lictor616 Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Posted October 31, 2009 There's a very real historical context to this. White Pride has been for well over a century a calling card of the racists. I'm sure, to some extent, that also applies to some of the more fanatical Black Pride types, who are also pretty racist, but it simply does not have the historical connotations of the term "white pride". there are no historical connotations to "white pride" ... white power movements have never been but tiny, irrelevant factions... they haven't had any play in international affairs... Black power movements... or derivatives of it... include federally funded and respected NAACP, the Nation of Islam with its 2 million strong membership, all types of gangs bloods, cryps... with millions more enlisted... I mean surely you realize this right? lol, this is where you play the willfully obtuse card again TB... Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
lictor616 Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Posted October 31, 2009 k,It's ok to second-guess Lictor, I suppose, in order to better articulate his arguments. God knows he needs it. But do we really want that kind of affirmative action on MLW ? I'm left-of-center but I more closely identify as a poster who wants to read a supported and clearly articulated point of view, not an emotional outpouring. Case in point is the sorry example of the 9/11 conspiracy people who hopscotch all over the web blaming Bush for everything wrong with the world. If the idea is that we want to supports posters like Lictor so that they stick around and improve their thinking, then I'm all for it. Even Jerry Seinfeld (the poster not the comedian) supported moderate Muslims recently which shows some openness. But seriously - what is the point of coddling a poster by restating his arguments for him, if he's only going to soil the place forever ? I'd much rather see him leave if he's not going to improve. soil the place? if my comments are so inept... they they do my arguments disservice... which should be what opposing posters want... Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
M.Dancer Posted November 1, 2009 Report Posted November 1, 2009 if my comments are so inept... they they do my arguments disservice... You do do yourself all the time. You are like the fellow who who blarted wearing dockers and didn't know know till he got got home Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
noahbody Posted November 1, 2009 Report Posted November 1, 2009 4) Do you eat a lot of (plug in the offending stereotype here) LOL! Yeah, don't try breaking the silence in the lunchroom with that one. Quote
GostHacked Posted November 1, 2009 Report Posted November 1, 2009 there are no historical connotations to "white pride" ... white power movements have never been but tiny, irrelevant factions... they haven't had any play in international affairs... The Klu Klux Klan was not small, or irrelevant. North America's dabble in slavery of Africans. It sure had National play, as well as International reaching effects. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_supremacy White supremacy is the belief that white people are superior to people of other racial backgrounds. The term is sometimes used specifically to describe a political ideology that advocates the social and political dominance of whites.[1] White supremacy, as with racial supremacism in general, is rooted in ethnocentrism and a desire for hegemony.[2] White supremacy has often resulted in anti-black racism and antisemitism. Different forms of white supremacy have different conceptions of who is considered white, and not all white supremacist organizations agree on who is their greatest enemy.[3] Hilter was good at getting the word out for the Aryan Nation, all white, blonde and blue eyed. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa37...7/ai_n16855769/ Learn some history. It will serve you well. Or in this case. Not. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 1, 2009 Report Posted November 1, 2009 lictor, The point of a discussion board is discussion. When I debate with another poster, it's called a dialectic. Frankly, it's uninteresting to debate with another poster if they're evasive, refusing to acknowledge where they've made mistakes, and especially if they don't amend their arguments when they're wrong. It's not a productive discussion then. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
kimmy Posted November 1, 2009 Report Posted November 1, 2009 There's a very real historical context to this. White Pride has been for well over a century a calling card of the racists. I'm sure, to some extent, that also applies to some of the more fanatical Black Pride types, who are also pretty racist, but it simply does not have the historical connotations of the term "white pride". I'm not sure that's all of it, Mr Toad. It seems to me that people have been conditioned to look for something that might not be intended at all... to simply assume it's implied. For example, I recall some time ago on this forum a discussion where I had facetiously mentioned my duty to all of humanity to pass on my "radiant skin and straw-colored hair" to future generations, and was startled to the degree at which some people interpreted my narcissism as a put-down of other races. (Certainly a much different reaction than when I compared my appearance to "sour cream".) -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
lictor616 Posted November 1, 2009 Author Report Posted November 1, 2009 The Klu Klux Klan was not small, or irrelevant. North America's dabble in slavery of Africans. It sure had National play, as well as International reaching effects.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_supremacy Hilter was good at getting the word out for the Aryan Nation, all white, blonde and blue eyed. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa37...7/ai_n16855769/ Learn some history. It will serve you well. Or in this case. Not. the ku kluxers where motivated by a religious fervor (that told them that blacks didn't have souls) they number about 2 000 members today... yet we hear more about them then the crips, new black panther party and many other black power groups what you say about Hitler's "Aryan Theory" is essentially true though, I'll concede that. Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
JB Globe Posted November 2, 2009 Report Posted November 2, 2009 (edited) I doubt that you'd be kicked... I,ve already been called a monster, hitler loving, goose stepping, less-worthy-then-rapist-drug-dealer, stupid, idiotic, and all manner of expletives ... with not so much a whiff of reprimand.. in fact, most of the replies I receive are ad hominems... and never actually address points I've made... Most of us have no problem addressing arguments we find completely disgusting. However, we simply don't want to waste our time addressing arguments that are completely idiotic, much less with posters who employ troll-like techniques. (ie - evasion, not revealing sources, claiming sources say something when they don't, deliberately putting facts out of context, discrediting facts because the authors of said facts are black/jewish/etc. and thus are part of an imagined conspiracy, etc) It's not because of the positions you take, but how you argue those positions: they're so determined by your subjective take on things that they're stupid. (ie - "the sun orbits the earth because that's how it looks like to me") And just how egotistical are you? Do you really think that HOW you choose to argue your points has nothing to do with the fact that almost no one here wants to bother engaging with you at all? And please, save me the self-righteous "It's because I speak the truth!" routine, no one buys it anymore and I hope you don't - you're only hurting yourself when you don't own up to your own shortcomings. Edited November 2, 2009 by JB Globe Quote
JB Globe Posted November 2, 2009 Report Posted November 2, 2009 lictor,The point of a discussion board is discussion. When I debate with another poster, it's called a dialectic. Frankly, it's uninteresting to debate with another poster if they're evasive, refusing to acknowledge where they've made mistakes, and especially if they don't amend their arguments when they're wrong. It's not a productive discussion then. Co-sign. Quote
lictor616 Posted November 2, 2009 Author Report Posted November 2, 2009 (edited) Most of us have no problem addressing arguments we find completely disgusting.However, we simply don't want to waste our time addressing arguments that are completely idiotic, much less with posters who employ troll-like techniques. (ie - evasion, not revealing sources, claiming sources say something when they don't, deliberately putting facts out of context, discrediting facts because the authors of said facts are black/jewish/etc. and thus are part of an imagined conspiracy, etc) The real trolls are people who make false claims (such as me refusing to back up my sources, which I do to a far greater extent then most here) ... as far as evasion, I actually LOOK for conflict and debate. Look at my posts per day average, sure I may decide not to respond to certain posters who simply spout ad hominems... like dancer does from time to time, but usually end up having the last comment in many threads. but that is merely following forum rules: namely not replying to insults and ad hominems... when have I discredited a "fact" because an author was jewish? or black? How many times have charter.rights aet all say, discredited certain authors (bell curve) because they were white... again without reprimand? everything you say is suspect and seems to be an attempt at deflecting... by the way if you find my posts "unworthy of your time" then by all means stop replying to me, especially not long winded hand wringing angst laden little comments that are pure unadulterated ad hominem muck. Edited November 2, 2009 by lictor616 Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
GostHacked Posted November 2, 2009 Report Posted November 2, 2009 The real trolls are people who make false claims (such as me refusing to back up my sources, which I do to a far greater extent then most here) ... as far as evasion, I actually LOOK for conflict and debate. Trolling and debate posting are two different things. Always post your links as back ups, or you are going to get eaten. Some posters here, like me can be sarcastic, while people like BC can be very scathing. We have a very dynamic and colourful bunch here. Look at my posts per day average, sure I may decide not to respond to certain posters who simply spout ad hominems... like dancer does from time to time, but usually end up having the last comment in many threads. but that is merely following forum rules: namely not replying to insults and ad hominems... No one has the last comment here in any thread. Just when you think you got last word, something happens, someone bumps the thread and round and round we go. And judging by many posters, no one is going to let you get the last comment in. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 2, 2009 Report Posted November 2, 2009 Ghost, Always post your links as back ups, or you are going to get eaten. And this is a good thing. People who post opinions as fact should last as long as a Big Mac in a shark tank. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
GostHacked Posted November 2, 2009 Report Posted November 2, 2009 Ghost,And this is a good thing. People who post opinions as fact should last as long as a Big Mac in a shark tank. It's a lesson most of us learn very early on when posting on this site. And we have seen many posters come and go because of just the way people post. Quote
JB Globe Posted November 2, 2009 Report Posted November 2, 2009 So you have nothing to do with how your posts are received? All of the reaction your getting is simply a result of a hate campaign against you because . . . Because why exactly? . . . "Because I speak the truth!" . . . Really? Get over yourself. You don't have to debate your points the way you do, you CHOOSE to do so. You want to deal exclusively in hyperbole for example - fine, go ahead, but the consequence of that is most people here (conservative, progressive, etc) won't take you seriously, and thus won't engage with you. You know what the deal is - so why are you whining about it? Do you enjoy the attention on some level? Because most of us are finding it hard to believe you're genuinely surprised and/or upset that your ridiculous posts beget ridiculous responses. Quote
lictor616 Posted November 5, 2009 Author Report Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) So you have nothing to do with how your posts are received? All of the reaction your getting is simply a result of a hate campaign against you because . . . Because why exactly? . . . "Because I speak the truth!" . . . Really? Get over yourself. You don't have to debate your points the way you do, you CHOOSE to do so. You want to deal exclusively in hyperbole for example - fine, go ahead, but the consequence of that is most people here (conservative, progressive, etc) won't take you seriously, and thus won't engage with you. You know what the deal is - so why are you whining about it? Do you enjoy the attention on some level? Because most of us are finding it hard to believe you're genuinely surprised and/or upset that your ridiculous posts beget ridiculous responses. no because I hold opinions which are contradictory to the prevailing religion of political correctness.. to the prevailing ORTHODOXY of this society... People are mad at me, not because i'm saying incorrect things, or deducting incorrect conclusions, they are agitated and reacting emotionally because I am attacking their religion: political correctness: (and in particular the doctrine of equality) which they have swallowed their whole lives. I am shaking the foundation of their beliefs and this angers them because often they have no suitable refutation. As I have said I get the same hatred and vitriol when I debate evangelicals and evolution as I do equality with liberals... Most of the hatred, this disapproval and pressure to conform directed towards me, can be annoying for me, but that's hardly enough to make me change my mind... People who can't cope with my unexpected behavior resort to threats, and insults. Many of the most viscious posts I get are from people who are surprised to see that not everyone is equally weak and eager to parrot the liberal party line of "diversity is our strength"... I'm not surprised by this reaction, its the way MOST people react: we all want to conform to prevailing "orthodoxies" that's just human nature... we all WANT to believe what our government is telling us, its much more comforting to live under the impression that the government isn't malign and isn't lying to us on important matters, for so many people: its much more agreeable to believe in pleasant fantasies then looking at reality... Indeed, 50 years ago the stuff I say about religion would have elicited the same hate filled screeches and yelps that I get today from racial egalitarians... and for exactly the same reasons: because they run against the prevailing religious orthodoxy. Liberalism is the new Christianity, and its flocks (I am sorry to say) are no different from the ones who burned Giordano Bruno at the cross 400 years ago... (if I may be so supremely presumptuous as to compare myself with Bruno...). They don't like for people to rock the boat. Edited November 5, 2009 by lictor616 Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
M.Dancer Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 v\My Reaction Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 no because I hold opinions which are contradictory to the prevailing religion of political correctness.. to the prevailing ORTHODOXY of this society... People are mad at me, not because i'm saying incorrect things,or deducting incorrect conclusions... Actually this is one reason why people are ticked at you. ....they are agitated and reacting emotionally because I am attacking their religion: political correctness: (and in particular the doctrine of equality) which they have swallowed their whole lives. I am shaking the foundation of their beliefs and this angers them because often they have no suitable refutation. As I have said I get the same hatred and vitriol when I debate evangelicals and evolution as I do equality with liberals... Well, your first mistake is debating evagelicals. Walk away from those ones. That is never a battle you are ever going to win. Quote
JB Globe Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 People are mad at me, not because i'm saying incorrect things, or deducting incorrect conclusions, they are agitated and reacting emotionally because I am attacking their religion: political correctness: (and in particular the doctrine of equality) which they have swallowed their whole lives. I am shaking the foundation of their beliefs and this angers them because often they have no suitable refutation. As I have said I get the same hatred and vitriol when I debate evangelicals and evolution as I do equality with liberals... Most of the hatred, this disapproval and pressure to conform directed towards me, can be annoying for me, but that's hardly enough to make me change my mind... People who can't cope with my unexpected behavior resort to threats, and insults. Many of the most viscious posts I get are from people who are surprised to see that not everyone is equally weak and eager to parrot the liberal party line of "diversity is our strength"... I'm not surprised by this reaction, its the way MOST people react: we all want to conform to prevailing "orthodoxies" that's just human nature... we all WANT to believe what our government is telling us, its much more comforting to live under the impression that the government isn't malign and isn't lying to us on important matters, for so many people: its much more agreeable to believe in pleasant fantasies then looking at reality... Indeed, 50 years ago the stuff I say about religion would have elicited the same hate filled screeches and yelps that I get today from racial egalitarians... and for exactly the same reasons: because they run against the prevailing religious orthodoxy. Liberalism is the new Christianity, and its flocks (I am sorry to say) are no different from the ones who burned Giordano Bruno at the cross 400 years ago... (if I may be so supremely presumptuous as to compare myself with Bruno...). They don't like for people to rock the boat. 1 - I too, despise political correctness, but for different reasons than you. 2 - You're either being disingenuous by claiming that the way in which you argue your points has no bearing on why people don't engage you seriously, OR - you're an egomaniac, hence the image you hold of yourself as being some sort of prophet. Quote
lictor616 Posted November 5, 2009 Author Report Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) 1 - I too, despise political correctness, but for different reasons than you. 2 - You're either being disingenuous by claiming that the way in which you argue your points has no bearing on why people don't engage you seriously, OR - you're an egomaniac, hence the image you hold of yourself as being some sort of prophet. again, I dno't see myself as special or anything, actually, I know a great many ordinary people who are working away at their liberal foundations... as for being a prophet... you say this ONLY to ridicule me... I'm not a "messenger" or prophet or whatever... I merely talk about taboo subjects and don't use politically correct filters in talking about them... some people think this is uncouth or harsh... But that's the way I want to talk about things... as harsh and straightforward as possible... and I am honest in these debates, to me the truth if far more worthwhile then niceness or political correctness... Edited November 5, 2009 by lictor616 Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
JB Globe Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 again, I dno't see myself as special or anything, actually, I know a great many ordinary people who are working away at their liberal foundations... as for being a prophet... you say this ONLY to ridicule me... I'm not a "messenger" or prophet or whatever... I merely talk about taboo subjects and don't use politically correct filters in talking about them... some people think this is uncouth or harsh... But that's the way I want to talk about things... as harsh and straightforward as possible... and I am honest in these debates, to me the truth if far more worthwhile then niceness or political correctness... No one is criticizing you for your harshness. Frankly that doesn't faze me at all. What makes me never want to seriously bother with you is that I know if I get into a discussion is that you pre-judge incidents and cases based on the ethnicity/religion of the people involved and not the facts on the ground, and even when presented with facts to the contrary. You could pretty much say this about your entire worldview - "If group A is involved in a conflict with group B, than it MUST be group A's fault because group A is evil and group B is good" - You then do the confirmation-bias thing and dig up info which supports this view and ignore info that doesn't. I mean, you constantly talk about how evil Islam is (when what you really mean is Islamist) but you employ most of the same logical fallacies and biases I see Islamists doing online . . . Or other forms of prejudiced extremists as well, be they radical Zionists or Black Supremacists. That's been my experience with you - and a great many other people have this experience as well, so you can continue to believe it's because you shoot from the hip, but I think if you keep thinking like that you're going to have more and more of a problem getting serious responses. Quote
lictor616 Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Posted November 6, 2009 No one is criticizing you for your harshness. Frankly that doesn't faze me at all. What makes me never want to seriously bother with you is that I know if I get into a discussion is that you pre-judge incidents and cases based on the ethnicity/religion of the people involved and not the facts on the ground, and even when presented with facts to the contrary. You could pretty much say this about your entire worldview - "If group A is involved in a conflict with group B, than it MUST be group A's fault because group A is evil and group B is good" - You then do the confirmation-bias thing and dig up info which supports this view and ignore info that doesn't. I mean, you constantly talk about how evil Islam is (when what you really mean is Islamist) but you employ most of the same logical fallacies and biases I see Islamists doing online . . . Or other forms of prejudiced extremists as well, be they radical Zionists or Black Supremacists. That's been my experience with you - and a great many other people have this experience as well, so you can continue to believe it's because you shoot from the hip, but I think if you keep thinking like that you're going to have more and more of a problem getting serious responses. No, what I do is talk about matters which show CLEARLY the way the different races are treated by the media and by other posters... In another thread for instance there was endless yammering about a black criminal who was manhandled and left with tiny injuries by 3 white youths... in BC... everyone said the attack was definitely racist, and deserved exemplary punishment... and attacked everyone who didn't agree... I brought up a case where an 18 year old boy was beaten within a quarter inch of his life while his black aggressors (all 10 to 15 of them) while screaming racial epithets at him... the event elicited only minor local news outrage, and didn't get anything like the star billing WE ALL KNOW this would have had if the races had merely been inverted. The courtenay BC "hatercime" was far less worse... and had even less evidence of racial bias in it... yet it was shown on every major newservice in Canada... far far more conspicuous is the reaction ... or rather lack thereof for the white victim... there was scarcely any here who commented on it... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=14890&st=0&p=460969&fromsearch=1entry460969 yet the courtneay one was festooned with hand wringing posts and angst laden shrieks of outrage... these are pretty unambiguous admissions of RACIAL BIAS... its clear to anybody with half a brain that the only reason white victims of hatecrimes don't matter is because they're WHITE... I don,t see any of this as a "logical fallacy"... this confirms everything that i've mentionned. The fact that you see my asking for EQUALITY in treatment of racial hate-crimes for example, as "pro-white bias" and a logical fallacy, is very illustrative of the mindset I deplore and critique often here. Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
M.Dancer Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 In another thread for instance there was endless yammering about a black criminal who was manhandled and left with tiny injuries by 3 white youths... in BC... everyone said the attack was definitely racist, and deserved exemplary punishment... and attacked everyone who didn't agree... There is no thread about a "Black criminal" ....there are threads with blatent plagiarism posted by yourself. So are all white supremists intellectual frauds, liars and plagiarists or are you unique in this regard? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
lictor616 Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Posted November 6, 2009 There is no thread about a "Black criminal" ....there are threads with blatent plagiarism posted by yourself. So are all white supremists intellectual frauds, liars and plagiarists or are you unique in this regard? I corrected that mistake... but that aside do you agree with the quote? Quote -Magna Europa Est Patria Nostra-
M.Dancer Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 I corrected that mistake... but that aside do you agree with the quote? I'm still waiting forn you to correct you slander agianst the chap who was set upon by the white hooligans. Where is your evidence that he is a criminal. If I was to analyze your posts, what percentage would you say is plagiarized? 30% 25% 20%? My guess is 22% Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.