Not that this will matter to you, but I'm going to point it out anyway: you wrote exactly what I anticipated you would.
(What does that say about you?)
Quote:
|
Come on, bud. If Rush, O'Reilly, and plenty of Republicans across the country can call the antiglobalization rioters "liberal extremists", I can call Republican extremists Rethugnicans.
|
"Because other people are racist, it is okay if I am racist."
Quote:
|
The person believes the ideas of the party and generally agrees with the party platform. Therefore, disagreesing with a person because of their political party is the same as disagreement about a person's point of view.
|
So how does this correlate to calling members of a specific political party "thugs" when that has nothing to do with their party line?
You're not saying "I disagree with most aspects of the Republican party line." You are essentially saying "Republicans are thugs", which is as silly as me saying "Democrats are rapists". It has nothing to do with anything.
Some Republicans are thugs; some Democrats are rapists. Saying all have a common trait (besides their political party) is laying the groundwork for racist thought.
Quote:
|
If I said, "I call the rabidly jingoistic subpopulation of the Republican party 'Rethugnicans'."
|
<b>If</b> you said that. You didn't.
Quote:
|
This is an ad hominem attack.
|
Actually, it's not. It is a statement of fact. An ad hominem attack is one that is used to discredit a person instead of their argument. Stating that I think you're an idiot has nothing to do with our argument; I was simply clarifying my position.
Quote:
|
This is stereotyping. I guess you must be a racist, too - by your reckoning. If you say that black people all support the Rainbow coalition or that they all love watermelon because you've "seen it hundreds of times before", you must be a racist.
|
This is the big one that I knew you wouldn't pass up - which is fortunate, because your reasoning is ludicrous.
You are exhibiting a trait that is only exhibited by a certain sub-population of people. By identifying that trait, I can say that you are a part of that population.
To put it into the racism terms that I have been applying, it would be the equivalent of saying "You are black, so you must be a black person."
Is this clear? You jump in here and add yourself to the group; I just publicly identify it. If you stole a bike, I could safely call you a bike thief. This isn't stereotyping; it is a demonstrable behavior.
Quote:
|
I love how you equate a statement I made - directed at a certain subpopulation - with racism. What I love more is that you bring up these nasty little sterotypes to bolster your opinion. Who is really the racist here?
|
The examples I provided exist to demonstrate the line of thought that the racist mind follows. All three are, of course, demonstrably false.
Here is a good example of an ad hominem attack, however - implying that I am a racist. Whereas I said that your line of reasoning is the same type that is used by racists, you are clearly asking a rhetorical question to instill in other readers the notion that I am racist. This argument, too, completely misses the boat. The rest of the quoted post was written in such a way to show how absurd racist notions are, and to show how absurd it is to call one group of persons a collective name that has nothing to do with their similarity. But you just keep on thinking that was a clever twist of my words.
Quote:
|
What makes you think I am a sheep?
|
Because I don't believe any intelligent being could question views such as yours and still believe them afterward.