They Come to America

[canpakes]

Given the sweeping and broad categorization used in that statement, and the implication that ‘white culture’ can be destroyed, by ‘others’, and that such a thing would be bad, that rant sounds like a weird racist hangup if ever I heard one.

Guess you won't be moderating this thread either, panny.

This is your new way of admitting that you have no argument.

But, feel free to test your assumption. It would be easier for you than answering the question that I put to you above.

[bill4long]

In 2015 Joe Biden said white people becoming less than 50% of the population is "not a bad thing" and would be "a source of our strength."

He didn't mention culture. He mentioned race. And he was clear that the "unending stream of immigation" was to be non-white.

To use your words, it sounds a lot like "weird racism." Anti-white racism.

Did you agree with him, canpakes? Did you vote for him? Show your work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_sSxre-1nA

[canpakes]

In 2015 Joe Biden said white people becoming less than 50% of the population is "not a bad thing" and would be "a source of our strength."

He didn't mention culture. He mentioned race. And he was clear that the "unending stream of immigation" was to be non-white.

To use your words, it sounds a lot like "weird racism." Anti-white racism.

Did you agree with him, canpakes? Did you vote for him? Show your work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_sSxre-1nA

Do you believe that the comment sounds racist or represents racist attitudes?

Can I infer that based on you presenting the example? The question must be asked because this example is not the same as what the Hound account wrote, and the two examples carry different implications.

[bill4long]

In 2015 Joe Biden said white people becoming less than 50% of the population is "not a bad thing" and would be "a source of our strength."

He didn't mention culture. He mentioned race. And he was clear that the "unending stream of immigation" was to be non-white.

To use your words, it sounds a lot like "weird racism." Anti-white racism.

Did you agree with him, canpakes? Did you vote for him? Show your work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_sSxre-1nA

Do you believe that the comment sounds racist or represents racist attitudes?

Sounds racist? It is racist. Unless you don't think white vs non-white is not a question of race. Which would indeed be, as you say, weird.

(Biden was a rich, white, leftist grifter who would do anything for political power, including pander to leftists if it got him support. It makes sense what he did as a politician. But it doesn't matter why he said it. It's was a blantantly (anti-white) racist statement. "Weird" as you say. Just against whites instead of pro whites.)

You didn't answer my questions. Do you agree with him? Did you vote for him?

[canpakes]

Do you believe that the comment sounds racist or represents racist attitudes?

Sounds racist? It is racist. Unless you don't think white vs non-white is not a question of race. Which would indeed be, as you say, weird.

(Biden was a rich, white, leftist grifter who would do anything for political power, including pander to leftists. It makes sense what he did to garner support.)

You didn't answer my questions. Do you agree with him? Did you vote for him?

Biden’s comment asserts that the addition of non-white population is a positive thing. This can mean that there is additional benefit with cultural diversity but does not carry the racist implication that any particular culture is lessened, destroyed or more important.

The Hound account argues that the addition of non-whites is negative because it destroys white culture, implying the negative outcome of a presupposition and without defining what destruction means or whatever white culture is.

One of these is zero-sum thinking, and the other is not. The first would be hard to pin down as racist, whereas the second is unfortunately too easy to identify as racist.

[bill4long]

Biden’s comment asserts that the addition of non-white population is a positive thing. This can mean that there is additional benefit with cultural diversity but does not carry the racist implication that any particular culture is lessened, destroyed or more important.

You can spin it anyway you want. But it was a racist comment.

The Hound account argues that the addition of non-whites is negative because it destroys white culture

Which naturally includes political considerations. Thus a reason beyond mere race.

... implying the negative outcome of a presupposition and without defining what destruction means or whatever white culture is.

White people tend to vote more to the right-of-center than othe races. Thus race is a useful proxy for political outcomes. I am not speaking for Hound, but Hound may not want the country to go in the direction that s/he suspects is likely to go if non-whites end up being the absolute majority.

One of these is zero-sum thinking, and the other is not. The first would be hard to pin down as racist, whereas the second is unfortunately too easy to identify as racist.

Only if you're in denial of the political ramifications of whites becoming the absolute minority and why right-of-center whites might be opposed to that occurring.

[canpakes]

One of these is zero-sum thinking, and the other is not. The first would be hard to pin down as racist, whereas the second is unfortunately too easy to identify as racist.

Only if you're in denial of the political ramifications of whites becoming the absolute minority and why right-of-center whites might be opposed to that occurring.

The other statements are not too relevant other than confirming that you see Hound’s comment as racist, based on the reasoning you’ve just added.

This comment above, however, is relevant. What is it that ‘right-of-center whites’ have to fear from a shift in demographics?

[Whiskey]

Only if you're in denial of the political ramifications of whites becoming the absolute minority and why right-of-center whites might be opposed to that occurring.

The other statements are not too relevant other than confirming that you see Hound’s comment as ...

It never ends and it is always the same. Bill, it is a waste of your time. Every conversation is the same. panny decides what you think and what your conclusions are. No conversation is ever about anything other than what he declares you think or do. Facts be damned. If you address his point, well, too bad for you he has a different conclusion that he knows you made that is also incorrect and that you failed to refute. It is a cercle jirk, at best.

[canpakes]

The other statements are not too relevant other than confirming that you see Hound’s comment as ...

It never ends and it is always the same. Bill, it is a waste of your time. Every conversation is the same. panny decides what you think and what your conclusions are. No conversation is ever about anything other than what he declares you think or do. Facts be damned. If you address his point, well, too bad for you he has a different conclusion that he knows you made that is also incorrect and that you failed to refute. It is a cercle jirk, at best.

How will Biden’s statement be racist if Hound’s is not? Use Bill’s conditions above.

Thanks.

[Whiskey]

It never ends and it is always the same. Bill, it is a waste of your time. Every conversation is the same. panny decides what you think and what your conclusions are. No conversation is ever about anything other than what he declares you think or do. Facts be damned. If you address his point, well, too bad for you he has a different conclusion that he knows you made that is also incorrect and that you failed to refute. It is a cercle jirk, at best.

How will Biden’s statement be racist if Hound’s is not? Use Bill’s conditions above.

Thanks.

No idea retardo. No idea. Is there something you would like to say? Use the English language above.

This is your chance to say something. Because I damn sure did not say that Biden's statement is racist if Hound's is not. You pulled that assertion out of your damned ass, again. It never damned ends with your retarded logic and needling arguments.