ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Iowa politics , racism charges , racism issues , republicans , Steve King , white nationalism , white nationalists

Reply
Old 8th November 2018, 05:45 PM   #81
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,146
Ok...I wanted to hold my comments until I’d done my homework. I’ve done an exhaustive review of Mr. King’s publicly available comments over the years. I’ve looked especially for instances where perhaps he said something off the cuff and then later clarified his meaning. It would not be unusual for a politician’s comments to be exaggerated or their intent to be twisted.

That ************ racist. Like, straight up.

I’ve never been to Iowa and as a brown-skinned man, I hope I never have to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 06:31 PM   #82
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,005
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Ok...I wanted to hold my comments until I’d done my homework. I’ve done an exhaustive review of Mr. King’s publicly available comments over the years. I’ve looked especially for instances where perhaps he said something off the cuff and then later clarified his meaning. It would not be unusual for a politician’s comments to be exaggerated or their intent to be twisted.

That ************ racist. Like, straight up.

I’ve never been to Iowa and as a brown-skinned man, I hope I never have to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have been to Iowa, and I don't think it's fair to judge a whole state by a few jerks.
It's liking judging Texas by the actions of a few of the more obnoxious bigots who live there.
And I think most states have a elecotial district which appears to be inhabited by morons.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 07:07 PM   #83
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 19,972
Originally Posted by Strawberry View Post
Off topic, but is there any word stupider than cuck?
For me, using it means the alt-right get some kind of sexual excitement out of the whole schtick. I wonder if it's some kind of projection...
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 07:20 PM   #84
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 19,972
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
When everyone is a racist, white supremacist, transhomophobe, misogynist, then no-one is.
Are you done with the broom yet, or do you have more generalizations to sweep?
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 07:59 PM   #85
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,796
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I have been to Iowa, and I don't think it's fair to judge a whole state by a few jerks.
It's liking judging Texas by the actions of a few of the more obnoxious bigots who live there.
And I think most states have a elecotial district which appears to be inhabited by morons.
I have an East Indian friend (US citizen) who lives in Sugarland, outside Houston...a petrochemical engineer. He said he was afraid to put out his 'Obama' lawn sign in the 2008 and 2012 elections. It's that bad.

About the only place in TX I'd be comfortable living in is Austin, where my niece lives. It's a 'blue' enclave in the state. But I'd have to put up with TX weather, so even that's out. Retirement coming up in a few years and I'm going to stay right here in Oregon even though my retirement dollars would go farther in a lot of other places. I couldn't bear living someplace surrounded by Trumpers. I'd be a fish out of water.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 11:43 PM   #86
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 24,465
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Ok...I wanted to hold my comments until I’d done my homework. I’ve done an exhaustive review of Mr. King’s publicly available comments over the years. I’ve looked especially for instances where perhaps he said something off the cuff and then later clarified his meaning. It would not be unusual for a politician’s comments to be exaggerated or their intent to be twisted.

That ************ racist. Like, straight up.

I’ve never been to Iowa and as a brown-skinned man, I hope I never have to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh, but the term "racism" has no meaning any more. You heard it here, so relax. The wise have spoken. Spring has sprung and the birdies in the trees are going tweet tweet tweet.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 01:03 AM   #87
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,073
Originally Posted by baron View Post
A right wing member of a right wing party with right wing views? It shouldn't be allowed.
it shouldn't be given free airtime.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 01:12 AM   #88
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,626
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Not the writer, but the Iowa GOP congressman who embraces white nationalist politics and has made many openly racist statements?
Give me a excuse why the GOP should tolerate a man like that,and even reward him with some co chair positions. I know every party has it's kooks, but King is of a particular disgusting variety. Embrace him, you embrace bigotry.
He's both a Trump supporter and a bigot (not that there's a real difference). That makes him less than human. No person should lower themselves to engage with something that is less than them. His kind aren't people. You attack them, humiliate them, dehumanize them but you don't engage with them. I don't talk to the dog **** on the heel of my shoe, why would I talk with him?
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 04:07 AM   #89
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 40,731
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Because what you call racism and white nationalism is literally someone in the current year attempting to represent the will of the founders, ALL previous generations of Americans and the interests of the actual intended citizenry of this nation.

The only alternative to being pro-white and white nationalist is to be:

1.) Anti-white
2.) Anti-American (literally, the country was founded as a white nationalist nation)
3.) Pro-invasion and pro-invaders
4.) In favor of whites losing political power and thus being at the mercy of groups which are actively being encouraged to hate our guts.

Ultimately, if people like you get your way, whites will be slaughtered at some point in the process (edit: and prior to that point, there will be a lot of ever-increasing legally enshrined moves to discriminate against whites, take property and wealth from them, etc.). It is NOT a good idea for any group to lose control over their space(s.) It does not tend to work out well for them.



The White Race will get blended away over time either way. Get used to it.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 04:19 AM   #90
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,073
There never was a White Race - there are only accidents of history that cause some genetic pools to stay moderately stable for a time.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 06:03 AM   #91
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,656
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
The only alternative to being pro-white and white nationalist is to be:
You may have overlooked - "Decent human being who recognizes past mistakes and works to correct them" in favour of being afraid.

I get it, white nationalists are afraid that of the bankruptcy of their beliefs and that they will be the ones that will be the example of what not to do. Historically nationalist groups of any background fail when confronted by outside forces prepared to adapt, or just a refusal to accept that they aren't the be all and end all:

Nazi Germany - Fail (and failed hard);
Fascist Italy - Fail;
Imperial Russia - fail;
Argentina under the Junta - fail;
Imperial Japan - fail;
Imperial China - fail;
Chile under Pinochet - fail;
Rhodesia - fail;
Zimbabwe - fail;
etc.

Essentially, you can a. support an ideology that can be historically demonstrated to be destined to fail and hope that when it does that you won't be around, or b. you can adapt and you and your descendants can thrive. Option b. takes courage though
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 06:16 AM   #92
SuburbanTurkey
Graduate Poster
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 1,884
The question with Steve King:

Is he popular in his district because he is racist, or does his popularity in his district give him the freedom to express odious ideas?

If you feel your seat is very secure, you might feel free to say what you really think.

It is shameful that his comments don't disqualify him in the minds of his constituents. They don't have to vote in a liberal, just primary him with someone equally conservative that isn't a white supremacist.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 07:23 AM   #93
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,503
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Thanks. I guess I should have done that, but felt that the "give me examples" routine was just a BS Delaying tactic, since I can't believe that anybody who is interested in US politics is not familiar with King and his long history of outreous statements.
ANd I see that one of our resident Neo Nazis does not like me very much. I take that as a huge compliment.
I suspect a lot of people have no idea who is. The only thing I know about him his his long history of saying stupid and offense things. I suspect, its only the people that pay a lot of attention to US politics have any idea who he is.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 07:30 AM   #94
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,745
Originally Posted by baron View Post
I'm so bored of that word. Once it meant something. Not any more.
Bullhonkies.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 08:13 AM   #95
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,993
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
Can you elaborate a bit on what you're actually scared of? I honestly don't understand the motivation behind white supremacy or how membership in various groups is determined. . .
Not whining and I get plenty of attention elsewhere, but when I reply in these threads with basic, logical questions to those espousing white nationalist ideals I get <crickets> in return. I can only conclude that these folks lack a logical justification for their fears, and that's a solidly poor look just about anywhere, but especially so here at the International Skeptics Forum.

Also very much in agreement that use of cuck as some kind of insult is perhaps one of the most juvenile (and oddly fetishized) rhetorical devices I've ever seen. Is this the ISF or some kind of high school Jordan Peterson fan club?
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 08:15 AM   #96
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,910
Racism is not some boogeyman that SJW's created to attack white people.

Do I agree with every way, every instance, every scenario, every language, every so and so way that Progressives sometimes conceptualize racism? No. But that doesn't make it non-issue.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 11:22 AM   #97
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,005
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I suspect a lot of people have no idea who is. The only thing I know about him his his long history of saying stupid and offense things. I suspect, its only the people that pay a lot of attention to US politics have any idea who he is.
The point is the people who were asking me to "prove" that King made racist statements make a lot of political comments here and it's pretty clear they follows US politics closely. If it would have been a "honest" question where the guy did not know who King was I would have obliged, but someone as familiar with US politics as the questioners have shown htemesleves to be I consider it a BS question to evade the issue.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 03:41 PM   #98
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,358
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Because what you call racism and white nationalism is literally someone in the current year attempting to represent the will of the founders, ALL previous generations of Americans and the interests of the actual intended citizenry of this nation.

The only alternative to being pro-white and white nationalist is to be:

1.) Anti-white
2.) Anti-American (literally, the country was founded as a white nationalist nation)
3.) Pro-invasion and pro-invaders
4.) In favor of whites losing political power and thus being at the mercy of groups which are actively being encouraged to hate our guts.

Ultimately, if people like you get your way, whites will be slaughtered at some point in the process (edit: and prior to that point, there will be a lot of ever-increasing legally enshrined moves to discriminate against whites, take property and wealth from them, etc.). It is NOT a good idea for any group to lose control over their space(s.) It does not tend to work out well for them.



It is currently the 80th anniversary of Kristallnacht.

That is where your political views lead.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 04:09 PM   #99
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,222
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
The point is the people who were asking me to "prove" that King made racist statements make a lot of political comments here and it's pretty clear they follows US politics closely. If it would have been a "honest" question where the guy did not know who King was I would have obliged, but someone as familiar with US politics as the questioners have shown htemesleves to be I consider it a BS question to evade the issue.
Pretty much my only regular exposure to politics is the discussions that go on in this forum. If you don't post it here, I'll probably never see it. And probably never care.

I don't need you to prove that King's made racist statements. I do think it's hilarious that you cannot even come up with an example of the thing this thread was supposedly created to discuss.

And the quoted passage is exactly what I mean when I talk about Internet slapfights. Even if King is, somehow, defensible, there's no point in trying to defend him here, because his detractors here aren't arguing in good faith anyway.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 04:14 PM   #100
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,358
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Pretty much my only regular exposure to politics is the discussions that go on in this forum. If you don't post it here, I'll probably never see it. And probably never care.

I don't need you to prove that King's made racist statements. I do think it's hilarious that you cannot even come up with an example of the thing this thread was supposedly created to discuss.

And the quoted passage is exactly what I mean when I talk about Internet slapfights. Even if King is, somehow, defensible, there's no point in trying to defend him here, because his detractors here aren't arguing in good faith anyway.

There are quotes on this thread:

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
If you didn't know if there was anything defensible or not, why make a comment that indicates the reason you're not going defend King is that it would be an internet slap fest?

The entire 'I'm not going to discuss this with you, but let me discuss discussing this with you' right from the second post is just weird.

This article links to many other articles about what King has said and done.

Some highlights: Retweeted white supremacists tweets expressing white supremacists ideas (not like not knowing it was a white supremacist because the tweet was about cat pictures or something), more than once.

Supported a white supremacist candidate for Toranto's mayor.

On a trip organized by a Holocaust memorial group to teach about Jewish and Holocaust history, he met with and was supportive of literal, honest to goodness neo-Nazis.

At that meeting he opined that diversity wasn't worth the cost, even factoring in Mexican food and Chinese food (not even joking). He also made the point that the ******* Neo-Nazis wouldn't be considered 'far-right' in the US like they are in Europe, and would fit right in with the Republican party.

You know, the very claim you've decried before when it's coming from progressives, or liberals, or Democrats, or former Republicans, or independents. So I doubt you do want to defend him. He really is awful in exactly the ways the OP asserts and ways you're not a fan of either.
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
They probably have me on ignore, as I already spoon-fed some. But hell, I'll do some more.

Say 'ahh', here comes the train! "Diversity is not our strength."

“What does this diversity bring that we don’t already have? Mexican food, Chinese food, those things — well, that’s fine. But what does it bring that we don’t have that is worth the price? We have a lot of diversity within the U.S. already.” - said supporting the arguments of neo-nazis while being interviewed on a neo-nazis show.

Latinos “calves the size of cantaloupes because they’re hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert.” he vomited forth.

“We add to our population approximately 1.8 million of ‘somebody else’s babies’ who are raised in another culture before they get to us. We are replacing our American culture 2 to 1 every year.” - talking about brown babies.

“This whole ‘white people’ business, though, does get a little tired, Charlie. I mean, I’d ask you to go back through history and figure out, where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you’re talking about? Where did any other subgroup of people contribute to civilization?" on the concept of non-whites contributing to our culture.

And it goes on.
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Ok...I wanted to hold my comments until I’d done my homework. I’ve done an exhaustive review of Mr. King’s publicly available comments over the years. I’ve looked especially for instances where perhaps he said something off the cuff and then later clarified his meaning. It would not be unusual for a politician’s comments to be exaggerated or their intent to be twisted.

That ************ racist. Like, straight up.

I’ve never been to Iowa and as a brown-skinned man, I hope I never have to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 06:13 PM   #101
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,626
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
The point is the people who were asking me to "prove" that King made racist statements make a lot of political comments here and it's pretty clear they follows US politics closely. If it would have been a "honest" question where the guy did not know who King was I would have obliged, but someone as familiar with US politics as the questioners have shown htemesleves to be I consider it a BS question to evade the issue.
Why prove it when you can just accuse him and make it stick? King isn't a person. No rule of honor or civility applies.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 11:27 PM   #102
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,073
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Why prove it when you can just accuse him and make it stick? King isn't a person. No rule of honor or civility applies.
Well, that has been his motto...
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2018, 11:38 PM   #103
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,155
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
If it would have been a "honest" question where the guy did not know who King was I would have obliged, but someone as familiar with US politics as the questioners have shown htemesleves to be I consider it a BS question to evade the issue.
It is always amazing when people who seem eager to jump in and dispute an issue then begin a line of questioning that implies they're unfamiliar with the most basic facts of the case.

Although I suspect there's as much chance they were looking for an opportunity to spring the ancient White proverb of "But how is that racist?"
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 12:21 AM   #104
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,796
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post

>snip<

Even if King is, somehow, defensible, there's no point in trying to defend him here, because his detractors here aren't arguing in good faith anyway.
And you know his how? Would you care to provide another reason we "detractors" would decry his racism? Racism he exposes by his own words that have been provided in this very thread.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 02:10 AM   #105
Tommy Jeppesen
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Why prove it when you can just accuse him and make it stick? King isn't a person. No rule of honor or civility applies.
I am against King and I am against you. But all 3 of us are humans and persons. Now figure out how I am against both of you.
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 03:09 AM   #106
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I'm not one to quibble over semantics. What word do you propose we use to describe people who think their race is innately superior to other races?
Why do we need to use a word? That's rhetorical, I know the answer, it's so we can dismiss somebody without bothering to argue against their views. It's not just that the word 'racist' is routinely flopped out as a blanket condemnation, but also that the implications are apparently absolute. A racist's ideas aren't worth discussing. Whatever they do is evil and they, as a person, are filth. The objective is not to challenge and debate but to get a label to stick, whether it's to a person, a group, a political party or 30% of a country's population. Just look at the OP. The ideas of this King character are irrelevant, we just want people to try and defend the scumbag, then they can be called racist and dismissed in turn. Because that's an internet win. It's so pathetic.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 03:16 AM   #107
Tommy Jeppesen
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
Originally Posted by baron View Post
Why do we need to use a word? That's rhetorical, I know the answer, it's so we can dismiss somebody without bothering to argue against their views. It's not just that the word 'racist' is routinely flopped out as a blanket condemnation, but also that the implications are apparently absolute. A racist's ideas aren't worth discussing. Whatever they do is evil and they, as a person, are filth. The objective is not to challenge and debate but to get a label to stick, whether it's to a person, a group, a political party or 30% of a country's population. Just look at the OP. The ideas of this King character are irrelevant, we just want people to try and defend the scumbag, then they can be called racist and dismissed in turn. Because that's an internet win. It's so pathetic.
Not just that! If a racist is a person, who doesn't view some other persons as persons, it is okay not to view a racist as a person. Which means the racist has won, it is okay not to view other persons as non-persons.
I will not defend a racist, but I will defend him/her as a person.
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 03:22 AM   #108
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by Tommy Jeppesen View Post
Not just that! If a racist is a person, who doesn't view some other persons as persons, it is okay not to view a racist as a person. Which means the racist has won, it is okay not to view other persons as non-persons.
I will not defend a racist, but I will defend him/her as a person.
I won't even go into what this country (the UK) and indeed the world, would be like today if it weren't for a certain racist called Winston Churchill.

Last edited by baron; 10th November 2018 at 03:23 AM.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 03:37 AM   #109
Tommy Jeppesen
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,578
Originally Posted by baron View Post
I won't even go into what this country (the UK) and indeed the world, would be like today if it weren't for a certain racist called Winston Churchill.
Well, I will listen to all humans and compare their values to mine.
Should Winston Churchill be condemned for being a racist? Yes, but only in a limited sense. He was from another time and thus our standards don't apply.

Should we speak out against Steve King? Yes, but we should still treat him as a human.

As for whether we should listen to a racist? Yes, but we can reject her/his points on racism in general. If the racist has other points, then separate those. But back again, I will listen to a racist, but I reject racism in any form.

Now if you want to make a point of debating race as connected to science, we can do that. But if you want me to accept that some races are better in a value sense, I will call you a racist and stand by that.
__________________
I don't believe in God and all the rest outside of methodological naturalism But I am a cognitive and ethical relativist/subjectivist and skeptic.
#JeSuisAhmed
Tommy Jeppesen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 03:42 AM   #110
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,358
Originally Posted by baron View Post
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Nice to see people admitting racism is part of the right wing. Finally.
I'm so bored of that word. Once it meant something. Not any more.

Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
When everyone is a racist, white supremacist, transhomophobe, misogynist, then no-one is.
If anyone was making that argument, then you'd have a point. However that is only in your imagination.

What is the world coming to when one can't proclaim white supremacy without being called a racist? It's political correctness gone mad.


Originally Posted by baron View Post
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I'm not one to quibble over semantics. What word do you propose we use to describe people who think their race is innately superior to other races?
Why do we need to use a word? That's rhetorical, I know the answer, it's so we can dismiss somebody without bothering to argue against their views. It's not just that the word 'racist' is routinely flopped out as a blanket condemnation, but also that the implications are apparently absolute. A racist's ideas aren't worth discussing. Whatever they do is evil and they, as a person, are filth. The objective is not to challenge and debate but to get a label to stick, whether it's to a person, a group, a political party or 30% of a country's population. Just look at the OP. The ideas of this King character are irrelevant, we just want people to try and defend the scumbag, then they can be called racist and dismissed in turn. Because that's an internet win. It's so pathetic.
Now that is remarkably inane in the context of King.

He supports proponents of the White Genocide theory. He is a racist and supporter of neo Nazis and of parties founded by actual SS members. He believes that there is a White Genocide that has to be stopped. And this is what he considers acceptable to say in public.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 04:11 AM   #111
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
He believes that there is a White Genocide that has to be stopped. And this is what he considers acceptable to say in public.
This is what I mean. Instead of challenging his views we're invited to entirely dismiss him and everything he stands for and everything with which he is associated in one fell swoop. And as if that's not enough we're told he probably has even more extreme views in private! You know, probably. Ever wondered why people who interview the likes of Stephen Molyneux and Jared Taylor frequently come unstuck? It's not because the latter have hit upon some revolutionary truth, or even that they're speaking logically half the time, but because the interviewers think that flinging mud will be enough to get them through. And it's not, and that's why people like this are experiencing a recent surge of support because when it comes down to actual debate and engagement, they dominate. Ten years ago, maybe even a couple of years ago, the label of racist was enough to dismiss a person out of hand but the technique is so cliched and overused that it retains little of its power, and in the absence of effective opposition the far right is going from strength to strength right across the Western world.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 04:44 AM   #112
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,043
Originally Posted by baron View Post
Why do we need to use a word? That's rhetorical, I know the answer, it's so we can dismiss somebody without bothering to argue against their views.
That's one way the word is used. It's also used to describe a person who thinks their race is innately superior, as you know. There's no reason to retire the word, and I don't even believe you seriously propose it be retired.

Quote:
It's not just that the word 'racist' is routinely flopped out as a blanket condemnation, but also that the implications are apparently absolute. A racist's ideas aren't worth discussing. Whatever they do is evil and they, as a person, are filth. The objective is not to challenge and debate but to get a label to stick, whether it's to a person, a group, a political party or 30% of a country's population.
By the same token, the counter charge -- the race card card as I call it -- is sometimes used by racists to deflect.

I don't think the implications are absolute. I believe in redemption (of the non religious variety). However, I see no reason to be tolerant of racism. Especially those racists who have achieved power and use that power to advance their racist beliefs.

Quote:
Just look at the OP. The ideas of this King character are irrelevant, we just want people to try and defend the scumbag, then they can be called racist and dismissed in turn. Because that's an internet win. It's so pathetic.
Maybe, I dunno. But even if true, so what? Argue back.

That said, it's not a scenario that would occur unless one chose to defend King's racist beliefs. And I hate to tell you, but when a person defends King's racist beliefs, that person just might be a racist.

One thing I hate about this topic, including what I wrote above, is discussing racism as if it's binary.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 05:31 AM   #113
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 10,519
White male Europeans are not uniquely racist. Tribalism is common to all the race. The human race, that is. But here's the thing: White males in Europe and the US today have the best access in all history to the broadest and deepest set of facts about nature and human history. It's the jaw-dropping ignorance involved in being a white nationalist in advanced nations that offends, as it requires effort to be that contrary to reason and evidence, also known as malice. This is the issue with King and company.

King is like any white man who has not yet wised up to the real, demonstrable strength of the West, that which gave it its current preeminence technologically and militarily. Nope, not strong men or big muscles to fight with, sorry. Nope, not genetics, this is known to be incorrect. Yes, science. Science and the tech it engenders, not cash, and not strongmen, is what differentiates the achievements of today from those of the past, which also had their cash, weapons and strongmen. It's what makes, say, "Joe Plumber" as rich as many kings of old, and healthier. Also better armed, let's not forget what tech does for that. Ironically, it is the dimwit frightard in the West, running as he/she does from science and fact-based reasoning, who is daily ceding scientific and technical prowess to non-whites, his feared enemies, who, in short order, are replicating all the advantages that were imagined to pertain only to whiteness. Mega-oops!

And why is this happening? A shortage of lollipops, the fear of not being able to maintain permanent sway over other men, and the unwillingness to be an equal with no thumb on the scale and compete honestly.

Dang, that's some kinda trouser drop and utter failure to defend that which one claims needs defending. Whoa! Makes the inevitable seem like divine justice, or would, if it were not for the nukes. Hicks getting their homeschooling from folks who build Arks, arguing red-faced for nationalism, with access to nukes. Now that is stupid.
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion.
His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 05:50 AM   #114
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,252
The lengths people will go to deny racism is pretty silly. See the recent Bernie Sanders quote...

Quote:
"You know there are a lot of white folks out there who are not necessarily racist who felt uncomfortable for the first time in their lives about whether or not they wanted to vote for an African-American."
They are "uncomfortable...about whether or not they wanted to vote for an African-American," but hey, they aren't necessarily racist!

In fact, that's exactly what they are. What else would you call it when someone won't vote for a person based on the color of their skin? It's, like a direct example of racism!

Seriously, in the same sentence, he claims that they won't vote for a black person and that they aren't necessarily racist.

This is how much in denial people are about the existence of racism.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 05:50 AM   #115
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,358
Originally Posted by baron View Post
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
He believes that there is a White Genocide that has to be stopped. And this is what he considers acceptable to say in public.
This is what I mean. Instead of challenging his views we're invited to entirely dismiss him and everything he stands for and everything with which he is associated in one fell swoop. And as if that's not enough we're told he probably has even more extreme views in private! You know, probably. Ever wondered why people who interview the likes of Stephen Molyneux and Jared Taylor frequently come unstuck? It's not because the latter have hit upon some revolutionary truth, or even that they're speaking logically half the time, but because the interviewers think that flinging mud will be enough to get them through. And it's not, and that's why people like this are experiencing a recent surge of support because when it comes down to actual debate and engagement, they dominate. Ten years ago, maybe even a couple of years ago, the label of racist was enough to dismiss a person out of hand but the technique is so cliched and overused that it retains little of its power, and in the absence of effective opposition the far right is going from strength to strength right across the Western world.
He has made white supremacy a key component of his platform. I don't need to assess whether he has a good set of policies on farm subsidies.

As for the rest, you need to get into the cesspit of the far right to see how many dogwhistles King uses. What he says is bad enough, what he implies to allies is worse.

And claiming that it's about culture and not race doesn't really cut it, when he then talks about how blacks and hispanics will fight each other before they outnumber whites.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 06:45 AM   #116
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
That's one way the word is used. It's also used to describe a person who thinks their race is innately superior, as you know. There's no reason to retire the word, and I don't even believe you seriously propose it be retired.

By the same token, the counter charge -- the race card card as I call it -- is sometimes used by racists to deflect.

I don't think the implications are absolute. I believe in redemption (of the non religious variety). However, I see no reason to be tolerant of racism. Especially those racists who have achieved power and use that power to advance their racist beliefs.

Maybe, I dunno. But even if true, so what? Argue back.

That said, it's not a scenario that would occur unless one chose to defend King's racist beliefs. And I hate to tell you, but when a person defends King's racist beliefs, that person just might be a racist.

One thing I hate about this topic, including what I wrote above, is discussing racism as if it's binary.
OK, but ask yourself this: Is it likely that anybody with white nationalist leanings reading this thread would say, "Hang on, this is interesting, I may have to rethink my views here"? No, they'll laugh and dig in, because it's the same old shallow, divisive rhetoric that's been done to death, the same old 'libtards' insulting swathes of people then puzzling about why nobody listens. Then the reader will remember the name of Steve King and go on YouTube and hear him lecture, and like many on the far right he's likely a powerful speaker (I'm guessing, I don't know him) and so the listener will be further persuaded by his arguments. In all honestly I simply cannot comprehend why people can't see this.

And I repeat, I'd never heard of Steve King before I read this thread and I know next to nothing about him now, but I've heard of many other hard right-wingers like Jared Taylor, and I can absolutely see why their following is taking off. And it has nothing to do with whether they're right.

Last edited by baron; 10th November 2018 at 06:49 AM.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 06:48 AM   #117
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
He has made white supremacy a key component of his platform. I don't need to assess whether he has a good set of policies on farm subsidies.

As for the rest, you need to get into the cesspit of the far right to see how many dogwhistles King uses. What he says is bad enough, what he implies to allies is worse.

And claiming that it's about culture and not race doesn't really cut it, when he then talks about how blacks and hispanics will fight each other before they outnumber whites.
I can't debate his views because I don't know them. And sure, before you say how I'm going against my own argument, I would research them and debate them if there was any serious wish by others to explore them honestly but unfortunately, like all other threads on political topics, the tone has been set from the beginning. I've fallen into that trap too often.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 07:52 AM   #118
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,358
Originally Posted by baron View Post
I can't debate his views because I don't know them. And sure, before you say how I'm going against my own argument, I would research them and debate them if there was any serious wish by others to explore them honestly but unfortunately, like all other threads on political topics, the tone has been set from the beginning. I've fallen into that trap too often.

Well be like xjx388 and do your homework before you decide whether to support him.


Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Ok...I wanted to hold my comments until I’d done my homework. I’ve done an exhaustive review of Mr. King’s publicly available comments over the years. I’ve looked especially for instances where perhaps he said something off the cuff and then later clarified his meaning. It would not be unusual for a politician’s comments to be exaggerated or their intent to be twisted.

That ************ racist. Like, straight up.

I’ve never been to Iowa and as a brown-skinned man, I hope I never have to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
King has retweeted an avowed admirer of Hitler and former chairman of the Young BNP Mark Collett

He supports a white supremacist for mayor of Toronto - who has been interviewed by the Daily Stormer Feel free to look up her works but she's pretty unsavoury. She has used a specific quote of a jailed far right terrorist "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children."

He promotes the idea that immigrant babies are destroying white culture - he seems unclear whether it is white or western, the two are used almost interchangeably.

I could go on but really it's been said before.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 07:55 AM   #119
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Well be like xjx388 and do your homework before you decide whether to support him.[indent]
Why would you imagine I'd do otherwise?
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2018, 08:08 AM   #120
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,358
Originally Posted by baron View Post
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Well be like xjx388 and do your homework before you decide whether to support him.
Why would you imagine I'd do otherwise?
This bit.


Originally Posted by baron View Post
I can't debate his views because I don't know them. And sure, before you say how I'm going against my own argument, I would research them and debate them if there was any serious wish by others to explore them honestly but unfortunately, like all other threads on political topics, the tone has been set from the beginning. I've fallen into that trap too often.
Whilst *technically* you haven't defended his views, you have attacked criticism of his views, and from a self-acknowledged position of ignorance. That is getting pretty close to a distinction without a difference.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:57 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.