To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 10962
10961  |  10963
Subject: 
Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 15 Jun 2001 21:54:02 GMT
Viewed: 
1308 times
  
Dave Schuler wrote:

I have already [demonstrated why the LP's demographic composition matters],
and Dave has too.

You haven't *demonstrated* squat, all you've done is make yourself look
stupid, and basically defamed any white person who has ever worked their ass
off for racial equality.

  It is not for the LP, nor any of its passionate proponents, to declaim
that the demographics of the party are not a problem--it is for society to
decide, and, given the tepid national support of the party, I'd say society
has made its decision known.
  In addition, since I appear to be one of the people in "you,"

I in no way, shape, or form was lumping you in with Scott.  I would never do that
to you, Scott is in a class all by himself.



I would take
issue with your claim that I've made myself look stupid.  I have (as Bruce
has done) observed that, while the validity of a group's message is
independent of that group's demographic makeup, the fact that so much of the
party is made up of middle class white males is provocative, considering the
fact that the party's agenda would be of particular benefit to middle class
white males.  If, in fact, the party's agenda does not unduly benefit middle
class white males, then it is in the party's interest to establish clearly
why this is not so, rather than simply saying "well, non-white-males will
benefit, but they just don't see it yet."
  Further, to infer some defamation of the efforts of activists, based on a
skewed reading of the reasonable and appropriate concerns about an
overwhelmingly white party, is inflammatory ad hominem rhetoric.
  If, on the other hand, I was not intended as part of "you," then retract
my indignation.  8^)


Retract away, Dave!  (see, I can pull a ++Lar too!)

Scott seems to want to state that a predominantly white male party can't have
ideas that are good for non-white males.  The stupdity of this assertion is mind
boggling (ignore LP party discussion part and just think about this single
assertion).

Your arguments with DETAILS are fine, it's Scott's inflammatory one-liners that
tire me.


--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support
|   Netscape Communications Corp
|     A division of AOL Time Warner
|   iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/
| Please do not associate my personal views with my employer



Message has 3 Replies:
  Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
 
(...) Nice! Anyone can use Dave! in a sentence--the real art comes in making it appear that my ! naturally wound up at the end! (...) Well, in that case, you're a big silly doofus-head. See? I can be inflammatory, too! 8^) (I think I've over-stepped (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
 
(...) Um, that's not a Lar (0) I don't think, as while there ARE Doubting Thomases (1) I don't know of any Retracting Daves (2). 0 - much less a ++Lar 1 - prominent Figures of Speech 2 - and the image there is one I'd just rather not get into, er, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
 
(...) So where do Dave and I differ on this? How is there a class is difference between our views? (...) Where did I say that? Where? I think they are less likely too. I think any ideas they would have would be treated very sceptically. But I do not (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
 
(...) Allow me to elucidate: the LP claims that it aims to help all society, yet the overwhelming majority of LP members are middle class white males. If, as has been asserted, the LP really is (or will be at some indeterminate future time) for the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

271 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR