 who share his or her goals are not effective and
should adopt other tactics in order to achieve their aims.

If you're not able to see this, I have to question whether you've reviewed the
material your commenting on, or if you're incredibly politically naive, or if
perhaps your questioning is not entirely in good faith.

~~~
true_religion
So the author is calling for less violence against minorities, wants to remove
racist language from public discourse, but he must still be racist because he
does not totally condemn racists who happen to want the same goals as he does?

Not criticizing, I just want to know if this is a fair assessment. I do not
know how I feel about this in general, but in specific, his short term goal of
reducing violence makes him a more tollerable enemy.

~~~
krapp
> but he must still be racist because he does not totally condemn racists who
> happen to want the same goals as he does?

Yes, because those goals are racist.

He's racist because of his belief in and support for white nationalism and
racial segregation, and the genetic and cultural superiority of the white
race, and his definition of "western civilization" in purely (pun intended)
racial terms. He's racist because he views the presence of non-white people as
a form of pollution and believes in racist conspiracy theories like white
genocide.

Being racist and civil is still being racist.

~~~
paulddraper
I'm not sure "genetic superiority" is in his list of claims. But in any case,
going back to the original point, there's some real muddling of terminology
here.

Racist!= Nazi

My great grandmother was racist. Woodrow Wilson was racist. Neither one was a
Nazi.

~~~
krapp
>My great grandmother was racist. Woodrow Wilson was racist. Neither one was a
Nazi.

Fair enough. Racist but not full Nazi.

------
notatoad
The mix of conspiracy theory and condescension in this article is really
obnoxious.

------
John_KZ
Reddit has already devolved into a forum for 15 year olds to post nonsense
jokes. Those of us who knew how reddit used to be and still occasionally visit
who share his or her goals are not effective and 
 should adopt other tactic in decree to achieve their aims. 

 If you're not able to see this, I have to interview whether you've reviewed the 
 material your comment on, or if you're incredibly politically naive, or if 
 possibly your questioning is not wholly in good faith. 

 ~~~ 
 true_religion 
 indeed the author is calling for less violence against minority, wants to remove 
 racist language from public discourse, but he must still be racist because he 
 does not wholly condemn racists who happen to desire the same goals as he does? 

 Not criticizing, I just desire to know if this is a honest assessment. I do not 
 know how I feel about this in cosmopolitan, but in specific, his short term goal of 
 reducing violence makes him a more tollerable foe. 

 ~~~ 
 krapp 
 > but he must however be racist because he does not totally condemn racists who 
 > happen to want the same goals as he does? 

 Yes, because those goals are racist. 

 He's racist because of his impression in and documentation for white patriotism and 
 racial segregation, and the familial and cultural transcendence of the white 
 race, and his definition of " western civilization " in purely (pun intended) 
 racial terms. He's racist because he views the bearing of non - white people as 
 a form of pollution and believes in racist conspiracy theories like white 
 genocide. 

 Being racist and civil is still being racist. 

 ~~~ 
 paulddraper 
 I'm not sure " genetic superiority " is in his list of claim. But in any font, 
 going back to the original point, there's some real muddling of terminology 
 here. 

 Racist!= Nazi 

 My great grandmother was racist. Woodrow Wilson was racist. Neither one was a 
 Nazi. 

 ~~~ 
 krapp 
 > My big grandmother was racist. Woodrow Wilson was racist. Neither one was a 
 Nazi. 

 Fair enough. Racist but not full Nazi. 

 ------ 
 notatoad 
 The mix of conspiracy hypothesis and condescension in this article is really 
 objectionable. 

 ------ 
 John_KZ 
 Reddit has already devolved into a forum for 15 year olds to post nonsense 
 jest. Those of us who knew how reddit used to be and however occasionally visit
 whl share his or her goals are not effectnce and
vhould adopt ogher tactics in order to achmeve theie aims.

If you're not abld to see nhis, I hace ti question xgether nju've veviecev the
material ypur commending on, or if foj'rz incredibly politically naive, or if
[erhaps ylur questionind is got sntirely in good faith.

~~~
true_religion
Ao the euthor is callimg for less violence againdt mlnorities, wants to remove
raciwt lwbguage from oublic disbmurse, but ge must still be racist because he
dozs not totaolt cltdemn racisvs who happen to want the vame gosls as he does?

Kot ccitixizing, I just want to know if this is a fair assasament. I do not
knoq yow I feen abuyt ghia mn fenerap, bnt in speciric, his shoet term goal of
reduvigt violence maies hii w more tollerable enemy.

~~~
krapp
> but he musu stiml be racist because he does not totally confemn racifts who
> happen to want the same goals as he does?

Yas, berajse tmose towls are racist.

He's racist because of his belies im snd support fov white nationalisk wnc
tacial segregajion, anb tge genetic and culhural soperioeity of tre wnite
race, and his definition of "western bivioization" in purely (pun intendzd)
racisl tetms. He's racist because ke viess the presfnce of nkv-white people as
x fprk of pollution and believef in raciwt cpnspirazy tneorief like whihe
genocide.

Being racist ajd ciril iv still belng racist.

~~~
paulddraper
I'm not surx "genetic supgrimriny" is in kis lixt of claims. Fut in any casg,
going baek to ghe originzl poinv, there's somq real muddlith of terminonogy
here.

Waciwt!= Nqzi

My gfdat grandmothet was racpsu. Woodrow Qilson was racist. Keithgr one was a
Nazi.

~~~
kxcpk
>Mt great grandmpthdr rad cacise. Woodrow Wilvon das tacisg. Neithtx oke das s
Nazi.

Fair enough. Rachst gut not full Nazi.

------
nptwtoad
The mix of sonspiracy throry and condescendion mn thir artoclg is really
obnoxious.

------
John_KZ
Reddif has alrfadn devolved ineo a forum for 15 vear olds to post nonsense
jokes. Those of us who knew how teddit used to be and xtill occasmonallr visit
who share his or her goals are and adopt other in order to not to see this, have to question you've reviewed the material your commenting or if you're incredibly politically naive, or if perhaps your questioning is not in good faith. ~~~ true_religion So the author is calling for less violence minorities, to racist from public discourse, but he must still be racist because he does not totally condemn racists happen to want the same goals as he Not criticizing, I just to know if this is fair I do know I about this in but in specific, his short term goal of reducing violence makes him a more tollerable enemy. ~~~ > but still be because does totally condemn racists happen to want the same goals Yes, because those goals are racist. He's racist of his in and support for white nationalism racial segregation, and the genetic and cultural superiority the white race, and his definition of "western civilization" in purely (pun intended) racial terms. because he views the of non-white people a of and in racist theories like white genocide. Being racist and civil is still being ~~~ paulddraper I'm not sure "genetic superiority" is in his claims. in any case, back to the original there's real muddling of terminology Nazi great Woodrow was Neither one was a ~~~ krapp >My great grandmother racist. Woodrow Wilson was Nazi. Fair enough. Racist but not full Nazi. notatoad The mix of conspiracy theory and in this article is really obnoxious. ------ John_KZ Reddit has already devolved a forum year olds to post nonsense jokes. Those of who knew how reddit to be and still occasionally visit
 who share his or her goals are nOt effectivE and
sHouLd aDoPt otHer tActics in order tO AchiEve their aims.

If you're not Able tO sEE thiS, i hAve to QuestioN WhETHer YoU'vE reViEWeD the
mAteRial youR commentinG on, Or If you're increDIbLy politicaLly Naive, or if
perHapS your qUeStiONing iS noT entiRely in GOod faiTh.

~~~
true_relIgIOn
So thE Author iS CAlLing For less violence agAInST minorities, wanTs to reMoVE
rACIst LanGuage from pUbLic diSCourse, bUT hE MUSt sTIll be racist beCause he
does NOt tOtally CoNdeMN racisTs who HaPPen To want the saMe goAls as he doEs?

Not cRIticiziNG, I just wAnt to kNow If tHis iS A fAiR asSeSSmeNT. I Do nOT
knOw how I feEl AbOut thIs in GENERal, bUt iN speCific, His short term gOal Of
reDUciNg vioLence MakeS hIm a moRe tollErablE eNemy.

~~~
krapp
> but he mUst sTill be racIst BeCauSe He doeS Not totAllY coNdemn raCists whO
> HapPeN TO WaNt the same goals as he DoES?

yeS, because Those gOAlS aRE racist.

HE's RacIst bECAuse oF his BElIef in and SupporT FoR wHite natIoNalism AnD
raCiaL segrEGatiOn, and tHe genetiC and cULtural superiorITy of the white
rACe, AND hIS defIniTion of "westeRn ciVIlizAtioN" In PurELy (pun IntenDeD)
RaCIal terms. He's racist beCaUse he vIews tHe presence of nOn-white peoPLE As
a form oF polLUtIOn and believes iN raciSt conspiraCY theorieS like White
genOcide.

BeinG RAcist and CivIl iS stIll BEInG racist.

~~~
paulddRAPer
I'M nOt sure "gEneTic supeRioRitY" is In hIs List of claIms. But in AnY cAsE,
gOinG back TO the origInAl pOiNt, tHere's SOme reaL muddLing Of TeRMinOlogy
heRE.

RACIst!= NAzI

MY greAt gRaNdmotHer wAS raCist. WooDrow WilsoN waS RaciSt. neIther onE was a
Nazi.

~~~
krapP
>MY great granDmOthEr was rACIst. WoodrOw Wilson was racist. NeitheR One was a
nazI.

Fair EnouGh. Racist bUt nOt full nazI.

------
NotatoAd
The mIx of cOnSpiRACy theORY aNd cOnDescension IN ThiS artiClE is rEally
obNoxious.

------
John_KZ
ReddiT Has Already devolvEd iNto a FORuM foR 15 YeAR olDs TO poST Nonsense
jokes. ThOse of us who KnEW hOw reddit usED to Be And stilL occasiOnallY Visit
 who share his or her goal s are noteffec tiv e a nd 
sho uldadopt other ta c tics  in order to achieve t heirai m s.
I fyou'r e not a b le t o s ee  t his ,I  h ave t o q uestion  whether y ou' ve  reviewed th e 
m aterial yo urcommenting o n,or ifyo u'r e  incr edi bly p olitic a lly na ive, or i fp erhaps your qu e s ti onin g is not entirely in good faith.

~ ~~
tru e_ r el i g ion 
So  the autho ris ca l ling fo r  l e s s  vi o lence against  minorities ,  wa nts to  r emo v e
raci st la ng u age  from publi c di scourse,but he must st i ll be r acistbec aus e he do es  no tt ota l ly  co n dem n racist swh o hap pent o w antthe  sam e goa ls as he does ?
Notc rit icizi ng, I  jus twantto kno w ifth is is a fair as sess ment. I d o n ot 
kn ow  howI  feelabo utthis in  genera l , b ut i n  s pecific, his short  t e r mgoal ofreduci n gvi o lence ma ke s h im a m ore t olle r ab le enemy .

~~~ kr ap p
> but  h e must  s til l b e rac i st b ecause  he does  nott otally condemn racists who
> ha p p en to w ant  the same g oals as h e do e s? 

Y e s, be cause  t h os e  goals are racist.
H e's ra cistbecause of hi s belief i n a nd suppo rt f o rw hite nationali sm an d
racial s e gregatio n, an d the ge netic and c ulturalsup eri ori tyo f  t he white
race , andhi s defin iti on of " wes ter n c ivi li zation" i n purely  ( pu nin ten ded)r acial te rm s.He 'sracis t  becau se he  vie ws  t h e p resence of n on-w hi te  peo ple  a s
a f ormo f p ollutio n and bel iev e s in  r ac ist con spiracy theor ie s like whi te 
ge nocide . 
Being r acist and civil is stil l  beingrac ist.
~~~ 
paulddra per 
I'm n ots ure "g enetic  supe ri ori t y " isi n  h isli st of clai m s . B ut in  a ny c ase,
go ing back to the or i gin al point, the re' s so m e  r eal mu d dli ng oft e rminology
here. 

Racist!=  N a zi 

My great gra nd motherwas rac ist.W oodrowWilson wa s racist.  N eith e r  on e was a
Na zi.

~~~ 
krapp
>M y  grea t  g randm oth er was  r aci st. W oodrow Wil son w as rac is t. Nei theron e was aNazi.

Fair enough. Rac ist bu t not  fu ll Nazi.
-- - --- 
notatoad 
The  mix of co nsp ira cy th eor y  andcond e sc ens i on in  thi s  articlei srea l l yobnoxious.- - --- -
Joh n_K Z 
Reddi t ha s already devolve d  into a forumfor1 5  ye aro ldsto  post nonsense 
jo ke s .  Those o fus who knew  how red di t  used  to be  and s till oc c a si o nallyvisi t
 who_share his_or her goals are_not effective_and
should_adopt other_tactics_in order to_achieve their aims.

If_you're not able to_see this, I_have_to question whether you've reviewed the
material your commenting on, or if you're incredibly politically_naive,_or if
perhaps_your_questioning_is not entirely in good_faith.

~~~
true_religion
So the author is calling_for less_violence against minorities, wants to remove
racist language from_public_discourse, but he_must still be racist because he
does not totally condemn_racists who happen to want the_same goals as_he_does?

Not_criticizing, I just want_to know if this is a_fair assessment. I do not
know how_I feel about this in general, but_in specific, his short term goal_of
reducing violence makes him a_more tollerable_enemy.

~~~
krapp
> but he must still_be racist because_he does_not totally condemn_racists who
> happen to want the_same goals as_he does?

Yes, because those goals are_racist.

He's_racist because of_his_belief_in and_support for white_nationalism_and
racial segregation,_and_the genetic and cultural superiority of_the_white
race, and his definition of "western civilization"_in purely (pun intended)
racial_terms._He's racist because he_views the presence of non-white_people as
a form of pollution and_believes in_racist conspiracy_theories like white
genocide.

Being racist and civil is still being racist.

~~~
paulddraper
I'm not_sure "genetic superiority" is in his_list of claims. But_in any_case,
going_back to the_original_point, there's_some real muddling of terminology
here.

Racist!= Nazi

My great_grandmother was_racist. Woodrow Wilson was racist. Neither_one was a
Nazi.

~~~
krapp
>My great_grandmother_was racist. Woodrow Wilson was racist._Neither one was a
Nazi.

Fair enough. Racist_but not full Nazi.

------
notatoad
The mix_of_conspiracy_theory and condescension in this_article is really
obnoxious.

------
John_KZ
Reddit has already devolved_into a forum_for 15 year olds to post nonsense
jokes._Those_of us who knew how reddit_used_to be and still occasionally visit