White Supremacists protest at UVA

[Roy]

Absolutely. He's still pointing to the double-standard. Even though you're okay with saying that white pride is fine as long as it's not a euphemism, you seem to realize that it can not be disassociated from that euphemism. And you're right. It can't be. In modern Western English "White Pride" is a dirty phrase. Even if you were to attempt to talk about it while disassociating it from racists, it'd make people mighty uncomfortable. You'll never hear a politician (who keeps his job anyways) talk about white pride being okay, as long as it's not associated with the KKK.

Maybe not. But I said that.

seer is basically saying "this isn't fair." But more to the point, seer doesn't seem to be saying "this isn't fair" because he wants to use the phrase "white pride". It seems to me he's saying it isn't fair because "black pride" is also associated with negative elements, but far from a negative association, it has a positive association. If things were fair, seer is saying, then "black pride" should be seen as negative a phrase as "white pride".

It seems to me seer is trying to justify his own bigotry and doesn't care about truth or accuracy.

[seer]

Adrift, can you find an excuse for the above? Any reason to believe I might think "black pride" is automatically racist, when I explicitly stated that "white pride" was fine in some contexts? Anything to justify the leap from a factual statement about a group's adopted motto to my views about a similar motto? Any reason at all to think seer isn't a habitual liar who deliberately and knowingly misrepresents anything and everything, including his own sources, and when proven wrong just moves onto a different misrepresentation?

Roy, I get that I live in your head rent free, but you need to calm down. I did not say that you believed that black pride was automatically racist, or that even white pride was automatically racist. But white pride is linked with racism when black pride is not. Get it?

[Adrift]

Updated:

Me: White pride is fine if it's not a euphemism for KKK and neo-Nazism.
Adrift: I think that's the point he's making. People can talk about black pride, or brown pride, but as soon as someone mentions "white pride" the first thing that comes to mind is the KKK and neo-Nazis.
Me: That's because it ["white pride"] is a motto adopted by the neo-Nazis.
Seer: So black pride is automatically racist because the New Black Panthers use it?

Adrift, can you find an excuse for the above? Any reason to believe I might think "black pride" is automatically racist, when I explicitly stated that "white pride" was fine in some contexts? Anything to justify the leap from a factual statement about a group's adopted motto to my views about a similar motto? Any reason at all to think seer isn't a habitual liar who deliberately and knowingly misrepresents anything and everything, including his own sources, and when proven wrong just moves onto a different misrepresentation?

Yep, he's essentially attempting to make an argument that forces you to reflect on your perspective. So when he says "So black pride is automatically racist because the New Black Panthers use it?", he's not saying that that's something you actually have said. What he's saying is that if you actually believe that a motto can be racist if it is adopted by a hateful group (your point to me), then going by your own words, logically you should also admit that black pride is racist (because of its association with the Black Panthers).

Again, Roy, like in the other thread. I don't get why you're having such a hard time understanding seer. These are age old discussion techniques. Lot's of people debate or discuss issues in this fashion. This isn't anything new, nor is it intended as misrepresentation.

[seer]

I said that.It seems to me seer is trying to justify his own bigotry and doesn't care about truth or accuracy.

Of course you do, because well, it's you...

[seer]

Again, Roy, like in the other thread. I don't get why you're having such a hard time understanding seer. These are age old discussion techniques. Lot's of people debate or discuss issues in this fashion. This isn't anything new, nor is it intended as misrepresentation.

I guess Roy isn't as nuanced as me!

[seer]

I've just watched the video seer posted. This is the first missile thrown in the clip:

Nonsense Roy, at the beginning of the video a man is on the ground, he can't even get up himself or walk away under his own power. Obviously he was hit by something. And yes projectiles were going back and forth after that - the vast majority coming from the left. And yes the alt-right were using pepper spray as the left was pushing in on them. But why would this be controversial Roy since the left have been causing violent across the country for the past year or so?

[Mountain Man]

But why would this be controversial Roy since the left have been causing violent across the country for the past year or so?

Didn't you know? It's only wrong when liberals think they can blame it on conservatives.

[NorrinRadd]

Yeah, whoda thunk!



Not sure that really helps as both are typically considered Caucasian. That's changed recently for Latinos, but historically they've been considered Caucasian, that's why there was little resistance to Lucy being with Ricky back in the 50s. Growing up in a very multicultural city on the East Coast, Latinos in my neighborhood were all considered Caucasian, or, at least Mestizo.

Well, in Pittsburgh in the '70s, Latinos were considered non-white, and often loosely referred to as "black" or "negro."

[Mountain Man]

Now they're considered white-Hispanic, but only if they shoot a black young adult in self-defense.

[Jedidiah]

There is no comparison between the 'March on Wall Street', the 'Black Lives Mater' protests, and the hate filled violent protest of the Alt-Right fuelled by the hateful rhetoric of the likes of David Duke, former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard. . . . Snip . . .

You are so right Tass. Those liberal "protests" were hate filled violent events all by themselves. This latest atrocity was two hate filled groups coming together with the violence initiated by the left, not the Nazis. The Nazis are terrible because of what they believe and encourage. The Black Lives Matter (not Mater by the way) are terrible because they are violent about something that most of us agree on - racial prejudice is completely wrong.

[NorrinRadd]

Now they're considered white-Hispanic, but only if they shoot a black young adult in self-defense.

Nice Zimmerman call-back.

[EvoUK]

So someone drove a car into a crowd, killing one person & wounding several others, because the crowd was supposedly violent?

I visit several forums/news sites to try to get out of my 'bubble' and see opposing viewpoints first hand, but I have yet to come across a discussion on this incident which resembles anything like this one, and so I am sort of fascinated.

[Mountain Man]

Source: Breitbart

“There was no way of making a correct statement that early,” [President Trump] said, defending his first statement on Saturday before the facts were in. “Unlike you and unlike the media, before I make a statement, I like to know the facts.”

As reporters grew more agitated, Trump continued defending his decision and condemning the media for their one sided reporting.

Trump again denounced racist elements among the protesters, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, and white nationalists, but clarified that he still believed that there was blame on both sides.

“You look at both sides. I think there is blame on both sides. I have no doubt about it … if you reported it accurately, you would say that,” he said.

Reporters demanded to know whether the driver of the car that injured counter-protesters and killed a woman in the crowd was a domestic terrorist.

“I think the driver of the car is a disgrace to himself, his family and this country,” Trump replied. “The driver of the car is a murderer. What he did was a horrible, horrible, inexcusable thing.”

Trump also condemned what he called the “alt left” demonstrators that charged into the crowd of alt-right protesters without a protest permit.

“Do they have any semblance of guilt? What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands, swinging clubs? Do they have any problem?” he asked. “I think they do.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ille-violence/

© Copyright Original Source

[firstfloor]

Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa https://t.co/tTESdV4LP0
— David Duke (@DrDavidDuke) August 15, 2017

[seer]

Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa https://t.co/tTESdV4LP0
— David Duke (@DrDavidDuke) August 15, 2017

So what? I'm glad Trump called out the left too...