Sal Paradise wrote:
No I don't - he called me a racist - completely unfounded allegation. He gets what he deserves IMO...
As I have quite clearly stated, I'm not sure that you are a racist, but picking up and running with a racist argument doesn't help you.
To suggest that all those nasty kaffirs are so bad that maybe it was better when they were still kept in their place – which you did – is not actually going to convince people that you are not personally a racist. It's not an intelligent 'argument'.
And it's sophistry to play the line of: 'oh, those Africans are all so bad, blah, blah' – an argument that you decided to suggest was interesting – when the same accusations can be laid at every other continent on planet Earth.
I raised all this, entirely politely, and you have made not a single effort to respond properly beyond another boring martyrdom routine.
There's also a certain irony, since you're one (not the only one, but are one among a number) who harp on about 'socialists' and 'supposed socialists' (TM) etc, regardless of whether the individual concerned regards themselves as a socialist or not: that you're now crying about comparable behaviour either indicates an extraordinary lack of awareness or simply double standards.
Sal Paradise wrote:
He is typical of the lefty chattering classes on here - you cannot criticise anything that involves a non-white person without being labelled a racist, its pathetic. Anybody with a right wing leaning is a Neo-Liberal!!
I very much doubt that you understand what neo-liberalism is (it's not a proper noun for starters).
Sal Paradise wrote:
... They all gang together - perceived gravitas by association - and in the end they kill the debate most threads on here are dominated by HIM, Mintball, Graham, Mr Fish, FA, Wiz all of which have a very similar outlook on matters. The fun is to prod a stick at such entrenched thought processes and stir up the hornet's nest.
I'm not sure whether this is more pathetic or just farcical.
On the Domino's thread you pointed out that bullying behaviour happens in other workplaces and situations, and admitted that you can let fly if things go wrong at your place of work.
And yet here you are whinging like a spoiled little brat about people 'ganging up on you'.
What you actually mean is that more than one person has dared to disagree with you and to challenge your posts and since you haven't got a concrete response to the actual points raised (see above) you need to claim it's all unfair etc etc ad nauseum.
That's not 'ganging up' – but then, you recently claimed that anyone who 'challenges' me gets banned, which either means that you're succinctly unchallenging, by your own definition, or you were simply making another paranoid claim that has no foundation in reality.
