Brive1987 wrote: ↑Overall, this exercise has demonstrated to me that not even liberals will hold out charity to their ideological enemies. Nuance, subtlety and the teasing out of complex ideas is as prescribed here by some, as anywhere else. Issues are comfortably black and white when you have the certainty of objective right and wrong.
Says the guy who thinks that civil libertarians and SJWs are one and the same, all "libtards".
Also some ideas ARE morally wrong, period. Genocide is one of them. I'm talking about real genocide here, not the alt-right word games about how immigration of non-white people to Europe is "white genocide".
Curious how the alt-righters want to appropriate the "genocide" label to paint immigration under the worst possible light, as if "genocide" was associated with the worst possible level of evil, while they're eager to dismiss calls for genocide on their side, from people who have ties to political entities implicated in a war of aggression, as "jokes".
Plus there is a hair-trigger for these professed rationalists that quickly kicks the debate into an emotional tail spin. With tears.
Absolutely intriguing.
Yes, we, the ones who point out that Dugin wants a genocide of cretins/a bastard race in the Ukraine, all while the Russian government is involved in a war in the Ukraine, are the overly triggered and emotional ones.
The people who can't stand the sight of Chinese or Indians in Australia, because it's killing their ethno-state nostalgia, are incredibly rational.