Police in the town of Savage, Minnesota, are now investigating an attack on a little girl at a local school by assailants, schoolchildren, who told officials they beat her up because "she wasn't Muslim."
I’ll take that to mean that you concede that a good white supremists would not make white supremists less dangerous to society.
Prove it, give me an example of what a “good” white supremacist is.
The whole point of comparing things is to highlight how they are different and the same. Apples and oranges are fruits… see different things can be compared.
Now you’re focusing on the semantics of an idiom which means “comparing that which cannot be practically compared” (source) rather than provide anything substantial that can lead me to agree with you. Congratulations, you failed at making your point again.
I asked a question about how you treat other rare occurrences, you falling for the propaganda seems to be the answer.
Because white supremacy is a form of racism, and racism is anything but “rare”, I once again state it’s a dumb comparison. You don’t need propaganda to think that because it’s the truth.
What does that have to do with white supremacy being prevalent now? Does that mean I can judge current Muslims by what Muslims did in the past?
That viewpoint could be entertained if you can speak at all to the prevalence of ramifications that past had, sure. But you can’t even back up your first comment in this thread so I highly doubt you’ll be able to form this one coherently.
But can’t provide examples.
Because society is the example.
Here are a few specifics though, if you insist:
The British Royal Empire and impact on the slave trade
Slave migrations to the New World
Trail of tears
All rooted in white supremacy, all resulted in complete or partial genocides, all formed the basis of modern western society which still tends to treat people differently due to race/ethnicity.
This is where I would provide current stats such as how hard it is for Black Women to receive appropriate healthcare, or how people of color are less likely to get a home loan compared to white people in the same economic class. I will be happy to provide those, but first I want you to respond in kind with proof of your first comment that there is such a thing as a “good” white supremacist.
I have backed up my statement a good white supremists doesn’t make any acts by white supremists less rare. The “good guys” are not important when looking at bad things.
You haven’t backed up shit because you haven’t given an example of what a “good” white supremacist is.
Prove it, give me an example of what a “good” white supremacist is.
You still don’t get it, what would one good white supremists change? With one good white supremists would they become less of a threat? If a group has 10 murders in it does the group become less dangerous if the 11th is not a murderer?
Now you’re focusing on the semantics of an idiom which means “comparing that which cannot be practically compared” (source) rather than provide anything substantial that can lead me to agree with you. Congratulations, you failed at making your point again.
How about this. What makes the rarity of white supremists instances of violence incomparable to the rarity of Muslim instances of violence?
Because society is the example.
Here are a few specifics though, if you insist:
The British Royal Empire and impact on the slave trade
Slave migrations to the New World
Trail of tears
All rooted in white supremacy, all resulted in complete or partial genocides, all formed the basis of modern western society which still tends to treat people differently due to race/ethnicity.
You forgot that they all happened a long time ago. How does the trail of tears, slave trade, make white supremacy a danger today?
I want you to respond in kind with proof of your first comment that there is such a thing as a “good” white supremacist.
I’ve never made this claim, it’s a flat out falsehood on your part. I assume it’s because your whole argument hinges on this lie.
You haven’t backed up shit because you haven’t given an example of what a “good” white supremacist is.
I don’t have to, the rarity of bad people doing bad things in not affected by a good person being part of that group.
I can’t argue with someone who steps into a thread, tries to make a comparison, then refuses to provide a single example of why their comparison is right, then goes on to continually project that they’re the correct and rational one while it’s the other one that’s refusing to do those things.
I’m simply asking you to go first, since you’re the one that made the comparison. That’s all.
If you can’t do that then why are you even here if not to just project and troll?
I can’t argue with someone who steps into a thread, tries to make a comparison, then refuses to provide a single example of why their comparison is right, then goes on to continually project that they’re the correct and rational one while it’s the other one that’s refusing to do those things.
You are just stuck on a nonsense requirement that there by has to be a good white supremists but you can’t answer any of my questions as to why.
I’m simply asking you to go first, since you’re the one that made the comparison. That’s all.
I stated multiple times there doesn’t need to be a good white supremists provided rational for why, none of which you have tried to dispute
f you can’t do that then why are you even here if not to just project and troll?
If you are so eager to have a discussion then you would answer my questions or rebut my reasoning. Instead you keep repeating that there needs to be a good white supremists without providing reasoning.
Here are some questions to ponder.
what would one good white supremists change?
With one good white supremists would they become less of a threat?
If a group has 10 murders in it does the group become less dangerous if the 11th is not a murderer?
What makes the rarity of white supremists instances of violence incomparable to the rarity of Muslim instances of violence?
How does the trail of tears, slave trade, make white supremacy a danger today?
It’s basic debating dude, you bring up a point you should expect people to want to see evidence of that point.
So far you have failed to provide a satisfactory reason for comparing a group of hateful racists (of which all of them are) to a religion (of which some of them believe justifies violence).
This goes way beyond basic prevalence. You just don’t seem to understand that.
So far you have failed to provide a satisfactory reason for comparing a group of hateful racists (of which all of them are) to a religion (of which some of them believe justifies violence).
I have, both rarely have violent incidences and are not a threat to society.
Now it’s your turn to answer a question.
How do nonviolent Muslims make the violent ones less of a threat to society?
This goes way beyond basic prevalence. You just don’t seem to understand that.
I have, both rarely have violent incidences and are not a threat to society.
You still don’t get your comparison doesn’t work because you can’t claim one isn’t a threat when one is literally baked into society and one is a religion which only some members interpret the teachings of with the justification of violence.
I feel like a skipping record because you keep circling back to trying to claim your comparison is ok because you don’t see how entrenched racism (and in part white supremacy) is baked into society, without giving any further data points beyond “it’s rare”.
In other words, you can’t stop focusing on prevalence of violent attacks between the two organized groups because in your mind, that’s all there is.
First you’re wrong. But before I prove you wrong, you need the put the two things you’re trying (horribly) to compare on equal footing in some way that makes some damn sense.
Muslims are not all violent.
You claim there are good white supremacists.
So give me an example of a good white supremacist. Otherwise, your comparison makes no sense and isn’t even worth arguing.
Now it’s your turn to answer a question.
Just as soon as you answer mine. I asked you first.
How do nonviolent Muslims make the violent ones less of a threat to society?
You’ve asked this before. What you’re missing is the existence of “good” white supremacists (which you’ve yet to prove exist) do not make the advantages white people have in society due to the result of historical white supremacy any better for POC. But one is MUCH more prevalent than the other.
How prevalent you ask?
Show me yours and I’ll show you mine. Show me the prevalence of “good” white supremacists, and I’ll show you how common white supremacy and racial bias is in our world.
How does this go way beyond basic prevalence?
I just told you. One is a religion of which only a fraction of the word belongs to, and of them only a sect of them believes in using violence to spread their message.
The other has become more than just a single group or organization, and is now baked into our way of life.
Prove it, give me an example of what a “good” white supremacist is.
Now you’re focusing on the semantics of an idiom which means “comparing that which cannot be practically compared” (source) rather than provide anything substantial that can lead me to agree with you. Congratulations, you failed at making your point again.
Because white supremacy is a form of racism, and racism is anything but “rare”, I once again state it’s a dumb comparison. You don’t need propaganda to think that because it’s the truth.
That viewpoint could be entertained if you can speak at all to the prevalence of ramifications that past had, sure. But you can’t even back up your first comment in this thread so I highly doubt you’ll be able to form this one coherently.
Because society is the example.
Here are a few specifics though, if you insist:
The British Royal Empire and impact on the slave trade
Slave migrations to the New World
Trail of tears
All rooted in white supremacy, all resulted in complete or partial genocides, all formed the basis of modern western society which still tends to treat people differently due to race/ethnicity.
This is where I would provide current stats such as how hard it is for Black Women to receive appropriate healthcare, or how people of color are less likely to get a home loan compared to white people in the same economic class. I will be happy to provide those, but first I want you to respond in kind with proof of your first comment that there is such a thing as a “good” white supremacist.
You haven’t backed up shit because you haven’t given an example of what a “good” white supremacist is.
You still don’t get it, what would one good white supremists change? With one good white supremists would they become less of a threat? If a group has 10 murders in it does the group become less dangerous if the 11th is not a murderer?
How about this. What makes the rarity of white supremists instances of violence incomparable to the rarity of Muslim instances of violence?
You forgot that they all happened a long time ago. How does the trail of tears, slave trade, make white supremacy a danger today?
I’ve never made this claim, it’s a flat out falsehood on your part. I assume it’s because your whole argument hinges on this lie.
I don’t have to, the rarity of bad people doing bad things in not affected by a good person being part of that group.
I can’t argue with someone who steps into a thread, tries to make a comparison, then refuses to provide a single example of why their comparison is right, then goes on to continually project that they’re the correct and rational one while it’s the other one that’s refusing to do those things.
I’m simply asking you to go first, since you’re the one that made the comparison. That’s all.
If you can’t do that then why are you even here if not to just project and troll?
You are just stuck on a nonsense requirement that there by has to be a good white supremists but you can’t answer any of my questions as to why.
I stated multiple times there doesn’t need to be a good white supremists provided rational for why, none of which you have tried to dispute
If you are so eager to have a discussion then you would answer my questions or rebut my reasoning. Instead you keep repeating that there needs to be a good white supremists without providing reasoning.
Here are some questions to ponder.
There you go projecting again.
If you want the rest I’ll be happy to provide once you can give me an example of a “ good” white supremacist.
It’s obvious you can’t provide intelligent reasoning as to why I need to provide a good white supremists.
It’s basic debating dude, you bring up a point you should expect people to want to see evidence of that point.
So far you have failed to provide a satisfactory reason for comparing a group of hateful racists (of which all of them are) to a religion (of which some of them believe justifies violence).
This goes way beyond basic prevalence. You just don’t seem to understand that.
I have, both rarely have violent incidences and are not a threat to society.
Now it’s your turn to answer a question.
How do nonviolent Muslims make the violent ones less of a threat to society?
How does this go way beyond basic prevalence?
You still don’t get your comparison doesn’t work because you can’t claim one isn’t a threat when one is literally baked into society and one is a religion which only some members interpret the teachings of with the justification of violence.
I feel like a skipping record because you keep circling back to trying to claim your comparison is ok because you don’t see how entrenched racism (and in part white supremacy) is baked into society, without giving any further data points beyond “it’s rare”.
In other words, you can’t stop focusing on prevalence of violent attacks between the two organized groups because in your mind, that’s all there is.
First you’re wrong. But before I prove you wrong, you need the put the two things you’re trying (horribly) to compare on equal footing in some way that makes some damn sense.
Muslims are not all violent.
You claim there are good white supremacists.
So give me an example of a good white supremacist. Otherwise, your comparison makes no sense and isn’t even worth arguing.
Just as soon as you answer mine. I asked you first.
You’ve asked this before. What you’re missing is the existence of “good” white supremacists (which you’ve yet to prove exist) do not make the advantages white people have in society due to the result of historical white supremacy any better for POC. But one is MUCH more prevalent than the other.
How prevalent you ask?
Show me yours and I’ll show you mine. Show me the prevalence of “good” white supremacists, and I’ll show you how common white supremacy and racial bias is in our world.
I just told you. One is a religion of which only a fraction of the word belongs to, and of them only a sect of them believes in using violence to spread their message.
The other has become more than just a single group or organization, and is now baked into our way of life.