Police in the town of Savage, Minnesota, are now investigating an attack on a little girl at a local school by assailants, schoolchildren, who told officials they beat her up because "she wasn't Muslim."
I have, both rarely have violent incidences and are not a threat to society.
You still don’t get your comparison doesn’t work because you can’t claim one isn’t a threat when one is literally baked into society and one is a religion which only some members interpret the teachings of with the justification of violence.
I feel like a skipping record because you keep circling back to trying to claim your comparison is ok because you don’t see how entrenched racism (and in part white supremacy) is baked into society, without giving any further data points beyond “it’s rare”.
In other words, you can’t stop focusing on prevalence of violent attacks between the two organized groups because in your mind, that’s all there is.
First you’re wrong. But before I prove you wrong, you need the put the two things you’re trying (horribly) to compare on equal footing in some way that makes some damn sense.
Muslims are not all violent.
You claim there are good white supremacists.
So give me an example of a good white supremacist. Otherwise, your comparison makes no sense and isn’t even worth arguing.
Now it’s your turn to answer a question.
Just as soon as you answer mine. I asked you first.
How do nonviolent Muslims make the violent ones less of a threat to society?
You’ve asked this before. What you’re missing is the existence of “good” white supremacists (which you’ve yet to prove exist) do not make the advantages white people have in society due to the result of historical white supremacy any better for POC. But one is MUCH more prevalent than the other.
How prevalent you ask?
Show me yours and I’ll show you mine. Show me the prevalence of “good” white supremacists, and I’ll show you how common white supremacy and racial bias is in our world.
How does this go way beyond basic prevalence?
I just told you. One is a religion of which only a fraction of the word belongs to, and of them only a sect of them believes in using violence to spread their message.
The other has become more than just a single group or organization, and is now baked into our way of life.
You still don’t get your comparison doesn’t work because you can’t claim one isn’t a threat when one is literally baked into society and one is a religion which only some members interpret the teachings of with the justification of violence.
This is where you provide evidence
In other words, you can’t stop focusing on prevalence of violent attacks between the two organized groups because in your mind, that’s all there is.
Both threats are overblown and used as propaganda, that’s the common link.
You claim there are good white supremacists.
Back to this lie, I never claimed that there was a good white supremists. You have yet to provide where I made this claim.
The other has become more than just a single group or organization, and is now baked into our way of life.
Still waiting for evidence that white supremacy is now baked into out way of life.
What game? I’m trying to game a serious discussion and help you make am ironclad argument so I can respond to it appropriately.
Response to your comment below because your inability to understand the basics of debating combined with your need to constantly belittle anyone with a different opinion seems to have caused us to hit the thread limit:
Hahaha for a guy who likes to take digs on the reading comprehension of others yours isn’t any better.
You’ve got maybe half of it, that I’m asking for A because B but I’ve already explained why B is B. If you can’t understand than I guess you’re the one who’s gotta go back to 5th grade.
I’ll distill your circular logic. Hopefully it’s simple enough for you to grasp.
You have to provide A (good white supremists) because of B (comparison between white supremists violence and Muslim violence is invalid) but I won’t provide evidence of B until you provide A.
This is the game your playing because you don’t have evidence of B.
You still don’t get your comparison doesn’t work because you can’t claim one isn’t a threat when one is literally baked into society and one is a religion which only some members interpret the teachings of with the justification of violence.
I feel like a skipping record because you keep circling back to trying to claim your comparison is ok because you don’t see how entrenched racism (and in part white supremacy) is baked into society, without giving any further data points beyond “it’s rare”.
In other words, you can’t stop focusing on prevalence of violent attacks between the two organized groups because in your mind, that’s all there is.
First you’re wrong. But before I prove you wrong, you need the put the two things you’re trying (horribly) to compare on equal footing in some way that makes some damn sense.
Muslims are not all violent.
You claim there are good white supremacists.
So give me an example of a good white supremacist. Otherwise, your comparison makes no sense and isn’t even worth arguing.
Just as soon as you answer mine. I asked you first.
You’ve asked this before. What you’re missing is the existence of “good” white supremacists (which you’ve yet to prove exist) do not make the advantages white people have in society due to the result of historical white supremacy any better for POC. But one is MUCH more prevalent than the other.
How prevalent you ask?
Show me yours and I’ll show you mine. Show me the prevalence of “good” white supremacists, and I’ll show you how common white supremacy and racial bias is in our world.
I just told you. One is a religion of which only a fraction of the word belongs to, and of them only a sect of them believes in using violence to spread their message.
The other has become more than just a single group or organization, and is now baked into our way of life.
This is where you provide evidence
Both threats are overblown and used as propaganda, that’s the common link.
Back to this lie, I never claimed that there was a good white supremists. You have yet to provide where I made this claim.
Still waiting for evidence that white supremacy is now baked into out way of life.
Sorry, it’s not on the other party to prove your point for you. It’s on you.
Can’t defend your point or accusations you’ve made.
Says the guy who still hasn’t defended his yet.
I’m ready to go with mine as soon as you defend yours.
You’re not, your playing this little game because you know you can’t defend your position.
What game? I’m trying to game a serious discussion and help you make am ironclad argument so I can respond to it appropriately.
Response to your comment below because your inability to understand the basics of debating combined with your need to constantly belittle anyone with a different opinion seems to have caused us to hit the thread limit:
Hahaha for a guy who likes to take digs on the reading comprehension of others yours isn’t any better.
You’ve got maybe half of it, that I’m asking for A because B but I’ve already explained why B is B. If you can’t understand than I guess you’re the one who’s gotta go back to 5th grade.
I’ll distill your circular logic. Hopefully it’s simple enough for you to grasp.
You have to provide A (good white supremists) because of B (comparison between white supremists violence and Muslim violence is invalid) but I won’t provide evidence of B until you provide A.
This is the game your playing because you don’t have evidence of B.