Another shooting - 20 children killed

Someone who for instance opposes illegal immigration, can be called "racist" because there's non-white people trying to immigrate to our predominately white nation. You must be racist if you want to keep them out, right?

Please re-read that several times and understand how it pretty definitively demonstrates that you ARE a racist.

Why?

Because rather than simply opposing illegal immigration (not racist), you have changed the argument mid-stream to opposition to immigration based on maintaining the white majority status quo (definitely racist).

And further, by wanting to keep 'them' out ... you solidify your racist viewpoints.

So thanks for clarifying.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
Jemy - you may have tons of book smarts, and youre great at categorizations and classifications, but you have no common sense whatsoever.
Youre an idiot

People who understand insight and experience to be valuable but know their own limits are either humble about their shortcomings or create identity-protecting myths about the quality of education. The false dichotomy between knowledge and experience is a very common one that reveals a level of frustration. My tip is to not utter such in public as inferiority complexes are awkward to see in adults. You have made your choices and you can be confident in what you have accomplished. You do not need to diminish other fields, other expertises or other professions to feel better about yourself.

Further more, to claim to know "common sense" and call people "idiots" are clues that a person is incompetent and naive. Overconfidence is a good sign that a persons experience is rather limited. Competence breeds humbleness because the more you know the more you know you do not know.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
Please re-read that several times and understand how it pretty definitively demonstrates that you ARE a racist.

Why?

Because rather than simply opposing illegal immigration (not racist), you have changed the argument mid-stream to opposition to immigration based on maintaining the white majority status quo (definitely racist).

And further, by wanting to keep 'them' out … you solidify your racist viewpoints.

So thanks for clarifying.

No, I didnt mean for the purpose of keeping things white, and it's glorious that you actually proved my point. That's the problem, the assumption and use by political forces that it "has" to be about race, if it's non-white people immigrating to a majority white state or nation, regardless of what someone says otherwise. The notion that if someone white opposes immigration, it has to be about race, even if it's not. That's all that some people see. It cannot be financial concern of a state that's already practically bankrupt? It cannot be security concerns for a nation at war? It cannot be simply regard for the rule of law of a sovereign nation?

Nope. It must be RACISM. It's the only thing that matters, because it's the hammer that you can use to strike at your political foes to make them buckle w/ the accusation of heresy.

Arguing w/ you people is not a fun thing. This is like arguing w/ a couple 13 year olds who have never been out in the real world. I feel like I have to keep going, and I now know why i generally stay out of P&R. Screw this, you guys can have this little slice of heaven you call P&R - it seems like nothing but annoyance to me! I feel a headache forming!
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
5,228
Location
San Diego, Ca
No, I didnt mean for the purpose of keeping things white, and it's glorious that you actually proved my point.

Sorry - but we are using the English language to talk here, and the reason I suggested that you re-read your post is that you use specific words in specific ways that demonstrably indicate a specific intent.

If the reality is that you expect people to determine your intent by means OTHER than the words you use, I suggest you stay away from the internet. If you believe that the problem is all of these 'book smart' people who understand words and sentence structure and can discern context properly ... that is something entirely different.

I didn't assume that you were being racist ... YOU brought race into it. Using the word 'white' (as in race) immediately draws racial distinctions that wouldn't have been needed to prove your illegal immigration point.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
So then, the mere observation of fact (immigrants are not white, majority society is white) automatically makes you a racist. Cool.

A white person would be a minority in Harlem. A white person moving into Harlem would reduce the black majority. Noting that statistical fact makes me a racist, right? Gimme more enlightenment!
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
So then, the mere observation of fact (immigrants are not white, majority society is white) automatically makes you a racist. Cool.

A white person would be a minority in Harlem. A white person moving into Harlem would reduce the black majority. Noting that statistical fact makes me a racist, right? Gimme more enlightenment!

I will try to give you enlightenment ... noting statistics is NOT racist. Using statistics as a basis for a logical push to 'keep THEM' out - with THEM directly meaning non-whites - IS racist.

And also, if a group of blacks wanted to form a strategy to 'keep THEM out' meaning whites, that would also be racist.

However, things that are done by a majority group have a different impact - MUCH greater - than things done by a minority group. Especially when that majority group has the VAST majority of power, wealth and control. And it is an indisputable truth that America is run, owned and controlled by older white men.

Glad to help.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
It's interesting how the most selfish are so often the least enlightened. Kinda makes sense and I think it means hope for the future, however far we need to look.
 
I'm sure everyone's seen the awful news about the Christmass Eve ambush murder of volunteer firefighters lured into a trap by a gunman who set fire to his own home.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-rifle-gunman-set-blaze-lure-deadly-trap.html

What absolutely awful news for their families to receive - and so close to Christmass. I hope the community rallies behind them and is able to make things just a little less unbearable, as impossible as that might be.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
1,710
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
560
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
560
Bold printing & italic printing by me :

On violence in games :

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Taek..._Games_Why_Game_Violence_is_a_Red_Herring.php

A quote from that :

It’s not that violent games make us more violent (though they have been shown in various studies to make us more aggressive), it’s that they often foster a message of solving problems through unilateral power. And when you start showing, not simply telling, a troubled individual who believes himself to be severely disenfranchised that the kind of unmitigated power they desire is obtainable, you can see where the problems might begin to arise. And the particular problem with gunplay is that the unilateral power of guns in games is of the same degree as in real life.

So I have to ask if those of us who enjoy games aren’t doing a bit of the same thing that American 2nd Amendmentists do. Consider this quote from a US gun shopper on the Newtown massacre:
But there's people trying to use that to say I'm responsible because I own a gun. Where's the connection? The only people making one are doing it for political ends because there's not one of these massacres would ever have been stopped by a law that takes my gun away. But now they're talking about doing that again, I think this may be the time to buy.

A false equivalency to be sure (games really don’t kill people*), but the question “Where’s the connection?” sounds entirely too familiar for comfort.

In the end, it’s difficult for me to escape the conclusion that games have more responsibility for their active content than other media, because the power one obtains for oneself in a game is more real and more personal than anything one can experience through projection as found in other media. And the defense that’s trotted out time and again, that games don’t desensitize us to violence any more than films, TV, or books do, just doesn’t apply. Because it’s not about desensitization at all, or even violence itself for that matter. It’s about power.


Another, different article : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...me_investors_express_concern.php#.UNxSKkc0NI4
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
Are there similar psychological traits between the killers?
- Yes, depression and social problems

Were there school shootings prior to video games?
- Yes, wikipedia lists three shootings as early as the 70'ies.

Are there school shootings in all nations in which violent videogames are popular?
- No, the vast majority happens in the states. Videogames are very popular in places like Sweden that do not have any school shootings up to date but the psychological traits exist in other nations than the states

Can videogaming be linked to such profiles?
- No, videogames do not lead to depression. Like with "videogame addiction" it's easy to draw a correlation between excess use of games and the psychological state of the person, but this also lead to a false causation. It's not that people try to escape to play videogames, but that people play videogames in an attempt to escape.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
After reading all of those comments, I must confess something that really appalled me is the recurrence in your argumentation of the word "RACE". I thought it has been demonstrated, many years ago, that speaking about mankind in such terms is absurd and totally inappropriate. Seems there's still a long way to go and many of you should learn some basics about biology, genetics and such things.

JemyM> You seem to be fairly well educated and you made your point about coherent definitions so why don't you insist on this particular misconception, human races that is ? Every time I hear or read about such an idiocy, I feel insulted myself. We're not talking about livestock here so please gentlemen, watch your language and, by the way, stick to the subject of the thread ;)
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
499
Location
Chapelle Guillaume
After reading all of those comments, I must confess something that really appalled me is the recurrence in your argumentation of the word "RACE". I thought it has been demonstrated, many years ago, that speaking about mankind in such terms is absurd and totally inappropriate. Seems there's still a long way to go and many of you should learn some basics about biology, genetics and such things.

JemyM> You seem to be fairly well educated and you made your point about coherent definitions so why don't you insist on this particular misconception, human races that is ? Every time I hear or read about such an idiocy, I feel insulted myself. We're not talking about livestock here so please gentlemen, watch your language and, by the way, stick to the subject of the thread ;)

If I ever use the word "race", I use it as a reference to belief systems and the belief that races exist is an important foundation for racism. I know that there are no such thing as "human races" that fit the biological definition of what a "race" is. I believe in merit (but not meritocracy) and believe merit is best utilized in a nation that do not segregate on meaningless birth-traits (color, origin, gender etc) but distribute power so that those who have something to give (merit, skills, ideas) will be able to do so, with the chance to achieve their dreams as a reward.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
Back
Top Bottom