2020 General Election Predictions

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

You’re trying to convince fighters not to fight?! Jesus, man, you’re worse than the enemy.

I am trying to convince fighters that their tactics aren't working.

I have watched the whole 'definition of racism' debate unfold, and the tactic of moral indignation over the leftists changing the definition has made zero headway.

The problem is that the case for preserving the classic definition of racism is persuasive to us because we are all, basically prescriptivists (at least when it comes to this specific word). So we just can't adapt.

It is not persuasive to the left. Preserving the prescriptive definition we prefer means nothing to them, so if you want to argue with them, you will get nowhere.

Now, if you don't want to actually win the argument, but want to subscribe to some sort of accelerationist idea of just letting our race-war Millerism come to a head, then continue doing what you have been doing.

[Martin Hash]

You obviously don’t follow my FB posts. When called a racist, I respond, “I’m a racist.” In fact, every time I’m called a name, I parrot it back like that. Kill-shot; I recommend everyone do it.

[Martin Hash]

There’s no law against racism, only Cancel culture. Shunning is all they got. Passive-aggressiveness wins again.

[Martin Hash]

And when the war comes, we will take the word back from the “niggers,” since then we’ll own the language again. I assume you’ll change back too, Mr. Capitulate, and also start calling people “niggers,” or do you only slide one way?

[Ph64]

[Ph64]

You’re trying to convince fighters not to fight?! Jesus, man, you’re worse than the enemy.

I am trying to convince fighters that their tactics aren't working.

I have watched the whole 'definition of racism' debate unfold, and the tactic of moral indignation over the leftists changing the definition has made zero headway.

The problem is that the case for preserving the classic definition of racism is persuasive to us because we are all, basically prescriptivists (at least when it comes to this specific word). So we just can't adapt.

It is not persuasive to the left. Preserving the prescriptive definition we prefer means nothing to them, so if you want to argue with them, you will get nowhere.

Now, if you don't want to actually win the argument, but want to subscribe to some sort of accelerationist idea of just letting our race-war Millerism come to a head, then continue doing what you have been doing.

https://cloverchronicle.com/2020/06/10/ ... orthodoxy/

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

@Ph64

While the source is of questionable veracity, that letter echoes many of the points made by the likes of Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, or Coleman Hughes.

Again, the argument that BLM and the like are damaging one of the few truly successful diverse countries in the world is a fantastic point that should be presented as muscularly as possible, and this can be done without recourse to pointless digressions on the definition of 'racism.' Digressions that do little to provide a compelling and superior counter narrative.

[Martin Hash]

I’m still curious if you’ll be calling people “niggers” when the tide turns? You need to explain why you wouldn’t accept a fait accompli on that, yet you will on “racist”?

[DBTrek]

@Ph64

While the source is of questionable veracity, that letter echoes many of the points made by the likes of Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, or Coleman Hughes.

Again, the argument that BLM and the like are damaging one of the few truly successful diverse countries in the world is a fantastic point that should be presented as muscularly as possible, and this can be done without recourse to pointless digressions on the definition of 'racism.' Digressions that do little to provide a compelling and superior counter narrative.

Half of the words in your last post have not been approved by BLM.
Please use the accepted alternatives.
Lackey.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I’m still curious if you’ll be calling people “niggers” when the tide turns? You need to explain why you wouldn’t accept a fait accompli on that, yet you will on “racist”?

I'm not sure I understand the question. Why would I? 'Nigger' isn't really a word whose definition is being scrutinized, or is likely to meaningfully change in my lifetime. My feelings on the rules of civil discourse aren't likely to change either.