“ Look for real, I’ll stop trolling for a second. I would be interested in an actual, non confrontational conversation. I am concerned however, such a conversation would take a prohibitively long amount of time to just end up nowhere (I believe it will for a myriad of reasons). I’m also not sure what the conversation would even consist of. The only thing you and I seem to have common ground on is the 2nd amendment.
I am particularly unsure if you’re capable of arguing in good faith. As both you and Alex have demonstrated an unwillingness to state an opinion for fear of reprisal, which is legitimate. Regardless, I personally believe reprisal is not only moral, but mandatory in the case of your previous demonstrated willingness to wholeheartedly hold legitimately white supremacist viewpoints. For example, stonetoss not being racist or your belief minorities were legitimately less intelligent than white people. Since science shows this is far from the case empirically, one has to wonder how you arrived at that opinion in the first place. I personally think there is no way you arrived at that viewpoint empirically, which only leaves personal bias/prejudice as the deciding factor. Had you just said “I think minorities are less intelligent than white people” from the get-go, I would’ve been more than happy to show you the mountains of evidence to the contrary and we could’ve gotten to the conclusion much more efficiently. But no, you kept playing word games and would never actually take any sort of stance. This comes across as incredibly disingenuous and makes me question your motives.
Since the election has already been called and certified (to my knowledge I may be incorrect, please tell me) and all suits have been rejected by literally every court in the land that got a case. I feel debating the election is worthless. Rather I’d like to understand your exact philosophy. Once we understand each other’s actual stances, we can determine what could be discussed.”
“ Look for real, I’ll stop trolling for a second. I would be interested in an actual, non confrontational conversation. I am concerned however, such a conversation would take a prohibitively long amount of time to just end up nowhere (I believe it will for a myriad of reasons). I’m also not sure what the conversation would even consist of. The only thing you and I seem to have common ground on is the 2nd amendment.
I am particularly unsure if you’re capable of arguing in good faith. As both you and Alex have demonstrated an unwillingness to state an opinion for fear of reprisal, which is legitimate. Regardless, I personally believe reprisal is not only moral, but mandatory in the case of your previous demonstrated willingness to wholeheartedly hold legitimately white supremacist viewpoints. For example, stonetoss not being racist or your belief minorities were legitimately less intelligent than white people. Since science shows this is far from the case empirically, one has to wonder how you arrived at that opinion in the first place. I personally think there is no way you arrived at that viewpoint empirically, which only leaves personal bias/prejudice as the deciding factor. Had you just said “I think minorities are less intelligent than white people” from the get-go, I would’ve been more than happy to show you the mountains of evidence to the contrary and we could’ve gotten to the conclusion much more efficiently. But no, you kept playing word games and would never actually take any sort of stance. This comes across as incredibly disingenuous and makes me question your motives.
Since the election has already been called and certified (to my knowledge I may be incorrect, please tell me) and all suits have been rejected by literally every court in the land that got a case. I feel debating the election is worthless. Rather I’d like to understand your exact philosophy. Once we understand each other’s actual stances, we can determine what could be discussed.”
I am NOT racist, I do not think whites are better than blacks in any way. Genuinely. I do not have that hatred and vitrol in me. But apparently me not denouncing StoneToss in his exact wording makes me a racist.
Why do you have to clarify you're not a racist?
Your friend is.
Socioeconomics does not equate to white/black/hispanic/asian.
Your friend translated that to, "I think minorities are less intelligent than white people".
His words, not yours. He's putting words in your mouth because he is building his own strawman to cut down.
Throw that in his face. "So YOU are telling me all minorities, black/asian/hispanic, are POOR?"
You talk economics, he talks race.
Also he says "Once we understand each other’s actual stances, we can determine what could be discussed.”, TRANSLATION, once I know what we agree and disagree on, lets NEVER discuss anything that we disagree on. Just blow smoke up each others ass about things we agree on and feel like we're coming to understand one another, and anything we disagreed on I will have a list to attempt to reeducate you to conform to my beliefs, because I am the correct one.
Well IQ tests prove east asians are the most intelligent and sub-saharan africans are the least. The empirical data proves this. Intelligence is largely genetic (a dog will never be as smart as a human because their genetics don't allow for it) and population groups that don't regularly interbreed will slowly go under a speciacion event, during these speciacion events races will pop up and eventually new species. Varying groups of humans isolated geographicly didn't interbreed and thus races were born. These races evolved differently and some evolved to be slightly more intelligent on average.
Wow, really IS clownworld.
This person is dangerous and I do not want to communicate with him anymore
Tell your friend to get a job and start paying taxes. I have family exactly like this, he is a very intelligent guy with a high IQ, highly educated. We used to often debate but you you corner them on a subject they start playing all kinds of word games. They are very lazy and are professional victims, highly brainwashed. AND DON"T BE FOOLED, they have NO INTEREST in changing any of their views, no matter how much information you give them, their one and only goal is to convert you. When I confronted my family on this, he has never talked to me again. I guess he knew his gig was exposed.
"I personally think there is no way you arrived at that viewpoint empirically", this statement shows his views are unable to be changed even with fact because even if you show facts that say otherwise he's already determined that it is not possible to arrive at your viewpoint unless you have moral deficiencies which are impossible to overcome. He's already condemned you entirely.
I would zero in on this and keep hammering all angles. Ask him - "so if lets say there was fraud but it has been certified (as you say), its not worth talking about fraud anymore? You are not concerned that tomorrow the same fraud will be used against the agendas you are behind? You dont think it will affect your life tomorrow?"
Was it because of this Stonetoss? http://stonetoss.com/comic/wagging-the-dog/
STONETOSS IS BLOCKED AS RACISM BY THE AIRPORT WIFI LMAOOOO
WTF!!! That's literally censorship!!
Stopped reading at the third sentence, second paragraph.
In short, "I know you are afraid to use 1A and that is good."
That is straight up Nazi/Commie/Totalitarian garbage.
I would be finding new friends.
But science shows the exact fucking opposite.