I have a question for Sup Forums that I wish to get a genuine answer for...

I have a question for Sup Forums that I wish to get a genuine answer for. Why do y'all conflate anybody who calls something out as racist, sexist, xenophobic, etc. with people who like to cream their pants over getting righteously angry at others regardless of whether or not the argument is valid or of any consequence (SJW's)? I mean, it's not like pointing out one or two things means you're an annoying asshole, after all.

the actual truth no one will tell you is that pol are SJWs. not the sjws called sjws, but rather, their behavior and subversive action and tactics are completely identical, they just have a completely different worldview and goal. see diversification on tumblr and maga photoedits here for trump and other political aims.

Calling something out as racist, sexist, xenophobic, etc. is creaming their pants over getting righteously angry at others regardless of whether or not the argument is valid or of any consequence. It's not atrificial conflation; these are simply equivalent.
>no u
pic related. It's you.

interesting

it effectively gets shouted down though. there are different ways of stifling arguments.

*shouted down with many people just trolling in the comments, making it difficult for any real discourse to occur.

It isn't an argument. It's infantile name-calling, and deserves no more than to be treated as such. People who go around calling people shit like "racist" or "bigot" deserve no more respect than, and are ideologically no different from, SJWs.

also, you're saying nobody outside of the affected can criticize racism, or any of those other detestable things for that matter?

Because the overlap between the two groups is that great. Take yesterday, for example, the amount of hateful misandrists came out of the woodwork was insane.

Affected by what? And no, criticism and defining things as "detestable" without providing an argument as to why that is actually the truth, is deserving of zero respect or consideration.
Don't listen to this idiot. "They're the same" is just a rationalization to compensate for non-substantive understanding.

i would agree. however, there is a distinct difference between those who provide rational arguments and get shit like "lol beta cuck other side of the wall for you" flooding their comment sections (effectively drowning out real conversation so much that it becomes impossible to follow) and people who get triggered over meaningless bullshit who get the exact same shit.

affected by whatever is being criticized. seriously, if you have to provide an argument why blatant racism is a problem, well then, i doubt any conversation being had is valuable anyway. i would absolutely agree that providing evidence as to WHY something is racist is important, but it's a pretty universally held notion that that shit ain't cool.

I don't think you understand his point... I think he's talking about your pic, not the comment you wrote.

i was talking about both

It's racist (or phobic or whatever other "ist"). And? What's your point?

People who try to support their 'arguments' by appealing to emotion and to the stone, such as by saying things like "It's obvious that is detestable, [therefore I'm correct]," don't use or have rational arguments. People will be trolled regardless of whether you have a rational argument, and regardless of what it is you argue, and if you have no rational arguments, then that's all you'll receive. Many people here have heard retarded leftist arguments over and over, to the point that engaging in the same old debate is simply less lulzy than triggering leftist retards.
>if you have to provide an argument why blatant racism is a problem, well then, i doubt any conversation being had is valuable anyway.
>I don't have to provide an argument. I'm just obviously right.
This is an appeal to the stone fallacy. If you have no rational arguments for your beliefs, it follows you have no rational basis for your beliefs. Your notion that "Racism is just bad. period" is nothing but an appeal to emotion and regurgitation of indoctrination. Even the word "racist" is a faulty syllogism and a rhetorical tautology, because it connotes the "racist" as being wrong by definition. "Racism" is really just pattern recognition.
>it's a pretty universally held notion that that shit ain't cool.
This is an appeal to the people fallacy. The reason leftists tend to be wrong about pretty much everything is because you don't even recognize the logical fallaciousness in your own thinking. Your emotions and what you've been fed by the sensationalistic media do not dictate what is true, important, or meaningful.

there's nothing wrong with any kind of prejudice, thus calling someone racist, sexist, whatever means nothing.

Then tell me why racism is an issue, when one race can be clearly superior to another as evidenced in bell curves, anecdotes and history.

please make it less obvious that you're a woman.

i see somebody took philosophy 101. okay, then. people are given basic rights when they live in a civil society. if they didn't you would not be alive to be able to post here on Sup Forums today. just because a person comes from a different place does not mean they have any less fundamental rights when they come into that society. ergo, any method of seeking to violate said rights without justifiable cause while IN that society, e.g. skin color or nationality of origin, does not predispose that that person should have any less rights, as it is not a provable, justifiable reason for relinquishment of said rights, so long as that society claims "all are created equal". regardless of the society, please provide evidence as to why any society should equate skin color or nationality of origin as a basis for less rights if that person has not done anything wrong?

am real doggo

I don't know what you mean by "rights."

>skin color and nationality isn't a justifiable cause
If you've come in illegally, you've done something wrong.

privileges

...

i love how you conveniently leave out the "if that person has not done anything wrong" part

interesting take

While there are demonstrable, objective differences between races, acknowledging such doesn't mean one believes any race should have less privileges than another. Let it be clear there is a difference between race and illegal immigration status.

basically this. all the liberals on Sup Forums ever seem to do is whine about how bigoted we are and ad hom with ancient redneck and basement dweller memes. it's a very superficial engagement.

And what if their friends have done something wrong? Their brothers? What if their entire race has a habit of doing things wrong? If one in ten ahmeds has intent to blow himself up in front of a dozen or so whites who've done nothing wrong, is that not good cause to stop taking them in by the trillions?

Racial differences mean that there will be inherent privileges in a merit based society, the problem is when shitlibs try to "correct" for natural advantages using the state as a club against the intelligent and successful

silly goy, patterns don't exist! you must treat every achmed and jamal as if he were a blank slate! you're not a racist, are you, goy?

Shit, how could I have forgotten Mr.Schlomostein, here's your tip.
Also check'd

>Anecdotes and history
you don't understand anthing about history, try reading anything by james burke

>(((british)))
>(((historian)))
>(((science)))
Top rape my dude

Saying that something is sexist, or racist, or xenophobic is not an argument, and assumes that discrimination is a bad thing
> protip: it's not

Genuine racism doesn't exist in America the way people think it does. It's entirely toned down to a verbal form of abuse here. No one is really going around and killing niggers because they're niggers. But we'll quickly kill a nigger if they act like a nigger. And even the word nigger in itself, doesn't apply solely to black people. Its a genuine discription for lawless people with subhuman tendencies. Now, it very much applies to the vast majority of blacks, but any other race can be a nigger as well. It's more or less become like the word faggot in todays context.

What SJW's are doing, is making assumptions. And thats what pisses people off the most. They assume, that in ANY context, words should be policed just because they either once caused harm, or could cause harm in the wrong context. This also harms the actual violent abusive factors behind some words, causing actual racist tendencies associated with it, to be covered in a fog of war, so to say.

So yes, no one outside the affected can criticize racism, because racism is no longer verbal thanks to SJW's. Racism is context in actions, not in speech. Lets say I'm a spic, I can run down a street, find the nearest black and beat the shit out of him while screaming "FUCK YOU NIGGER!" or, I could scream "SPANISH LIVES MATTER!" Which one seems like racism to a SJW more? The "Fuck you nigger". Why? Because it has racial overtone to it. The "Spanish lives matter" is overlooked, even though it in itself, is racist as fuck. Now apply this logic to BLM when they attack whites while screaming "Black Lives Matter". To the left, it doesn't appear racist. To us, it's fucking racist, because we take context into consideration. The left doesn't. They focus on words and the overall meaning. And to them, saying the right string of words, can justify ANY action, even terrorism, as we quickly are seeing from ANTIFA groups.