Why my supposed fallacies are being judged here but not his?
That’s a fun use of supposed. When, in your very first reply, you started out with “I’m amazed to find out what’s your opinion of any other place on earth.” - what exactly is that if not a deflection/whataboutism?
In your third reply, when you subtly removed the parentheses around the word “extremism” and suggested that @shaserlark had said that *“most EU governments are right-wing extremist”, even though what they said amounted to “most EU governments are right-wing, some are even right-wing extremists” (fact)? Was that an honest mistake?
He made fallacies also.
So their fallacies are real and don’t deserve the label “supposed”?! Interesting.
Fwiw, I can’t say that I noticed such a density of bad-faith patterns in @shaserlark’s comments. But feel free to point them out.
Can anything be debated here?
Yes. However, there are rules. In particular, there are rules 2, 3, and 4. You know, provide facts, don’t be a bigot, stuff like that.
I’m clearly against racism, I consider racism something terrible thus why I get offended when not racist people get accused of being racist.
So you’d be offended if someone called you racist and … that is why you can’t be racist? I am sure this tactic has a name; I really should read that h*cking Wikipedia page top to bottom at some point. :) In any case, this is nowhere near a valid argument.
Quite the contrary I think the European Union have done wonders integrating races
Fun bit: There are no human races, we’re all the same race. Phenotypes are a terrible indicator of genome composition even; the genome difference between a white person and a black person may be much smaller than the difference between two white people.
When people talk about racism, what they actually mean is phenotype-based group-oriented enmity. The term “racism” is used because there are people who claim there may be human races (i.e. “racists”) and not because that is actually true.
migration or border policies different from completely open borders are not racism
So, for one, no one says you need to have “completely open borders”. It’s just that the practices of Frontex are often very very far removed from treating humans with any dignity. Or in a way that helps European societies improve.
On that, you may want to look up what Frontex does (or just read @Shaserlark’s comment, for a summary). You may also want to look up former Frontex head Fabrice Leggeri, including his political background.
At the very least, Frontex is massively betraying humanitarian ideals. I am sure there are fun ways to justify their behavior. Of course, to a large degree it’s “lawful” – but that does not mean it’s good, just, fair or not racist.
You can even argue that Frontex treats people badly because they come on shitty boats, whereas Ukrainians who largely came on buses and in cars. I guess that argument would then be “we hate poor people”, imo that does not make it any better. But it’s not challenging to find marginally cloaked racism from a bunch of EU politicians talking about “Christian values” and “cultural compatibility” and whatnot, to justify that Ukrainians should be treated completely differently from Syrians or Afghans. E.g. here in Germany, Ukrainians somehow immediately received work permits and regular social benefits which are usually denied to other groups of migrants for years or until deportation. Poland actually changed its stance on migrants–as long as they are Ukrainian.
forcing eu members to remove any racial law from their legislation.
Sure - there are no (few?) blatantly racist laws in the EU. But that doesn’t stop bureaucrats, police officers or judges from selectively applying laws, and that is something we see a lot of. And beyond all that is reported on the topic, a lot stays private and untold. If you are not a person affected by racism in your society, it’s quite hard to understand.
Because calling the EPP or Renew Europe racist just because (and you say nothing about that) feels completely antieuropean.
Feelings? Really? We have lots of indications that many EPP feel closer ideologically to ECR, ID, and PfE than to the anti-racist groups of the parliament. H*ck, the prospective future German chancelor, member of EPP associate party CDU, ran his entire campaign on racism thinly cloaked as “protecting public safety”. (Besides calling Muslim-raised boys “little pachas” and complaining about to-be-deported refugees blocking his dental appointments.)
same as I have done with the other person, with arguments from both sides, each one giving our opinion
Opinions that are not based in facts are worthless. In fact, worth than useless, they waste people’s time.
Just look through your own comment and check how many times you refer to feelings and yourself being offended at the thought of something and whatnot. None of these things is grounded in facts.
That’s a fun use of supposed. When, in your very first reply, you started out with “I’m amazed to find out what’s your opinion of any other place on earth.” - what exactly is that if not a deflection/whataboutism?
In your third reply, when you subtly removed the parentheses around the word “extremism” and suggested that @shaserlark had said that *“most EU governments are right-wing extremist”, even though what they said amounted to “most EU governments are right-wing, some are even right-wing extremists” (fact)? Was that an honest mistake?
So their fallacies are real and don’t deserve the label “supposed”?! Interesting.
Fwiw, I can’t say that I noticed such a density of bad-faith patterns in @shaserlark’s comments. But feel free to point them out.
Yes. However, there are rules. In particular, there are rules 2, 3, and 4. You know, provide facts, don’t be a bigot, stuff like that.
So you’d be offended if someone called you racist and … that is why you can’t be racist? I am sure this tactic has a name; I really should read that h*cking Wikipedia page top to bottom at some point. :) In any case, this is nowhere near a valid argument.
Fun bit: There are no human races, we’re all the same race. Phenotypes are a terrible indicator of genome composition even; the genome difference between a white person and a black person may be much smaller than the difference between two white people.
When people talk about racism, what they actually mean is phenotype-based group-oriented enmity. The term “racism” is used because there are people who claim there may be human races (i.e. “racists”) and not because that is actually true.
So, for one, no one says you need to have “completely open borders”. It’s just that the practices of Frontex are often very very far removed from treating humans with any dignity. Or in a way that helps European societies improve.
On that, you may want to look up what Frontex does (or just read @Shaserlark’s comment, for a summary). You may also want to look up former Frontex head Fabrice Leggeri, including his political background.
At the very least, Frontex is massively betraying humanitarian ideals. I am sure there are fun ways to justify their behavior. Of course, to a large degree it’s “lawful” – but that does not mean it’s good, just, fair or not racist.
You can even argue that Frontex treats people badly because they come on shitty boats, whereas Ukrainians who largely came on buses and in cars. I guess that argument would then be “we hate poor people”, imo that does not make it any better. But it’s not challenging to find marginally cloaked racism from a bunch of EU politicians talking about “Christian values” and “cultural compatibility” and whatnot, to justify that Ukrainians should be treated completely differently from Syrians or Afghans. E.g. here in Germany, Ukrainians somehow immediately received work permits and regular social benefits which are usually denied to other groups of migrants for years or until deportation. Poland actually changed its stance on migrants–as long as they are Ukrainian.
Sure - there are no (few?) blatantly racist laws in the EU. But that doesn’t stop bureaucrats, police officers or judges from selectively applying laws, and that is something we see a lot of. And beyond all that is reported on the topic, a lot stays private and untold. If you are not a person affected by racism in your society, it’s quite hard to understand.
Feelings? Really? We have lots of indications that many EPP feel closer ideologically to ECR, ID, and PfE than to the anti-racist groups of the parliament. H*ck, the prospective future German chancelor, member of EPP associate party CDU, ran his entire campaign on racism thinly cloaked as “protecting public safety”. (Besides calling Muslim-raised boys “little pachas” and complaining about to-be-deported refugees blocking his dental appointments.)
Opinions that are not based in facts are worthless. In fact, worth than useless, they waste people’s time.
Just look through your own comment and check how many times you refer to feelings and yourself being offended at the thought of something and whatnot. None of these things is grounded in facts.
I won’t be spending more time in this community if moderators behave like this. Thank you for making this decision easy for me.
Enjoy your day.
Sure. Fwiw though, there was no need to make a report.