BNP membership list has been put online.
- Thread starter audiotech
- Start date
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
why? Care to actually explain yourself, for a change?
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
more air time the cunt shouldn't have?
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Bollocks to you an' all.
The second part was a piss-take on infallibility, mine included.
I was not in agreement with Hill at all.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
a - We can argue about the definition of racism all evening. Can we call it supremacy instead? Perhaps I should have used that term to start with.
b - I disagree.
The reason I think it's worth making the distinction is that the notion that one race is superior to another is, in my reckoning, fundamentally wrong and I think can be proven to be so.
On the other hand, the notion that mixing up different races (and in many cases but by no means all, this also means mixing up cultures) can cause problems is not fundamentally wrong - it can and does cause problems. It may well be that many people have a distorted view of how and to what extent it causes problems, and that the solutions to these problems offered by the BNP are not good ones, but you can't just write people who hold this view off as bigots, racists or supremacists. Some of them may be, of course, but not all of them. And the attitude where you do just write these people off, is exactly the kind of attitude which will only increase the extent to which they'll be attracted to parties like the BNP.
cybertect
It's grim up north (London)
[lobs the example of indigenous peoples' reservations in the Amazon into the discussion to see what will happen]
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
on a - well if we both agree that the two are different, good.
on b - thats an almost meaningless statement, as anything - mixing cultures, not mixing cultures - causes 'problems'. As such that renders 'problems' almost meaningless. Life causes 'problems', tho probably not quite as many as death. Your one-sided version (and I happily accept in advance that you agree with the converse, as I just described it) is just that, one-sided, and as such, a sop to bigotry.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
[lobs the example of indigenous peoples' reservations in the Amazon into the discussion to see what will happen]
Damn you, I was just pulling the pin on that one
(now it's going to go off in my hand)
mauvais
on reddit or something
OR, equally significantly, gangsta rap and morris dancing.[lobs the example of indigenous peoples' reservations in the Amazon into the discussion to see what will happen]
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
do you work in HR?
No. I just wonder that if teuchter had used that word instead, whether it would have made you address the point rather than pick up on that one word.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Merging those two things produces an amusing mental image.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I didnt just pick up on one word, I addressed his whole post
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Agreed
Not agreed
Highly debatable. But irrelevant
One-sided version in one-sided version is one-sided version shocker.
Complete non-sequitur as far as I can see. Argument doesn't make sense.
But I'll try it again with a different argument just to make sure:
fictional teuchter said:
fictional belboid said:
fictional belboid said:
Agreed
Not agreed
Highly debatable. But irrelevant
One-sided version in one-sided version is one-sided version shocker.
The logic concludes that not eating breakfast is a sop to bigotry. Therefore I conclude that the logic is faulty, as I suspected.
october_lost
It's not hip any more...
Someone not thought of trailing facebook and put faces to the email addresses?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
good try, and a fair example i think.
Unfortunately I don't think it works for you. 'Eating breakfast' doesn't make you late for work, bad time management does that. But, 'not having bad time management causes me problems' doesn't really work, does it?
as the basis for such decision making it is clearly insufficient here. If the reason for taking a course of actions is to avoid problems, then neither course of action has any merit as they both cause problems. That renders it pretty worthless as a deciding factor. If you'd rather swap worthless for meaningless, thats fine by me.
it's a shit way of making a decision. Now you seem to be defending not thinking.
get better glasses then. As you just said, your initial statement was entirely one-sided. Taking an entirely one-sided view is by definition biased. Prejudiced one might say. And prejudice is a synonym for......
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
I'm glad I know where my local bigots live TBH, privacy disaster notwithstanding. I'm just glad I don't have kids, cos then I might have to say that about the paedos
Taxamo Welf
kebagels pls
ctrl+f......
oh yes! so he is!
(but i suspect that was fairly common knowledge anyway
allegedly one of the first ways this list was confirmed was by someone calling up and pretending to be someone on it and going ahhh nick is this real? And he was like aaaah yes it is fuck
or maybe i just made that up
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Actually I can't be bothered staying up half the night going through this the slow way.
The fact is that I can feed in the converse to your faulty reasoning process and get the same result:
"Not eating my breakfast in the morning causes me problems. It means I am hungry at work" is a "sop to bigotry"
Which demonstrates that it's a nonsense.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
does that make sense in your head?
claphamboy
The wheels on the bus go round and round....
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I'm happy with your example cos it shows you are totally wrong. Which you'd realise if you understood a thing about basic logic. But you dont, which is why you have to keep redefining words
You are totally and utterly wrong
teuchter
je suis teuchter
That's one of the most rubbish defences I've seen for a while.
This relies on an assumption that it is "bad time management". There are any number of reasons why it might not be. Perhaps there is some reason why I can't go to bed earlier than I do, and getting up earlier than I do would mean I don't get enough sleep. Then we are back to saying "doing X causes problems, not doing X causes problems">>>your dodgy reasoning>>>>saying that "eating breakfast causes problems" is a sop to bigotry, but also the statement "not eating breakfast causes problems",>>>your dodgy reasoning>>>saying that "not eating breakfast causes problems" is a sop to bigotry"
But let's say I agree that it is due to bad time management. Then you are quite right that saying that "eating breakfast causes problems" is untrue in that case.
So if we go back to my statement that you claim is meaningless and a "sop to bigotry":
By your reasoning, the converse is also meaningless and "a sop to bigotry". Which is why your argument is unconvincing.
You need to show why it is that mixing up cultures causes no problems at all before you can say that my statement is meaningless. In the same way that you tried to show that "eating breakfast" does not cause problems.
bloody romans
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Of course. But some people's circumstances might mean that they predominantly register the problems. And registering these problems disproportionally does not necessarily imply bigotry. In my opinion.
Similar threads
