(05-18-2022 05:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 03:24 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 03:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 03:12 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 03:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  They're one in the same to me, as you don't get to the white ethno-state without mass murder.

Hence, loaded question.

Not in the slightest. And definitely nowhere close to asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

One question implies the person being asked is doing something atrocious. The other doesn't make the same implication.

Maybe I'm just not seeing it - explain how it's loaded and puts the person being asked in a position where they're being accused of harboring a horrible idea or having perpetrated a heinous act like beating someone's wife.

If I took the bait and answered "I disagree" to the question as phrased would I be implying I don't believe that white nationalism incites race hatred and violence?

Not really - it would mean you don't think it ends in mass murder, and you would have the entire runway to explain why.

To your question, do you think white nationalism incites race hatred and violence? If so, do you think that mass murder is not included in that violence?

From what I know about white nationalism, violence and mass murder are pretty much engrained in the ideology, so I'm legitimately interested in, as I am inferring, you don't think it leads specifically to mass murder.

White nationalism runs the gamut from genocide to apartheid. For example, although segregationism is repugnant, it's highly inaccurate to characterize segregationists as mass murderers. Presumably they'd use force to impose segregationism, but that's not the same at all. South AFrica maintained apartheid for years without resorting to genocide.

I really can't agree with you, at all, that this guy is "representative" of white nationalists for the simple reason that they aren't all writing manifestos and committing mass murder. Not only that, but this guy is a lone gunman, not acting on behalf of any organization - he isn't "representing" anybody.

Is it fair to say that the Khmer Rouge are "representative" of Marxism, or that mass murder is the inevitable outcome of Marxism? That's the same logic you're using.

You're overextended in your efforts to attribute this nutbar's actions to white nationalism, and the logical inconsistencies in your argument are yours to rationalize.