Poll: How many White Supremacists do you know? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate News And Just About Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Poll: How many White Supremacists do you know?
in United States

By VaulkVaulk 504 Pts edited May 13
Let's say that the standard for this will be: Anyone you've ever met who at least claims to be a White Supremacist.


aarong
"If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

"There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

"Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".





Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +



Arguments

  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Are we counting in person or online. If we're counting online I'll say at least one as the OP is certainly a white-supremacist racist based on previous comments about wanting to deny jobs to black people.
    George_HorseErfisflat
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 582 Pts
    Ampersand said:
    Are we counting in person or online. If we're counting online I'll say at least one as the OP is certainly a white-supremacist racist based on previous comments about wanting to deny jobs to black people.
    Where has Vaulk claimed to be a White Supremacist? 

  • I don't know any white supremacists, online or offline. At least not that I know of, if I do they hide it very well. 
  • VaulkVaulk 504 Pts
    Don't feed the trolls, despite the singular claim...I've never commented on wanting to deny anything to anyone for being black.  Instead I provided reasoning with statistics to suggest that it's not racism that's causing job hiring disparity in the record breaking murder capitols of America.  Of course my reasoning doesn't fit the race-baiting agenda and so the "You're a racist" card was played and is apparently still in play for the duration of this month as well as the previous 4.
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Vaulk said:
    Don't feed the trolls, despite the singular claim...I've never commented on wanting to deny anything to anyone for being black.  Instead I provided reasoning with statistics to suggest that it's not racism that's causing job hiring disparity in the record breaking murder capitols of America.  Of course my reasoning doesn't fit the race-baiting agenda and so the "You're a racist" card was played and is apparently still in play for the duration of this month as well as the previous 4.
    You stated that you think it is right and fair to deny black people a job based on the colour of their skin. It is textbook racism. You can try and justify it all you want, but it just means you are putting more and more effort into trying to justify a text-book racist position.
  • VaulkVaulk 504 Pts
    edited May 13
    @Ampersand

    So first it was "You commented on wanting to deny jobs to black people" and now it's "You stated that you think it's right AND fair to deny black people a job based on the color of their skin".  

    If either of these accusations were true, then you could cite them as they were allegedly stated by me on this site.  Since you didn't...I'm left to my own personal knowledge of what I said as well as the absence of any proof.  Looks like you're taking an abundance of personal liberty with what I actually said.  You're welcome to continue to insist that I'm racist and I'll continue to call you out for repeatedly race baiting.  There's not an expiration on the race card is there?
    George_Horse
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • I know one person in my neighborhood. His name is Todd, and I've heard the many ridiculous things he's said about minorities, though I do not know him very well because I avoid him at all costs. 
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? " ~Epicurus

    "We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes." ~Gene Roddenberry

    "A communist is like a crocodile" ~Winston Churchill
  • VaulkVaulk 504 Pts
    Yea, the point of the poll is to point out (Despite popular belief) that white supremacists, while still in existence, aren't some powerhouse organization of an Army that has any sort of sway or pull in today's society.  They're mostly shunned, ridiculed and avoided when people run into the one or two they ever meet.
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 271 Pts
    I do not know any personally, but I have met quite a few in Eastern Europe, where nationalism and racism are prevalent. They would blame Asians more than anyone else, but also Blacks and Arabs, for all the country's problems; they would see as solution to their failing economies deporting most immigrants, as opposed to improving the economical framework and clearing out the corruption in the government.

    Interestingly, I have never met a race supremacist in any of the First World countries. Japan is widely believed to be a nationalist and racist country, but what I personally found there throughout the 6 months I spent there was that Japanese were misunderstood. Most of them are not nationalists/racists, and they actually treat immigrants very well, like important and respect-worthy guests - but they are very defensive of their culture and are afraid of it being eroded throughout the interaction with foreign cultures. They are interested in cultural exchanges, but only as long as it enriches and not replaces their culture. It is a complex phenomenon, difficult to understand without having lived there.

    In the US, I know that White supremacists exist, but they seem to be very rare on the Midwest, at least. What is somewhat more common is patriotism ("Buy American!", "Praise Jesus!", "Our country is the best in the world!"), which has similar roots, but, in my opinion, is less malicious - and even that is very rare. That said, Blacks tend to hang out with Blacks, Whites tend to hang out with Whites, Asians tend to hang out with Asians and so on, which is somewhat puzzling to me - but it is not really racism/nationalism, and, instead, is self-imposed segregation.
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Vaulk said:
    @Ampersand

    So first it was "You commented on wanting to deny jobs to black people" and now it's "You stated that you think it's right AND fair to deny black people a job based on the color of their skin".  

    If either of these accusations were true, then you could cite them as they were allegedly stated by me on this site.  Since you didn't...I'm left to my own personal knowledge of what I said as well as the absence of any proof.  Looks like you're taking an abundance of personal liberty with what I actually said.  You're welcome to continue to insist that I'm racist and I'll continue to call you out for repeatedly race baiting.  There's not an expiration on the race card is there?
    https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/1164/social-justice-is-absurd

    You claim that it is okay to discriminate people based on their skin colour and specifically double and then truiple down, trying to justify your racism. The basis of equality is judging people by their actions, not their skin colour. You argue that we should judge people based on their skin colour and not their actions.
    Erfisflat
  • VaulkVaulk 504 Pts
    edited July 4
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    Erfisflat
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1426 Pts
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    You know you jut conceded your racism? In that post you identified as "Racism" you'll note that there is quote marks around what I'm saying. I was actually summarising your position from earlier in the thread in that post because of how ridiculous and racist I found it - so congrats because you've just identified your own point of view as racist!

    Also the posts clearly show you supporting discrimination. You are provided with a piece of peer reviewed scientific research that shows that when sent CVs which are otherwise identical apart from some having stereotypically black names are sent to employers, the stereotypically ethnic minority names receive less responses to a degree that is statistically significant to a scientific legal. You argue that because the black population at a whole has a higher rate of criminal offence than the white population, it is therefore completely valid to choose not to hire black people as statistically they are more likely to commit crimes. You rhetorically ask "If you're a White business owner and you're hiring for a new position and you know that a Black Person is 27 times more likely to attack a White Person than vice a versa... ...then would you refuse to take any of that into account when hiring a Black Person? " with you making it clear the answer should be no you wouldn't hire them.

    This argument is based around the idea that rather than the employers rejecting black candidates who have a criminal record or other indications of criminal behaviour, employers should judge applicants based on their skin colour rather than as an individual and reject black applicants in favour of white ones. This is by definition racist. If you disagree feel free to actually present an evidence based argument rather than just complaining and dogding the point. 

    Lastly I'll just point out the logical fallaciousness of trying to argue that it wouldn't matter if you were racist in a conversation you had with someone else or the tu quoque fallacy where you think if someone else said something racist that would somehow mean you didn't say something racist.
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    edited July 4
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Well done Vaulk, you have the holocaust denier who calls it the holohoax supporting you. That'll convince everyone you're not racist  :+1:
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1426 Pts
    Ampersand said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Well done Vaulk, you have the holocaust denier who calls it the holohoax supporting you. That'll convince everyone you're not racist  :+1:
    This is a guilt by association fallacy. Questioning historical events does not equal racism.
    Evidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Polaris95Polaris95 52 Pts
    Online, quite a few, but I don't know any in real life. A couple people I know are against immigrants, but don't discriminate them or anything. 
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Erfisflat said:
    Ampersand said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Well done Vaulk, you have the holocaust denier who calls it the holohoax supporting you. That'll convince everyone you're not racist  :+1:
    This is a guilt by association fallacy. Questioning historical events does not equal racism.
    Why do you never actually just look up what fallacies mean before you use them incorrectly and look stupid?

    Guilt by association takes the form: "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists" which doesn't fit the structure of what I've said at all. If I said "Vaulk is a racist and right-wing, therefore all right-wing people are racists" that would be a guilt by association fallacy. You probably actually meant something like poisoning the well, although that wouldn't apply either because this is a topic about white supremacists and so you being a holocaust denying Hitler-apologist is pertinent to the topic and not an off-topic attempt to drag down your character as an attempt to avoid the argument - your racism IS the argument..

    Also questioning historical events and being racist are not mutually exclusive so your defence there is irrelevant.
    Erfisflat
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 582 Pts
    Ampersand said:

    Why do you never actually just look up what fallacies mean before you use them incorrectly and look stupid?

    Guilt by association takes the form: "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists" which doesn't fit the structure of what I've said at all. If I said "Vaulk is a racist and right-wing, therefore all right-wing people are racists" that would be a guilt by association fallacy. You probably actually meant something like poisoning the well, although that wouldn't apply either because this is a topic about white supremacists and so you being a holocaust denying Hitler-apologist is pertinent to the topic and not an off-topic attempt to drag down your character as an attempt to avoid the argument - your racism IS the argument..

    Also questioning historical events and being racist are not mutually exclusive so your defence there is irrelevant.

    Actually, you managed to commit both fallacies in your one short post. 

    First, you assume all Holocaust deniers are racist. Since the Holocaust was committed against people of a common a religion and not a race, this is in error.

    Second is the poisoning the well fallacy that you alluded to.  @Erfisflat was not the topic, @Vaulk's claims were the topic.
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    edited July 6
    CYDdharta said:
    Ampersand said:

    Why do you never actually just look up what fallacies mean before you use them incorrectly and look stupid?

    Guilt by association takes the form: "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists" which doesn't fit the structure of what I've said at all. If I said "Vaulk is a racist and right-wing, therefore all right-wing people are racists" that would be a guilt by association fallacy. You probably actually meant something like poisoning the well, although that wouldn't apply either because this is a topic about white supremacists and so you being a holocaust denying Hitler-apologist is pertinent to the topic and not an off-topic attempt to drag down your character as an attempt to avoid the argument - your racism IS the argument..

    Also questioning historical events and being racist are not mutually exclusive so your defence there is irrelevant.

    Actually, you managed to commit both fallacies in your one short post. 

    First, you assume all Holocaust deniers are racist. Since the Holocaust was committed against people of a common a religion and not a race, this is in error.

    Second is the poisoning the well fallacy that you alluded to.  @Erfisflat was not the topic, @Vaulk's claims were the topic.
    Wow, that's a touching defence to say someone is merely a religious bigot but you're completely wrong anyway. Jews are an ethnolreligious group meaning there is an shared ethnic basis to Judaism as well. Discrimination by ethnicity is by definition racist and it was as a race that they were persecuted e.g. people with of Jewish decent were persecuted and killed regardless of their religion.

    The second point is even easier to dismiss. Scroll to the top of the page. See the big title at the top. The title is "How many white supremacists do you know?". That is the topic and a Hitler apologist holocaust denier who thinks a Jewish conspiracy committed 9/11 should be a good candidate in anyone's book and it is therefore on topic.

    Why is everyone except me so bad at understanding logical fallacies?
  • VaulkVaulk 504 Pts
    edited July 6
    Thanks to everyone who participated in the debate/poll.  On a minor note I don't support or endorse insulting the character of anyone here on the site and I appreciate those of you who managed to refrain from destroying the debating method by respecting common decency and appropriate social discourse.
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Vaulk said:
    Thanks to everyone who participated in the debate/poll.  On a minor note I don't support or endorse insulting the character of anyone here on the site and I appreciate those of you who managed to refrain from destroying the debating method by respecting common decency and appropriate social discourse.
    Might have been more meaningful except:

    1) You hypocritically engaged in the same behaviour you now try to deplore; unless you think that because your claims of me being racist blew up in your face that somehow means your attempt should count.

    2) Any normal person would consider racism as very much not "common decency" and "appropriate social discourse".

    3) The evidence clearly show you are racist and you have been unable to offer a rebuttal.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 582 Pts
    Ampersand said:
    Wow, that's a touching defence to say someone is merely a religious bigot but you're completely wrong anyway. Jews are an ethnolreligious group meaning there is an shared ethnic basis to Judaism as well. Discrimination by ethnicity is by definition racist and it was as a race that they were persecuted e.g. people with of Jewish decent were persecuted and killed regardless of their religion.

    The second point is even easier to dismiss. Scroll to the top of the page. See the big title at the top. The title is "How many white supremacists do you know?". That is the topic and a Hitler apologist holocaust denier who thinks a Jewish conspiracy committed 9/11 should be a good candidate in anyone's book and it is therefore on topic.

    Why is everyone except me so bad at understanding logical fallacies?
    No defense here, just pointing out your errors.

    You are STILL wrong.  As far as the guilt by association fallacy.  White Supremacists don't care about ethnicity, they care about the religion.  In case you were unaware, they don't treat Jews from Asia differently than they do Jews from the Arabian peninsula.

    As for poisoning the well, @Erfisflat was not STILL NOT the topic.

    Not everyone here is bad at understanding logical fallacies, just you.
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1426 Pts
    edited July 6
    CYDdharta said:
    Ampersand said:
    Wow, that's a touching defence to say someone is merely a religious bigot but you're completely wrong anyway. Jews are an ethnolreligious group meaning there is an shared ethnic basis to Judaism as well. Discrimination by ethnicity is by definition racist and it was as a race that they were persecuted e.g. people with of Jewish decent were persecuted and killed regardless of their religion.

    The second point is even easier to dismiss. Scroll to the top of the page. See the big title at the top. The title is "How many white supremacists do you know?". That is the topic and a Hitler apologist holocaust denier who thinks a Jewish conspiracy committed 9/11 should be a good candidate in anyone's book and it is therefore on topic.

    Why is everyone except me so bad at understanding logical fallacies?
    No defense here, just pointing out your errors.

    You are STILL wrong.  As far as the guilt by association fallacy.  White Supremacists don't care about ethnicity, they care about the religion.  In case you were unaware, they don't treat Jews from Asia differently than they do Jews from the Arabian peninsula.

    As for poisoning the well, @Erfisflat was not STILL NOT the topic.

    Not everyone here is bad at understanding logical fallacies, just you.
    Agreed. I must clarify though, that I have nothing against any race. To say that I am against the Jews is innacurate. I'm against TPTB, it just so happens that quite a few Jews (as they are known to be) are in power. I am not a white supremacist for agreeing with Vaulk's position either, as @ampersand appears to be portraying.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    CYDdharta said:
    Ampersand said:
    Wow, that's a touching defence to say someone is merely a religious bigot but you're completely wrong anyway. Jews are an ethnolreligious group meaning there is an shared ethnic basis to Judaism as well. Discrimination by ethnicity is by definition racist and it was as a race that they were persecuted e.g. people with of Jewish decent were persecuted and killed regardless of their religion.

    The second point is even easier to dismiss. Scroll to the top of the page. See the big title at the top. The title is "How many white supremacists do you know?". That is the topic and a Hitler apologist holocaust denier who thinks a Jewish conspiracy committed 9/11 should be a good candidate in anyone's book and it is therefore on topic.

    Why is everyone except me so bad at understanding logical fallacies?
    No defense here, just pointing out your errors.

    You are STILL wrong.  As far as the guilt by association fallacy.  White Supremacists don't care about ethnicity, they care about the religion.  In case you were unaware, they don't treat Jews from Asia differently than they do Jews from the Arabian peninsula.

    As for poisoning the well, @Erfisflat was not STILL NOT the topic.

    Not everyone here is bad at understanding logical fallacies, just you.
    Wow, I only took you off ignore because I assumed you'd pretty easily show yourself to be a racist. Didn't realise it was this easy - that within a couple of posts you'd be defending all white supremacist groups as not racist even though that is the very definition of white supremicist groups, e.g.:

    "White supremacy or white supremacism is a racist ideology based upon the belief that white people are superior in many ways to people of other races and that therefore white people should be dominant over other races. White supremacy has roots in scientific racism and it often relies on pseudoscientific arguments. Like most similar movements such as neo-Nazism, white supremacists typically oppose members of other races as well as Jews."

    And of course that argument is entirely in aid of helping you defend a Hitler apologist holocaust denier! It would be weird how you cared more about the technicalities of what classifies as white supremacism rather than holocaust denial if your racism weren't so obvious at this point.

    As for the rest; you are trying to defend a white supremacist by "pointing out my errors" which so far consists of making up false claims about how white supremacists aren't racist and Jews aren't a group. Even if your argument weren't so lacking in any evidence whatsoever you would still be defending a white supremacist because defending a white supremacist and "pointing out errors" is not mutually exclusive, ergo your attempt at evading what you are doing fails.As for the guilt by association fallacy, I've already explained with evidence why that is ridiculous so you merely shooting your mouth off without evidence can be ignored because arguments are based on evidence like the kind I've been providing, not on how long someone can keep on spewing out rubbish.

    Anyway back on ignore you go - your post here is kind of emblematic of your overall inability to form a coherent argument and why I find it a waste of time to engage with you. You think simply by making wild claims that automatically means you are right and your argument are valid. that's not how debates work and you need to back up your arguments with evidence and logic - hence why you'll never be able to counter my arguments which are evidence and logic supported and why it's a waste of time for me to engage you - from this point going forward it would just be you insisting you are right regardless of the proof and evidence and then me reiterating how arguments rely on proof rather than wild claims.

    Erfisflat
  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Erfisflat said:
    CYDdharta said:
    Ampersand said:
    Wow, that's a touching defence to say someone is merely a religious bigot but you're completely wrong anyway. Jews are an ethnolreligious group meaning there is an shared ethnic basis to Judaism as well. Discrimination by ethnicity is by definition racist and it was as a race that they were persecuted e.g. people with of Jewish decent were persecuted and killed regardless of their religion.

    The second point is even easier to dismiss. Scroll to the top of the page. See the big title at the top. The title is "How many white supremacists do you know?". That is the topic and a Hitler apologist holocaust denier who thinks a Jewish conspiracy committed 9/11 should be a good candidate in anyone's book and it is therefore on topic.

    Why is everyone except me so bad at understanding logical fallacies?
    No defense here, just pointing out your errors.

    You are STILL wrong.  As far as the guilt by association fallacy.  White Supremacists don't care about ethnicity, they care about the religion.  In case you were unaware, they don't treat Jews from Asia differently than they do Jews from the Arabian peninsula.

    As for poisoning the well, @Erfisflat was not STILL NOT the topic.

    Not everyone here is bad at understanding logical fallacies, just you.
    Agreed. I must clarify though, that I have nothing against any race. To say that I am against the Jews is innacurate. I'm against TPTB, it just so happens that quite a few Jews (as they are known to be) are in power. I am not a white supremacist for agreeing with Vaulk's position either, as @ampersand appears to be portraying.
    Oh you're no against them you say? No of course not. You just think the Holocause was a hoax, Hitler was trying to keep them safe and fed and they are part of a secret Illuminati cabal that was behind 9/11 (and other stuff) but that in no way means you are racist: you are being perfectly fair minded towards the Jews.



    You are idiotic racist scum. You're so idiotic you may have a legitimate mental health disorder and that is the cause of your racist beliefs and claims, but that you are racist is not up for debate. 

    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1426 Pts
    Ampersand said:
    Erfisflat said:
    CYDdharta said:
    Ampersand said:
    Wow, that's a touching defence to say someone is merely a religious bigot but you're completely wrong anyway. Jews are an ethnolreligious group meaning there is an shared ethnic basis to Judaism as well. Discrimination by ethnicity is by definition racist and it was as a race that they were persecuted e.g. people with of Jewish decent were persecuted and killed regardless of their religion.

    The second point is even easier to dismiss. Scroll to the top of the page. See the big title at the top. The title is "How many white supremacists do you know?". That is the topic and a Hitler apologist holocaust denier who thinks a Jewish conspiracy committed 9/11 should be a good candidate in anyone's book and it is therefore on topic.

    Why is everyone except me so bad at understanding logical fallacies?
    No defense here, just pointing out your errors.

    You are STILL wrong.  As far as the guilt by association fallacy.  White Supremacists don't care about ethnicity, they care about the religion.  In case you were unaware, they don't treat Jews from Asia differently than they do Jews from the Arabian peninsula.

    As for poisoning the well, @Erfisflat was not STILL NOT the topic.

    Not everyone here is bad at understanding logical fallacies, just you.
    Agreed. I must clarify though, that I have nothing against any race. To say that I am against the Jews is innacurate. I'm against TPTB, it just so happens that quite a few Jews (as they are known to be) are in power. I am not a white supremacist for agreeing with Vaulk's position either, as @ampersand appears to be portraying.
    Oh you're no against them you say? No of course not. You just think the Holocause was a hoax, Hitler was trying to keep them safe and fed and they are part of a secret Illuminati cabal that was behind 9/11 (and other stuff) but that in no way means you are racist: you are being perfectly fair minded towards the Jews.



    You are idiotic racist scum. You're so idiotic you may have a legitimate mental health disorder and that is the cause of your racist beliefs and claims, but that you are racist is not up for debate. 

    Once again you display a complete lack of reading comprehension and have decided to grossly misinterpret what I've said. I could care less anymore, your opinion of me is worthless.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • VaulkVaulk 504 Pts
    edited July 7


    You know at this point I'd invite anyone who disagrees with @Ampersand to take their turn coming in here to debate him so they too could be labeled a Racist.  Seems we all are somehow racists and everyone's wrong except him.  Must be nice to be infallible.
    Erfisflat
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • AmpersandAmpersand 385 Pts
    Vaulk said:


    You know at this point I'd invite anyone who disagrees with @Ampersand to take their turn coming in here to debate him so they too could be labeled a Racist.  Seems we all are somehow racists and everyone's wrong except him.  Must be nice to be infallible.
    The juxtaposition of me providing an evidence based argument for you being racist while all you can do is make baseless unevidenced insinuations about me shows how meaningless your baseless claims are.

    Just for the record, are you defender the the Holocaust denying Hitler defender and the person who states white supremacists aren't racist as well as yourself and your statements that employers should discriminate against black people due to their skin colour? Your clear and apparent racism being a detail you have been completely unable to rebuttal and that I have documented and fully explained with links to your racist statements?
    Erfisflat
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    Ampersand said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Well done Vaulk, you have the holocaust denier who calls it the holohoax supporting you. That'll convince everyone you're not racist  :+1:
    @Ampersand
    I was a Flat Earth Denier, called them Flattards, and here I am a Globetard supporting Flat Earth. Besides, @Erfisflat answered you with: Questioning historical events does not equal racism. I agree, that six million did pop up a lot before the Holocaust did it not?
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1426 Pts
    Evidence said:
    Ampersand said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Well done Vaulk, you have the holocaust denier who calls it the holohoax supporting you. That'll convince everyone you're not racist  :+1:
    @Ampersand
    I was a Flat Earth Denier, called them Flattards, and here I am a Globetard supporting Flat Earth. Besides, @Erfisflat answered you with: Questioning historical events does not equal racism. I agree, that six million did pop up a lot before the Holocaust did it not?
    Yes, I think the New York Times mentions 6,000,000 Jews were dying or died at least 34 times since 1901. When you do the math, there just weren't enough Jews.

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-six-million-myth/
    Evidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    https://www.gofundme.com/mwmvf-is-the-earth-flat

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    Vaulk said:
    Let's say that the standard for this will be: Anyone you've ever met who at least claims to be a White Supremacist.



    Yes, I believe from all the historical evidence that Evolutionists are racist, and calling evolution science is a damn lie.




    Erfisflat
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    Erfisflat said:
    Evidence said:
    Ampersand said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Vaulk said:
    That's a nice try but anyone who reads that can clearly see that I made no such claim.  I don't even need to argue it as the argument rests in your link.  You're instead regurgitating the leaps to conclusions from someone who named themself "AlwaysCorrect".  

    You're welcome to misinterpret my statements however you'd like and in doing so I'll be happy to pocked the small victories from your trail of logical fallacies.  Thanks for playing.

    On a side note if you did want to see what it looks like when someone spews Racism and gets called out on it, you can look here:

    Ampersand said:
    "Also please end welfare to black people so that they are so poor they have to choose between self determination and poverty. Vote Trump 2020!"
    MayCaesar said:
    Assuming that cutting down social spending targets specifically black people is bad enough... But claiming that black people can only get out of poverty or secession activities by getting welfare from the government is probably more racist than anything our dear president has ever mumbled.
    This guy is great at incorrectly "paraphrasing" people he disagrees with.
    Well done Vaulk, you have the holocaust denier who calls it the holohoax supporting you. That'll convince everyone you're not racist  :+1:
    @Ampersand
    I was a Flat Earth Denier, called them Flattards, and here I am a Globetard supporting Flat Earth. Besides, @Erfisflat answered you with: Questioning historical events does not equal racism. I agree, that six million did pop up a lot before the Holocaust did it not?
    Yes, I think the New York Times mentions 6,000,000 Jews were dying or died at least 34 times since 1901. When you do the math, there just weren't enough Jews.

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-six-million-myth/
    @Erfisflat ; yeah, and they don't even believe in Jesus Christ or being "Born Again", .. so I don't know how they could have survived 34 Holocaust's??

    But were they persecuted, .. hated, .. that is for certain, and I know that first hand; My father hated the Jews (married my mom after the war to "blend in") so did every German family member I have, and Germans I worked with. Let's not forget the Russians, Croats, Hungarians hate Jews too, as do most of Europeans. So it's not about whether or not there was discrimination against Jews, and millions of them being rounded up and brutally murdered in Europe, which does and has existed since there were Jews. It's this 6,000,000 killed during WW2 that's in question, right? The Jews just love the number 6, even their star on their flag has two sixes, the two upside down triangles representing the "As Above, So Below" Satanic agenda!

    Denying that the Jews were specifically picked out during WW2 would be, in my opinion also discrimination, because as far as I'm concerned is a fact that I know from first hand accounts, first hand stories, ..  letters from non-Jews written in prison camps by Christ following Believers that were never published, and I heard first hand account stories from both sides.

    I mean we could just as well deny the Holocaust of Negros which goes into hundreds of millions over the past few hundred years, and continues to this day by the same people that murdered the Jews, the Gypsies, and all those of darker skin, even the sick, .. and today, it's those collecting more than $600 a month Social Security by either black or white! S.S. is reserved for the SS!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch