***Official Political Discussion Thread***

What, then, is your definition of a "racist", if it is so narrow and "racism" so broad?

I think deeming someone a racist has more to do with that individual’s intent than a broad discussion of racism in America.

I can understand an argument that Joe Biden, for instance, is a racist, but I wouldn’t deem him one without more information.
 
I think deeming someone a racist has more to do with that individual’s intent than a broad discussion of racism in America.

I can understand an argument that Joe Biden, for instance, is a racist, but I wouldn’t deem him one without more information.
It appears that you’re not going to answer my question.

Color me surprised.
 
It appears that you’re not going to answer my question.

Color me surprised.

A racist is someone who feels that their race is superior to that of others. Or someone who discriminates against others because of the color of their skin.

That personal feeling is what separates deeming someone a racist from a general discussion of racism, in my opinion.
 
A racist is someone who feels that their race is superior to that of others. Or someone who discriminates against others because of the color of their skin.

That personal feeling is what separates deeming someone a racist from a general discussion of racism, in my opinion.

Discriminating against others because of the color of their skin isn’t a “personal feeling”. It’s a pretty overt action.
 
Discriminating against others because of the color of their skin isn’t a “personal feeling”. It’s a pretty overt action.

The “because of” is the why. And that is what makes it personal.

So, yes, it’s an overt action based on personal feelings.

If you discriminate against someone because they are a woman, for instance, that doesn’t make you a racist.
 
A racist is someone who feels that their race is superior to that of others. Or someone who discriminates against others because of the color of their skin.

That personal feeling is what separates deeming someone a racist from a general discussion of racism, in my opinion.
But we mustn't, in your view, ever reach this conclusion by inference - only through direct admission. Is that correct?

Apparent discrimination is insufficient. Denigrating majority-Black countries and communities in insufficient. Consistently serving as apologist for avowed racists is insufficient. Denying the sheer persistence of racism and White privilege in contemporary society is insufficient.


One wonders where all this racism is coming from in a society inhabited by so few racists.
 

These show that the Special Counsel uncovered a lot more potential crimes than previously known.
Trump campaign vendor Left Hand Enterprises:
-Wire fraud
-FECA violations (Federal Employee's Compensation Act)

Rebuilding America Now PAC:
-Kickback schemes
-FECA violations
241919395900a878ffc3d8c341b6eb2e.png



Podesta Group, Mercury Clark & Weinstock and Associated Employees were referred to SDNY for investigation but no potential crime specified. Appears to focus on potential FARA violations
Greg Craig, a former WH Counsel for Obama, was already known, he was acquitted of his charges in D.C.
a4e02f73d6a9e2422c7efe1e438c154b.png
 
I think deeming someone a racist has more to do with that individual’s intent than a broad discussion of racism in America.

I can understand an argument that Joe Biden, for instance, is a racist, but I wouldn’t deem him one without more information.
A racist is someone who feels that their race is superior to that of others. Or someone who discriminates against others because of the color of their skin.

That personal feeling is what separates deeming someone a racist from a general discussion of racism, in my opinion.
:lol: Racists and racism aren't mutually exclusive. Have you experienced racism?
 
I think deeming someone a racist has more to do with that individual’s intent than a broad discussion of racism in America.

I can understand an argument that Joe Biden, for instance, is a racist, but I wouldn’t deem him one without more information.
A racist is someone who feels that their race is superior to that of others. Or someone who discriminates against others because of the color of their skin.

That personal feeling is what separates deeming someone a racist from a general discussion of racism, in my opinion.
So, if a manager only hires white candidates despite selecting from a diverse candidate pool, and they insist their decisions have nothing to do with skin color, you're cool with that?
 
But we mustn't, in your view, ever reach this conclusion by inference - only through direct admission. Is that correct?

Apparent discrimination is insufficient. Denigrating majority-Black countries and communities in insufficient. Consistently serving as apologist for avowed racists is insufficient. Denying the sheer persistence of racism and White privilege in contemporary society is insufficient.


One wonders where all this racism is coming from in a society inhabited by so few racists.
Good thing a racist can just dismiss allegations of racism by claiming to condemn white supremacy at least once.
Because after all, if a person is indeed racist, why would he deny it?

My point is that if his intent is to embolden racists and retain their support, why not be unambiguous and say that he is making these statements based on race? Why condemn white supremacy? Like what is the point of him doing that, if he is indeed a racist and/or comfortable pandering to racists?
 
Back
Top Bottom