Are you just a War Room mod and that's why you have a different color username? Regardless, you were a good choice, congratulations.12/16 but they changed some of the headlines to make them less clear. Specifically the one about middle eastern immigrants or I would have had 13/16.
If racism isn't applying different standards to different races, then what is it? It's amazing to sit back and look at the relentless racial (and sexual) negativity of popular liberal outlets like the Huffington Post.
It sounds as though you are defending race-based discrimination when it takes place under specific, but ill-defined circumstances.
Could you clarify?
It's not an application of different standards: it's realization the relativity of the standards themselves in political discourse. That isn't racist, and your silly desire for white victimhood is annoying.
Hmm, never knew they deleted those articles. Funny how this is being used as a political football now.Salon is the very last website that any rational human being should ever look to for moral guidance on any issue. They were already shamed in to deleting pro-pedophilia articles. Their idea of tolerance is to downplay the severity of lusting after children. These lunatic liberals want us to believe that it's just another sexual orientation. The last time I checked, the sexual exploitation of children is a concern that is orders of magnitude greater than that of the KKK today.
The left and it's shocking normalization of pedophilia. They want you to believe that it is on the same level as an eating disorder. I guess we are expected to have sympathy for them? Visiting the Salon website can induce vomiting for some.
http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/salon-deletes-articles-defending-pedophilia-from-site/
“In 2015, Salon published articles by Todd Nickerson, who was at the time defending pedophiles and insisting people shouldn’t treat them like monsters,” Twitchy reported Tuesday..."
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/01/meet_pedophiles_who_mean_well/
Meet pedophiles who mean well
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/pedophilia-a-disorder-not-a-crime.html?_r=0
Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime
Yes.
Explaining the shortcomings, or misconceptions thereof, of a dominant cultural majority is different than misrepresenting them as natural defects of a cultural minority. The former is not discrimination, while the latter is.
It's like discussion on "white privilege." White privilege is not a inherent racial burden on, nor virtue/defect of, the white community. Speaking of white privilege, at least by persons who understand it, does not speak to or purport any intrinsically white trait, beyond the natural history of race-based allocation of power and resources. Because of this, it's a term that can be used with fairly wide latitudes without functioning as racist towards white persons.
There has never been any meaningful strain in political discourse suggesting that white persons are "naturally" more evil, nor that rich persons are "naturally" more greedy, etc.--just that there are lingering distributional problems--so there is a certain freedom to describe these in-power actors without suggestion of dehumanization or depriving them politically. Meanwhile, there are long histories of ignoring policy-based plights of the poor and of racial minorities on the basis that they are "naturally" violent, lazy, stupid, etc., so there is naturally a shorter leash on explaining "why" Latinos are poorly educated, black persons have higher crime rates, or Native Americans are exceedingly poor, when descriptions of them demographically are so often used to remove them from economic/historical/political context and describe them racistly.