Debate user BoxerShorts47 on "strawmans" and logical fallacies, definitions of ephebophilia, how to MAGA, religion, Sailor Moon and more

[Heckler1]

And then coming to the internet equivalent of Statler and Waldorf and expecting them to be your nigger-killing Nazi personal army

I would watch that muppet movie tbh

 

[soft kitty]

This thread is still going? Lmao

 

[FuckedUp]

Do I get bonus points for it being 3 AM?

 

[soft kitty]

View attachment 1354783
Do I get bonus points for it being 3 AM?

Big brain time.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

If you've done a pisspoor job convincing a bunch of low level trolls you're kicking their ass, what makes you think you stand a chance against the average political figure, who is likely even more experienced in blowing off smartasses trying to dominate the conversation?

And it's not the shitlib political figures you need to win over, you need to change the minds of their constituents as well draw in people you want to be on the same side of in enough of a majority to be elected. That, and you need the funding to spread your message enough so everyone will give a crap.

That's Public Speaking and Politics 101, and if you can't get that right, you're screwed.

Avg political figure just repeats talking points. Less adept than spergs on the internet.

Preaching to the choir. You win over constituents by defeating the other side. By winning the debate against the liberals. That's the first step and neither Sargon's liberalists, the alt-light or alt-right did a good enough job winning the debate.

 

[FuckedUp]

1 & 2. SAT tests are an acceptable proxy for IQ and the data is clear. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9gs5v3pv The fact that UC system is going to drop test scores is proof positive that IQ is real and they have no way to "close the gap" through education. I think this is settled science at this point.

Could also be that it's easier to blame the standardized test than the gap in education quality.

3. How come Asians have higher scores than white? And living conditions could be used to explain 1 generation's performance but not inter-generational. If you had bad parents, that'll really affect you at age 10 or 20 but as you get 30 or 40+ the effects of environment or early life decrease. You can go back to school, community college, browse github, etc. Look at Jews. They had discrimination against them, they had to create their own Jewish colleges and now they outperform whites just like Asians.

A. Inner-city schools have been shit for generations. Societal factors can last for much longer than a single generation. And nearly everyone takes the SAT at 16-18, not after 30.
B. Blacks have faced much more discrimination and a bigger uphill battle than Asians and Jews. The vast majority of African Americans are descendants of slaves.

4. You're racist. Look you have to LOVE black culture. You got no right to criticize black culture using non afro-normative criteria because that's not being culturally relative and if you don't respect multiculturalism, that makes you racist.

Stop being autistic.

5. No, having to plan for winter increased the natural selection for high time preference behavior,.

Uhh...pretty sure you got that backward:

Someone with a high time preference is focused substantially on their well-being in the present and the immediate future relative to the average person, while someone with low time preference places more emphasis than average on their well-being in the further future.

Also, having good foresight is a sign of intelligence. EDIT: This was probably referring to Europe.

Now that I answered your question. I want you to answer 2 questions.

1. Is there ever a point when you admit that blacks are not the same as whites? Is there ever a point when you judge them based on the content of their character? Is there a point when you say diversity doesn't work?
2. Will you acknowledge that human sacrifices are part of your diversity experiment? That disproportionate white lives will be lost through black crime, brown crime or Muslin terrorism and likewise unnecessary blacks or Muslims will die when white nationalists get upset that their nation is being taken away and start to fight back?

1. No, I prefer judging people based on how they behave as an individual. That's the "content of their character."
2. Maybe, but I'd say fixing urban schools and providing better support would do wonders.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

View attachment 1354783
Do I get bonus points for it being 3 AM?

no. Now answer the questions I asked you.

1. Is there ever a point when you admit that blacks are not the same as whites? Is there ever a point when you judge them based on the content of their character? Is there a point when you say diversity doesn't work?
2. Will you acknowledge that human sacrifices are part of your diversity experiment? That disproportionate white lives will be lost through black crime, brown crime or Muslin terrorism and likewise unnecessary blacks or Muslims will die when white nationalists get upset that their nation is being taken away and start to fight back?

This is from way back since this thread moves a mile a minute with your meth posting, but I have to respond to your shitty history.

No, most genocides that were properly recorded only occurred post 1900. Maybe the fact that "genocide" is a word that was only invented in the 20th century has something to do with that. Maybe the lack of written records among early peoples is another reason. Most paleontologists will tell you that early tribes were wiping each other out all the time in the stone and bronze ages. And of course there's also the prominent theory that Homo Sapiens got rid of Homo Neanderthalensis by a combination of genocide and breeding out.


In what way is the big loser of the ideological struggle of the first half of the 20th century the "foundations" of a modern 21st century society? It's clearly not the foundations of any country that currently exists.

As much as you view yourself as the antithesis of SJW's, you latch onto some of their most retarded ideas, like "being on the right side of history." Guess what? There is no "right side of history." History doesn't give a fuck about your feelings.

And as much as you gush about how China is a new rising superpower, China doesn't follow your model of how you think a state should be set up. Literally no country does. The one that came closest was Nazi Germany, which lasted only twelve years before getting its absolute shit kicked. If you're going to use the "laboratory of history" argument, your ideas have already been tried and failed. A more pluralist type of fascism under Franco in Spain and communism were both vastly more successful, and western republic governments outlived both of them.


America absolutely fucking was a global super power before 1917, you mongoloid (and I say that in more than one sense). The Spanish-American War, the Filipino-American War, the Eight-Nation Alliance in China, Japan courting America to train its newly modernizing army. You are categorically wrong. By WW1 America had absolutely established itself as one of the great powers of the world, and every other power that mattered knew it.

You've clearly learn some history, then proceeded to fill the very large gaps in your knowledge with made up bullshit that you thought sounded right and smart but is completely wrong.

Also, what does any of this autistic rambling have to do with white nationalism? You're proving your ignorance and you don't even need to.


The entire world? What happened to your beloved China? That's a failed liberal democracy too?

Several of these conflicts are completely unequal. The Ukraine doesn't stand a chance against Russia in a full blown war. Ditto Taiwan against China or Palestine against Israel. Those will be very short conflicts. More likely with Ukraine and Taiwan, they'll work out some kind of unequal truce. Taiwan especially has things China is going to be sorely wanting in the event of an American collapse.

BTW, America also looks a lot like the Roman Republic did during the years leading up to it becoming the Roman Empire. It went on to become far more influential than it had in the Republic days and lasted for far longer. And it wasn't an ethnostate.


Nobody is ever giving up on the "moral" claim to "peace in the middle east." Do you know why? Because it's a moral claim being used to cover for something much more practical: oil. The oil has to keep flowing to fuel modernity. And if the USA collapses tomorrow, do you know who's going to ensure it keeps flowing? Russia. Russia is already shoring up its interests in the area through support of Syria and Iran the same way America has done with Israel and Saudi Arabia.

There's also a very high chance China will step in on behalf of other nations in the area to shore up its own interests and ensure Russia doesn't get a monopoly. Who knows, with America out of the picture, China may be eager to fill the void and make Israel their greatest ally. Heaven knows they'll be looking for markets to sell their cheap shit to without America in the picture.

Hell, Japan may get some of its old adventurous spirit back too. It certainly has the means.


"Your" people. Nice Freudian slip, Garcia.

strawmans. I'm not gonna respond to strawman arguements. This is the crap that Sargon and the Skeptics do to "win" debates. Line by line strawman. You need to stay on topic and address the real issues like demographic change, race realism, low trust society. Your post doesn't advance the conversation forward.

 

[Swiss46]

Its 4pm in the Philippines, please fix your sleep schedule.

 

[The Spice boi]

no. Now answer the questions I asked you.







strawmans. I'm not gonna respond to strawman arguements. This is the crap that Sargon and the Skeptics do to "win" debates. Line by line strawman. You need to stay on topic and address the real issues like demographic change, race realism, low trust society. Your post doesn't advance the conversation forward.

I don't think you know what a straw man argument is

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

In retard Flip newspeak, a "Strawman" is "anything that proves me incorrect"

 

[BoxerShorts47]

1. No, I prefer judging people based on how they behave as an individual. That's the "content of their character."

So then you're an ideologue relgious zelot? Diversity is 100% unfalsifiable, unquestionable belief?

The result of diversity, of anti-racism is white genocide: white people being a minority and race mixing away. So by your own logic, the fact that you're working to destroy the white community that makes you a racist and me fighting against you makes me the anti-racist. Do you see how contradictory your beliefs are?

2. Maybe, but I'd say fixing urban schools and providing better support would do wonders.

People are only individuals WITHIN their own race or ethnic group. Across racial or ethnic lines, we're judged as class first, individual second. There are many rules regarding interracial social dynamics. most obvious example is whites can never say the word nigger under any circumstance. There are certain words or ideas that you can say between your in-group vs the out-group. Entire concept of civil rights and affirmative action and appreciating multiculturalism all require judging people based as groups. Non whites view us as a group. Van Jones saying ALL whites have a virus in our brains. How long till he advocates for the genocide of all whites? https://disrn.com/news/cnns-van-jon...-white-person-has-a-virus-in-his-or-her-brain "We're all individuals" is just a lie that westerners repeat without thinking.

2. Maybe, but I'd say fixing urban schools and providing better support would do wonders.

Not maybe yes. So you admit that you need human sacrifices for your diversity project. Totally insane. And you also want to redistribute wealth from whites to non whites so you're a racial communist too.

Could also be that it's easier to blame the standardized test than the gap in education quality.

They tried to fix the gap, they couldn't and they had to admit the difference was because of genetics.

A. Inner-city schools have been shit for generations. Societal factors can last for much longer than a single generation. And nearly everyone takes the SAT at 16-18, not after 30.

school debate is over. liberals have given up on closing the gap because blacks failed to life themselves up like many other groups including jews or asians.

B. Blacks have faced much more discrimination and a bigger uphill battle than Asians and Jews. The vast majority of African Americans are descendants of slaves.

What you call discrmination is judging blacks based on the content of their character. People don't like blacks because they're dangerous. You've already admired that you will never judge them by the content of their character. So you're 100% an apologist. Always making excuses.

Stop being autistic.

Blacks are not white. They will never act like whties. If you don't accept black culture as different than you're the real racist because you don't value diversity, value multiculturalism. Your beliefs are 100% contradictory. You cherry pick when to judge other groups based on euro-normative values and when to be culturally relative.

Blacks aren't oppressed.
They brag about commiting crime and make jokes about stabbing white people.

"The Mad Real World" Pt. 3 - Uncensored - Chappelle's Show (Video Clip) | Comedy Central

Chad doesn't remember much after being in a sleeper hold.

www.cc.com

You're trying to gaslight the 1990s and 2000s at this point.

 

[Pee Cola]

So then you're an ideologue relgious zelot? Diversity is 100% unfalsifiable, unquestionable belief?

Nice strawman, faggot.

 

[Swiss46]

There are many rules regarding interracial social dynamics. most obvious example is whites can never say the word nigger under any circumstance. There are certain words or ideas that you can say between your in-group vs the out-group.

If you've never said nigger in front of a black person you don't deserve to say it. To get your N-word card you need to have true nigga aura instead of the true homo aura you have.

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

How to debate like an extremely high-IQ future president of the White Nation:
-Demand everyone agree with you before you begin the debate
-Ignore all gaps in your own knowledge
-Dodge all questions you are unable to answer
-Accuse anyone who brings evidence that you are incorrect, misinformed, or ignorant of strawmanning you
-Immediately, in the same post, create strawmen of your own

Genius

 

[BoxerShorts47]

If you've never said nigger in front of a black person you don't deserve to say it. To get your N-word card you need to have true nigga aura instead of the true homo aura you have.

white people can never say nigger. ever.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resignation-free-speech/7328759/

so we are judged based on our skin color.
we're not individuals.

Nice strawman, faggot.

not a strawman. if you say "no" you believe in diversity 100% and nothing can change your mind than you're a religious zealot / ideologue and you're arguing in bad faith because you've already admitted that nothing can ever change your mind. You are unwilling to listen to data.

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

I'm going to summarize every argument @BoxerShorts47 has made:

"Strawman strawman Dunning-Kruger?
Strawman, beg the question
[Word salad exhibiting profound lack of insight]
[Seeing patterns where there are none like a schizophrenic]
[Statement based on superficial understanding of complex issue with zero knowledge of background and conditions leading up to the situation]
IQ VERY HIGH"

 

[Swiss46]

white people can never say nigger. ever.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resignation-free-speech/7328759/ so we are judged based on our skin color.
we're not individuals

That link was about gay marriage or it went on about it so long I didn't care enough to finish. I know Tyrone is scary but if you just ask him "what's up nigga" after he's finished giving your mom $20 you just might earn his respect, trust me.

 

[Buster O'Keefe]

white people can never say nigger. ever.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resignation-free-speech/7328759/

so we are judged based on our skin color.
we're not individuals.


not a strawman. if you say "no" you believe in diversity 100% and nothing can change your mind than you're a religious zealot / ideologue and you're arguing in bad faith because you've already admitted that nothing can ever change your mind. You are unwilling to listen to data.

Hey mister white supreme leader, how do you feed and clothe yourself? Who pays for your lodgings?

 

[Drain Todger]

strawmans. I'm not gonna respond to strawman arguements. This is the crap that Sargon and the Skeptics do to "win" debates. Line by line strawman. You need to stay on topic and address the real issues like demographic change, race realism, low trust society. Your post doesn't advance the conversation forward.

You really, really need to pick your strawberries, @BoxerShorts47.

 

[AnOminous]

white people can never say nigger. ever.

Yes they can. All you have to do is start out with an "n" and follow it up with "igger" and you've said "nigger."

Easy peasy. You're just a mushmouth retard.