polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2016 at 11:40am:



Recognising racial, lingusistic, cultural differences is a normal and good thing. We all do it. No use denying the obvious.

Arabs are a race, a linguistic group and a culture, with some variation. The point - they are NOT Scandinavians, Brits, Chinese, Russians, etc.

Do Muslim Arabs have a habit of marrying their cousins for tribal reasons? Yes.
Do Australians, Europeans, Canadians marry their cousins for tribal reasons? No - unless they are Muslim Arabs.

Muslim Arabs have a negative cultural influence on every Western country they migrate to. That's the long and the short of all this argy-bargy, Gandalf - how does an evidently superior culture, the West, resist an evidently inferior culture, Islam, without appearing impolite.
It's an impossibility, Gandalf, I am telling you.

Islam is an inferior culture in every aspect- but we pretend it isn't because most Muslims are also afflicted with a 'racial' identity which they mine and exploit to the fullest extent. You are  case in point precisely because you are white. You are sensitive to Muslim race because you a white Muslim.

But Islam would be as inferior if it was entirely and exclusively an Icelandic creed. Islam is a bad creed not because most of its adherents are non-white, but because it IS a bad creed. You just divert from the badness of the creed by endless reference to 'race'.


A ginger Muslim is as stupid and misguided as a dark one.  It's the creed, stupid, not the race.

Gordon wrote on Jan 11^th, 2017 at 8:50pm:


I know. You're quite scary, Gordon.

FD?

Karnal wrote on Jan 11^th, 2017 at 10:02pm:


Is it the swastika tat on my neck?

Quote:


But only if they want to?

Quote:


Here's another one Gandalf. Like Moses, he thinks all Muslims are idiots. Is that racist? Do we need to ask him whether they were born idiots before we can decide? Or does he really mean African when he says ginger?

freediver wrote on Jan 11^th, 2017 at 7:13pm:


Best stick to what I actually say FD (that line never gets old does it). Also, you'll have to explain the Aborigine analogy. Makes no sense to me.

Quote:


Thats your narrative FD, not Aussies. You can't simply accuse someone of being racist based on your interpretation of the background history. The best you can say is that Aussie is ignorant of history or even deluded - but he is not being racist.

Quote:


No its a silly example that makes no sense. No one in England is suffering because of 'white ownership'. It is not a third-world backwater that has suffered decades of colonialism from foreign hegemons, nor is it a cesspool of political instability as a direct result of this colonialism - that continues to this day.


Quote:


Lebensraum arguments may conceivably be non-racist. It would be a massive stretch, but I suppose its possible. However to suggest that arguments for mass genocide along racial grounds could conceivably exclude racial superiority as the justification is the height of absurdity. Just to clarify, are you still contending that advocating mass genocide along racial grounds could possibly exclude superiority as a justification?


Quote:


I simply don't get this line of inquiry over what moses "intended". Whatever he intended, his statement is the height of stupidity - and racist: if he was thinking of me when he said all muslims are intellectually disabled, then he is casting baseless assertions about my IQ and/or my personal heritage (which in any case is not even Islamic) - and simply dismissing me as part of the mindless collective, that is the Islamic world to him. If he wasn't thinking of me, then it just proves he is describing muslims according to his (demonstrably untrue) stereotype - which, dare I say it, is a 'racialised' caricature.

In short, his 'intentions' regarding his racist statement could not possibly get him a 'get out of gaol free' card in terms of not being racist. If anything, his intentions just confirm the racist nature of his comment one way or another.


Quote:


Again, moses' fantasy world where the entire muslim population is intellectually disabled through inbreeding - is only possible by having a 'purebred race of recessive retards'. Go read your Mendelian genetics

Best stick to what I actually say FD (that line never gets old does it).

You did actually say that. Do I need to quote you again? Have you abandoned your argument that it is racist to say people who are born stupid are more likely to adopt Islam, but it is not racist to say that people who are willfully stupid are more likely to adopt Islam? Can I take your dodging as a Muslim version of yes?

Quote:


It is discrimination on the basis of race. Aborigines get better treatment under Australian law. Could that only be motivated by notions of aboriginal superiority?

Quote:


The background history is irrelevant to whether what he says is racist.

Quote:


No, but saying the European but not Arab Jews should ferk orf is racist.

Quote:


I am not asking whether it makes sense. I am asking whether it is racist. Stop being such a Muslim and try giving a straight answer. If someone suggested all non-whites should be kicked out of England, not out of a sense of superiority, but merely 'white ownership' of the Island and discontent with past policy, would that be racist?

Quote:


How is this relevant to whether it is racist? Are you adding cesspool to your definition of racism, as well as correct interpretation of history (ie, blaming the west)?

Quote:


Can you give an example of one you would consider non-racist?

Quote:


Sure. I gave an example earlier. Not everyone feels the need to dress collective self interest up as something else.

Quote:


Let me explain. It is not racist because you agree that Muslim is not a race, and if Moses intended to include you then it is not a "marker" for a race either, which is the only basis you gave earlier for including religious groups in racism.

Quote:


The "racialised caricature" is what you argued before when you insisted a religion is not actually a race and not a basis of racism, unless it is a "racial marker". If this is not the case - ie if Moses did in fact intend to include all Muslims regadless of race - how is it racist?

Quote:


Is this not what you argued when you insisted what he said is racist because he used Muslim as a "racial marker'?

Quote:


In other words, you insist on defining criticism of Islam as racism regardless of the racial content of the criticism. One by one you discard every distinction you have made about what is racist and what is not racist - born vs willfully stupid, racial marker etc - because your only goal is to racialise criticism of Islam and prop up the Islamic victimhood industry.

Quote:


He did not say intellectually disabled. Your fantasy Gandalf.

Quote:


No it is not. You suggested a far more plausible explanation.

Quote:


You conceded you were wrong about the inbreeding genetics, but kept it very vague. What exactly were you wrong about?

Quote:


Does being free to do what they like include maintaining a state there called Israel that is dominated by jews including a large number of jews of recent European ancestry?

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2017 at 7:07pm:


You think?

Quote:


Is this the only 'actual' change you are proposing?

Quote:


Just the European ones? Or all the Jews?