DebateAltRight banned me, and this was my response

submitted by [deleted] from self.SaidIt

Alright mods, what did I do wrong?

You do realize that this mod abuse, correct?

Looking over my previous comments, I see that I did not break any rules. Please consider asking yourselves about the rules that were supposedly broken. By the way: this - "you're wrong because I deem you wrong" - is clearly not what happened. I engaged in a thoughtful debate by responding to several users. Moreover, this - "appealing to authority" - can refer to any source that is appropriately an authority on a subject. It can be used for anything. Moreover, these authorities can be important, if they're earned the right to be authorities on a given subject. "Appealing to authority" is not necessarily a problem. Don't fear authorities. You're not 12.

If you want debate on the sub, have the balls to engage in debate. Otherwise, you have an echo chamber for the worst kind of people. If anyone here has the ability to explain properly a good reason for what caused the ban, I would be really impressed, though I am not counting on it. A sub that specializes in the promotion of hate and hate speech cannot be good for Saidit or for anyone else.

Regarding political points of view, I've not heard from anyone here at the sub, or at Saidit, who they'd propose voting for in the US in order to democrartically develop their alt right political interests. This is because users here don't know or do not want to say it, because users of DAR have no understanding of the way in which they are supporting the disinformation and propaganda of the 1%, and thus the abuses of the 99%.

If you really want to debate the alt right, ask yorselves about the next step. Ask yourselves what you plan to do. What are the practical next steps in the direction of a political solution. This might be the start of a worthwhile debate. Otherwise, your sub is a fraud. There are no real debates with the alt right here. Give it a shot. (Or continue to focus on hatred, and never develop as people.)

top 100 commentsshow all 110
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Retardation_station 18 insightful - 10 fun18 insightful - 9 fun19 insightful - 10 fun -  (1 child)

Nice username. I'm positive that you're not arguing in bad faith.

[–]Froglich 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Nice username. I'm positive that you're not arguing in bad faith.

Encore!

[–][deleted]  (52 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    BINGO.

    [–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    ^

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

      ↕️

      (i just wanted 2 be included)

      [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (47 children)

      This is the thread with the recent comments that were considered to be beyond the pale:

      https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/83fb/studies_that_show_that_race_mixing_is_a_bad_thing/

      Why did I want to debate? I wanted to respond to this: "I am against race mixing", among other comments in the thread.

      [–][deleted]  (46 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

        Spot on, Yin. My family breed dogs and other animals. This holds water with me, there is a reason we get the results we get, it is careful selection of parents and their respective traits.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          You should look at what socks responded to me with.

          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

          Studies that have been done in the area of health show that mixed-breeds on average are both healthier and longer-lived than their purebred relations. This is because current accepted breeding practices within the pedigreed dog community result in a reduction in genetic diversity, and can result in physical characteristics that lead to health issues.

          Studies have shown that crossbreed dogs have a number of desirable reproductive traits. Scott and Fuller found that crossbreed dogs were superior mothers compared to purebred mothers, producing more milk and giving better care. These advantages led to a decreased mortality in the offspring of crossbreed dogs.

          [–]cisheteroscum 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          Dog breeds are notoriously inbred. Humans are not. Crossbreeding dog breeds can mitigate duplicates of many of the harmful recessive alleles present in either breed. This is not the case for major human races. So it's not a relevant analogy

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Yes, mix-breeding within species is different. I know people don't like labradoodles, but those dogs can be amazing if bred correctly. You get the best of both the poodle and the lab, and folks with allergies can at least be around them.

          [–][deleted]  (2 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            This game of sex you're so enthusiastic about

            Not true. I am merely repeating what one can find when searching for and studying mixed-ethnicities and mixed breeds of dogs (not that the two necessarily compare). It's easy to find more information on this. I've provided links in previous posts. Saiditors who want to argue for racist approaches seem to be rather enthusiastic about their claims, which are however not generally agreed upon in many cases.

            [–]send_nasty_stuff 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

            The main reason certain dog breeds show health issues is because the AKC selects for weird aesthetics and not functionality. For example they've spent that last 70 years or so breeding the German shepard's back legs shorter to make it look to their 'standard'. A farmer or a military breeding program wouldn't do this. You don't get these health issues among working dog breeds. The AKC breeding for profit program is really dysgenic not eugenic.

            [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

            I was not necessarily arguing against mixbreeds, more was I arguing against your understanding of genetics, and those studies did not adequately compare Old World breeds to New World ones. There is a discernible difference. I personally think race-mixing could work, depending on the parent. While on average, mixing dogs might produce okay results, but I'd argue it isn't so for humans. Also, I should make it clear that we once created a new mixed breed on accident (female dog broke into male dogs area). The puppies they made were physically superior, but they were fucking stupid and acted like they were hyped up goofballs, and their coats/skin were jacked up.

            [–]Ash 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

            Are you seriously comparing us to Dogs and animals? What is wrong with you people! My pets can't create art, shape their environment like we humans do or have the capability to love and hate as much we can do.

            We are special and right now God's highest creation until the Aliens will turn up! You are not a dog, I am not a bitch, what is wrong with you, guys?!

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

            I have explained elsewhere why I call James Watson a racist asshole, which boils down to the frequent quotations of his work by those who have no interest in the work of so many of the other geneticists and scientists who've arranged much better studies. Consider also that he calls mixed-ethnicity people 'hybrids'. Because of his obvious biases, his work cannot be trusted as purely objective science. Even when he's manipulated his findings, he can only propose a very small, insignificant difference in IQ points in 'hybrid' people. As I've noted earlier, any report must be compared and contrasted with other genetics studies, and especially studies by proper scientists who use objective scientific methods, rather than promote genetics and IQ numbers as a maths exercise that can be misused by non-scientists to make racist assumptions about mixed-ethnicity people with simple calculations, as these are unrelated to scientific genetics models. Moreover, the miniscule IQ differences are not the only measures of intelligencence or especially the other qualities of a person.

            [–]send_nasty_stuff 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

            I have explained elsewhere why I call James Watson a racist asshole, which boils down to the frequent quotations of his work by those who have no interest in the work

            He has very little control over who quotes his work. Especially since he's old and not as directly involved with the promotion and dissemination as when he was younger. If you made a groundbreaking scientific discovery and some random blogger you don't like quoted it do you want the masses of people judging you for you or for the blogger? Really sounds like you're reaching for excuses here. You seem motivated by fear. Are you familiar with Bret Weinstein? Bret was the professor at Evergreen college driven out by radical marxist students when they decided, along with most of the staff at Evergreen, to have a, 'day without white people'. Bret is significant because he made the prediction then that Americans don't just have right wing authoritarian threats to deal. The primary threat to america according to Mr. Weinstein is left wing authoritarianism.

            Socks you seem much more focused on right wing authoritarianism. Is this because of a fear of whites? If so where does this fear come from? I brought Bret up because even though he correctly predicted militant leftism in the US he also frequently says that at all costs we can't allow white people to 're-racialize'. In Bret's mind it always leads to gas chambers. May I be so bold as to assume that this is the real driving force behind your picking apart of scientists, activists and political groups like the dissident right? Is this why you insist on having a voice on DAR?

            Consider also that he calls mixed-ethnicity people 'hybrids'

            It's a scientific term. Does it really surprise you a scientist would use it? Mixed race people refer to themselves as hybrids on occasion. Looks like you're again just searching for something to be offended by.

            IQ differences are not the only measures of intelligencence or especially the other qualities of a person.

            Watson never said this.

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

            He has very little control over who quotes his work.

            That's not the problem.

            Especially since he's old and not as directly involved with the promotion and dissemination as when he was younger.

            Also not an issue. And he's likely happy with the rise in popularity of his work among those who do not want to look at the approaches of others to genetics.

            If you made a groundbreaking scientific discovery and some random blogger you don't like quoted it do you want the masses of people judging you for you or for the blogger?

            I don't think it matters in this instance. Who he is does not matter. What happened to his studies is at issue.

            Really sounds like you're reaching for excuses here.

            No - I am merely responding to fallacies, pointing out ways in which those are fallacies.

            You seem motivated by fear.

            This doesn't make sense to me. What would I have to fear? If I am happy to argue with people on Saidit, what would scare me about this or the subjects we discuss? (You don't have to answer this, but fear is certainly not the motivation.)

            Are you familiar with Bret Weinstein? Bret was the professor at Evergreen college driven out by radical marxist students when they decided, along with most of the staff at Evergreen, to have a, 'day without white people'. Bret is significant because he made the prediction then that Americans don't just have right wing authoritarian threats to deal. The primary threat to america according to Mr. Weinstein is left wing authoritarianism.

            I've now looked him up, and I have to admit - after reading several websites - I have no idea what up with him. I'll give it more thought. It's odd that he got himself fired from a relatively good job at a small liberal arts College.

            Socks you seem much more focused on right wing authoritarianism.

            Yes

            Is this because of a fear of whites?

            No - certainly not - nor have I ever met anyone who was scared of white people (why would one be?), or who would have addmitted this; and you must appreciate that this is not really an issue.

            If so where does this fear come from?

            I've never heard of it outside of Saidit. It seems crazy. Are you trying to discredit my approaches by claiming that they are rooted in fear and the fear of white people? If so, you'd have to admit, that's really strange and virtually unknown among normal people who are merely having online debates.

            I brought Bret up because even though he correctly predicted militant leftism in the US he also frequently says that at all costs we can't allow white people to 're-racialize'. In Bret's mind it always leads to gas chambers. May I be so bold as to assume that this is the real driving force behind your picking apart of scientists, activists and political groups like the dissident right? Is this why you insist on having a voice on DAR?

            Thanks for letting me know about him. Isn't he a remarkably unusual person and example in this case? What he argues about - it seems - is very much on the fringe of social discourse, as is Watson's work - another fringe aspect of his field of work.

            It's a scientific term. Does it really surprise you a scientist would use it? Mixed race people refer to themselves as hybrids on occasion. Looks like you're again just searching for something to be offended by.

            Yes - referring to hybrid species is a scientific reference. What Watson has helped found is what's known as 'scientific racism' that's similar to the eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. What's wrong with this is that it's part pseudo-science and part actual science, while also heavily biased toward one kind of outcome (which is not scientific). The other problem is the assessment behaviour, which is not appropriately considered by these pseudo-science racists, partially because it's impossible to get a realistic assessment of behaviour for large groups, as social psychology and other studies are always incomplete. Moreover, the science does not show significant variances for mixed-ethnicity people - if one looks at Watson's spreadsheets and sources. And if we want to call mixed ethnicity people hybrid species, we would be comparing them to all species, and thus not valuing the differences of humans from other species. Perhaps that's a good idea, but when trying to understand behaviour, human behaviour differs significantly from that of animals.

            IQ differences are not the only measures of intelligencence or especially the other qualities of a person.

            Watson never said this.

            No - though followers of his work are fixated on this issue of IQ differences, as they oversimplify his work for their purposes, while also avoiding genetics research by so many other scholars.

            Perhaps I should explain that my responses here are merely meant to offer feedback for your arguments (not about fear, or whites, &c), because you were good enough to respond with some important points, and to clarify that I do not really fall into some of the categories you mention. I am remarkably, boringly, middle of the road on many issues.

            [–][deleted]  (5 children)

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

              There's no need to attack me. Read the comments in the same thread and you'll see my responses. It's that simple. Leave me alone.

              [–][deleted]  (3 children)

              [deleted]

                [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                Again - Yin - just saying something is false obviously doesn't make it false. You don't seem to understand this.

                [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

                I've now looked him up, and I have to admit - after reading several websites - I have no idea what up with him

                You're probably getting a mixed picture about the incident because there's a lot of disinfo about what really happened.

                Here's the incident from Bret's perspective

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-st73zhZL3A

                Here are some raw clips left out of the national story.

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COJ2TZ9Mvps

                It's a pretty fascinating story. It's hard to believe something like this happened in a western liberal arts college.

                Perhaps I should explain that my responses here are merely meant to offer feedback for your arguments (not about fear, or whites, &c).. and to clarify that I do not really fall into some of the categories you mention. I am remarkably, boringly, middle of the road on many issues.

                I appreciate you clarifying. I think that 'middle of the road' isn't really a good term anymore considering how wild and crazy modern politics have become. I also feel 'middle of the road' on a lot of issues but something tells me there's still a HUGE gulf between our views. I will say that after chatting with you a bit more I do think you are at least partially operating in good faith. You are just very tricky in how you debate people. You exploit holes in people arguments and force them into the minutia of an argument. Personally I don't really mind that but I can see how others will see this as tedious and even trollish. You kind of remind me of David Suzuki at the Rushton/Suzuki debate. You are like the polar opposite of Sam Harris who steel mans people arguments (before he attempts to tear them down). That's the way I like to debate but to each his own I guess.

                [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

                Thank you.

                I think Saiditors can focus more on the arguments, and much less on who I am and what I might want. These latter two issues aren't important and they're irrelevant in any discussion (per the pyramid od debate). Many response to me are nonetheless about me, which I don't want to talk about.

                I'll look up the names you mention.

                Looking back at my arguments for Saiditors, I think I've helped people understand fallacies and holes in their arguments, if they were curious about those problems. In this manner their next arguments should have improved. It's also helped me to think about ways of carrying on conversations with right-wing and alt-right people, which is very difficult.

                My approach is much like Jeremy Paxman's. He's the best interviewer I've seen. Some of my conversations on Saidit are much like the Paxman/Brand interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk (But Saiditors do not talk of revolution. My main question is sometimes: if you don't vote, why is your political opinion important? ) More Paxman interviews here: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/apr/30/jeremy-paxmans-top-10-newsnight-moments

                [–]send_nasty_stuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

                I've seen that interview but I'll probably watch it again. Brand is an interesting character. Looks like Jordan Peterson has changed his views a bit and I think he's trying to at least listen and entertain some new ideas. I can't help but feel a bit verbally hustled when I listen to Brand. He's very high IQ, especially verbally, but often lacks depth and experience on the things he talks about. The only thing he speaks on with any authority is addiction. I do think he might have a future if he doubles down and continues to explore politics and philosophy. Might be cliche but he has a beautiful mind.

                Looks like you're a fan of fast paced brit wit. I am as well. If you stay on the edges of the dissident space you might learn about Johnathan Bowden. He's my my favorite British dissident. He had wit and verbal acuity in spades.

                But Saiditors do not talk of revolution.

                Saidit is so small I don't even see us as a distinct group. Most of us are either tech people, alt right that got kicked off reddit, curious conservatives, shareblue trolls, feds and of course indians. If you even mildly start to accept any of our views you will magically find your internet world shrinking. You will be stuck wandering in the intellectual desert for 40 years bouncing from social media site to site in a vain attempt to carve out a space for discourse.

                My main question is sometimes: if you don't vote, why is your political opinion important?

                Good question. You have to get more historical perspective. The citizens can exercise power in a LOT more ways then voting (I'm not necessarily endorsing any of these). They can riot. They can be non compliant. They can boycott. They form political parties. They can be hostile towards representatives of the government. They can form black markets or commit more crime. They can train their children to resist the system. It's not uncommon in history for governments and elites to rise and fall quickly because of these non voting power tactics. I mean are you really trying to say that black and female opinions were not important in the US before they gained suffrage? I think not. Both those groups had some level of influence on the political process even though they couldn't vote. Being a dissident doesn't mean not voting either. Some dissidents still vote, we just think that it's a forgone conclusion with the current two party system. Some of us even vote for more tyranny and more debauchery in the hopes the normies* will wake up to the corrupt system they are living in and join dissident political factions. That's called acceleration. Acceleration is NOT a push for violence. It's simply a strategic push to allow more radical left wing policies and politicians into power to speed up the creation of a viable third position party that can peacefully get involved in the political process and thus oppose the two party system.

                *normies is a term we use for normal people not privy to dissident ideas and 4chan meme culture. Normies eat up everything the mainstream world sells them without critical thought. There's a women name Angela Nagel that even wrote about this internet subculture in a book called, Kill All Normies.

                https://www.amazon.com/Kill-All-Normies-Culture-Alt-Right/dp/1785355430

                Personally I don't think she did a good job and left some very important things out.

                Andrew Anglin does a better job here of describing the rise of this internet dissident culture

                https://dailystormer.su/a-normies-guide-to-the-alt-right/

                [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                If you vote for corrupt assholes, why is your political opinion important?

                Personally, I think you just want to rule us up into saying that all politicians need to be lynched or something. You know there are good reasons for not voting, and you know there are solutions that do not involve voting.

                You just think we can peacefully change the world, and it's stupid. You don't convince villains to walk away, and you don't convince normies to help force villains out. It doesn't happen.

                There are better ways in dealing with these villains, and it's not by playing ball in their court that they've convinced you is fair and just.

                [–]send_nasty_stuff 15 insightful - 3 fun15 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 3 fun -  (28 children)

                I'm discussing this with my fellow mods now. You did go down the pyramid it's not like you did nothing wrong and you have had a warning before.

                What I don't understand is why it's so important for you to be included in conversations with people you don't seem to respect or agree with on anything? I wasn't offended when I was banned from latestagecapitalism on reddit. I didn't feel entitled to be in that sub even though there were several topics I wanted to talk to them about.

                If you can acknowledge that you went down the pyramid with the indian user we can work with you on shortening or lifting your ban. The mod who banned you has agreed to some flexibility on this. I assume saidit admin would agree with me here considering it's their pyramid you're breaking not ours.

                [–][deleted] 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

                It's called trolling.

                [–]TheJamesRocket 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                Its what socks is best at.

                [–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                ^

                [–]mahavishnunj 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

                What I don't understand is why it's so important for you to be included in conversations with people you don't seem to respect or agree with on anything?

                yeah, because the internet needs to be a dumbshit echo chamber where no actual conversation can take place right?

                [–]send_nasty_stuff 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                This comment doesn't make sense.

                load more comments (2 replies)

                  [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                  I assume saidit admin would agree with me here considering it's their pyramid you're breaking not ours.

                  quality pyramid enforcement, your inner m7 is strong

                  [–]Retardation_station 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                  I'm not the user you were speaking to, but if nothing else, I appreciate a vocal response from administration.

                  More sites need transparent moderation.

                  And I'm not trying to kiss ass, I'm genuinely kind of a shithead who hates authority, because authority tends toward corruption inevitably.

                  [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

                  I appreciate this response. My answers:

                  You did go down the pyramid it's not like you did nothing wrong and you have had a warning before.

                  I remember the warning, though I see my comments as much more informative - and thus not so far down the pyramid - than the comments by others. For example, my point to the Indian user was to point out - as clearly as I could - that he too (by virtue of his agreement with those who think mixed race people are dumber than whites) could be a victim of others who don't like mixed-race or non-white people. I am not sure if there is a better, more informative way of pointing this out. The comment was about the username, not anything personal. (I might note that mods on Saidit are never bothered when I get spammed with insults, but that's a different discussion.)

                  What I don't understand is why it's so important for you to be included in conversations with people you don't seem to respect or agree with on anything?

                  I have to explain this periodically to Saiditors: I joined Saidit months ago in order to learn about right-wing and alt right points of view, to read the stuff you read, to learn about the commonly used websites here, to see why we all seem to be concerned about the 99% but have very different ideas on how to engage in political solutions, and to see which political solutions anyone would want to discuss (and I've had no responses that include actionable options or voting preferences, or even ideas about revolutions). Just as Saiditors should try to understand what centrists and the left are reading, I should try to understand what Saiditors are reading.

                  Why do I argue with Saiditors? I try not to make a habit of this, but once an argument starts, I feel it's responsible and respectful to respond to the arguments of others. Also, I want to know more about the reasons for some of the posts. Another reason I respond is because I am sometimes procrastinating with work, while also annoyed with one of the posts, and want to offer a counter-argument.

                  I wasn't offended when I was banned from latestagecapitalism on reddit.

                  I am certainly not offended that I am banned from DAR. Of all places to be banned from, it's certainly OK with me to be banned from DAR.

                  I didn't feel entitled to be in that sub even though there were several topics I wanted to talk to them about.

                  This is how I feel about DAR. I wanted an opportunity to ask DAR about their views on who to elect in the next election, and how those people can help deliver alt right political solutions. I am genuinely curious about what DAR think of actionable political opportunities.

                  If you can acknowledge that you went down the pyramid with the indian user we can work with you on shorting or lifting your ban.

                  I think my first response to him was lower on the pyramid than it should have been, and for reasons noted above, I wanted to make an explicit point about racist approaches. Additional responses were, I had thought, genuine approaches to debates, and not as low on the pyramid as the first response.

                  Thank you very much for responding.

                  At some point, DAR will likely be happy to be rid of me, but for what it's worth, I would think it important for Debate Alt Right to welcome debates with the alt right, warts and all. For this reason DAR should be the most free speech sub at Saidit, with fewer rules, not the most rules (and certainly not vague rules about 'authority' and saying someone is wrong). And as we know about Saidit, I am but one of many contrarians here who like to argue and debate. In my view, this is the best part of Saidit, as would be DAR if they could stomach debates.

                  [–]send_nasty_stuff 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

                  At some point, DAR will likely be happy to be rid of me

                  We're not actively trying to get rid of you if that's what you're implying. We enjoy spirited debate in good faith. We are naturalists that accept the laws of antifragility. If our arguments can't hold up to debate they need modified or thrown out. Which is why I'm engaging with you now. To be honest if this was reddit we wouldn't have even considered keeping you because we'd have plenty of moderates and leftists to debate. Saidit though is a small community and we are trying to be mindful of the admins mandate to allow counter points. From our point of view though there's a pretty clear line between counterpoints and trolling or shilling.

                  but for what it's worth, I would think it important for Debate Alt Right to welcome debates with the alt right, warts and all. For this reason DAR should be the most free speech sub at Saidit,

                  I agree but again I hope that you and everyone reading are aware (as I've stated before) that DAR and all alt right spaces on the internet have a target on their back. Many people want to take us down any way possible so we are constantly on guard. Personally I'm all for free speech 'platforms' but sub sections of those platforms need moderated if productive exchange of ideas is to occur.

                  I think my first response to him was lower on the pyramid than it should have been

                  We appreciate your acknowledgment. Since the other user was not banned your ban is lifted. Just going down the pyramid is not grounds for a permanent ban. This was agreed upon by the DAR mod team with nobody in disagreement.

                  I wanted to make an explicit point about racist approaches.

                  That's how your comment came off to me but I can see how others might have viewed it differently. Even though the members of DAR are race realists we really don't see a need for racial insults. It's not conducive to productive conversations. We actually had an automod that removed racial slurs on reddit. In fact our sub probably policed 'racism' more than other subs on reddit and we were still banned. What does that tell you?

                  If you don't mind me making a suggestion. I think you need to make some exploratory posts on DAR simplying asking us for positions and background. Structure your questions out as neutrally as you can. Many of our users don't mind laying things out in detail. There are some very sharp well read users on DAR that you could learn from. Some of our posters have been here for all 4 years and have amassed a lot of experience unwinding disinformation and propaganda. You don't have to agree with any of them but having a framework of our real beliefs, passions, and historiography might mitigate these tense exchanges in the future. If possible don't let blunt or provocative replies get the best of you.

                  [–]mahavishnunj 8 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 6 fun -  (8 children)

                  We enjoy spirited debate in good faith.

                  nope. some of the most brittle pussies on the entire internet.

                  If our arguments can't hold up to debate they need modified or thrown out. Which is why I'm engaging with you now.

                  werent brave enough to engage with me...

                  Personally I'm all for free speech 'platforms' but sub sections of those platforms need moderated if productive exchange of ideas is to occur.

                  LOL!

                  cant go on after that. that did give me my first legit lawl of the day though, thanks for that!

                  [–][deleted]  (3 children)

                  [deleted]

                    [–]mahavishnunj 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

                    Your post history makes you look like a troll. I can see why they banned you.

                    for sure, especially in a sub called 'debatealtright'. cant have actual debate there!

                    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                    [deleted]

                      [–]mahavishnunj 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                      no, i had just had fun with the dumbfucks on that sub. simple as that. after i saw how beyond retarded they were it was debate-less.

                      load more comments (4 replies)

                        [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

                        But that's the problem isn't it: when has u/socks EVER demonstrated even an inkling of good faith? He can quote the most contrived Wikipedia page and call you paranoid if you disagree.

                        [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                        ^

                        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

                        You can read my post history, or not. Perhaps too many multisyllabic words for you. If you can't support your claims, might as well avoid arguing with adults.

                        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

                        Ah yes. More ill faith: "I never did this. Prove me wrong, here are 10 trillion pages of evidence. Call me when you find it." knowing full well I'm not dumb enough to sift through your endless supply of trolling and inanities in order to find one particular turd.

                        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                        And now - victim shaming. You attacked me. So you do favor tellling lies, and when told that they are lies, and were to find evidence, you note that you'd prefer not to. You're seill wrong, however, and seem to have no moral compass.

                        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                        Oy vey

                        load more comments (1 reply)

                          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                          Thank you

                          [–]Fiyanggu 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

                          Socks, fuck on back to the Reddit libtard echo chamber. You've obviously pissed off enough people here to be banned.

                          [–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                          Excellent example of the kinds of bottom of the pyramid statements that are never questioned by mods (unless of course I were to respond at the same level to fragile weaklings like you, which would annoy the mods).

                          [–][deleted] 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (6 children)

                          You've done everything wrong since you joined saidit.net. I'm sure the guys on DAR have zero patience for your absolute BS.

                          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

                          Think about your comment, smarty-pants.

                          (If anyone at Saidit agreed with me I'd have to question my sanity.)

                          [–][deleted] 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

                          Yet you are here day in an day out will to power in bad faith. Consistently taking L’s.

                          What questions would you ask your “ sanity “.

                          [–]Jesus 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

                          Although, I don't think you're a shill. You could have debated on good faith on debateright. I see a lot of ad hominems in your arguments over there.

                          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                          Jesus - you're only seeing my responses (most of which aren't as bad as calling people smarty-pants), and not understanding how many attacks I respond to. Horrux and others essentially scroll through my comment history and post attacks. How do you think I should respond to someone who tells me that, "you've done everything wrong since you joined saidit.net." Should I tell Horrux what a wonderful person he is?

                          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

                          Oh no. I blocked you a long time ago, then unblocked when I saw certain posts, and now well... Your utterances do end up decorating my monitor fairly often, so I comment on these. I do wish it would stop. My health isn't so great that I think wasting my time wading through shit is a worthwhile occupation. Sadly, your posts are in the way often enough that this becomes unavoidable in my journey to the goodness that is saidit.net. Mostly.

                          [–]mahavishnunj 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                          not about to read that wall. i got banned for embarrassing the idiots who frequent that sub. its a badge of honor. just leave it at that.

                          [–]FoxySDT 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

                          Moreover, these authorities can be important, if they're earned the right to be authorities on a given subject. "Appealing to authority" is not necessarily a problem. Don't fear authorities. You're not 12.

                          Dude do you even know what appeal to authority means? And why that is fallacious?

                          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                          Yes - one of many forms of fallacy - which is inappropriately sumamarised in the rules at DAR, and as such, this fallacy can be used to describe so many of the responses of the users at Saidit, not to mention the many other fallacies they engage in. If DAR has a problem with fallacies, it should imploded from the self-realization of how often they're used by misinformation and disinformation memes and websites (eg. listed at /s/ShitpostNews). This particular fallacy is in several forms and would be impossible to ethically and equitably police as part of a set of rules at DAR, thanks especially to how often it's used in the sub.

                          [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                          WIKIPEDIA:

                          http://empirestrikesblack.com/2018/08/meet-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-ex-porn-peddler-paid-by-israel-to-spread-zionist-propaganda/

                          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                          [deleted]

                            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                            Sorry about that. Why they're so sensitive I have no idea, given how much they hate other people and are happy to discuss that hatred at length.

                            There have been some fun, creative subs on Saidit, some of which were banned. /s/tits was brilliant. It didn't really break any rules. Meanwhile there's /s/watchpeopledie which is pathetic, but whatever turns people on....

                            [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

                            Something labeled 'alt' anything should be taken with a grain of salt.
                            Once you get into that labeling process weird shit will go flyin. It has already been compromised once you get to that stage. The next stage is booting people out whom don't fit the site's 'model' for comments once a site has established their 'identity' so to speak.

                            [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                            Yes - seems to be part of the problem.

                            [–]hfxB0oyA 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                            I see your error - you presumed they might have balls. It's well known that all Reddit mods are sterilized eunuch trannies.

                            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                            I post there and I'd have to see the specifics but it seems like you're genuine.

                            [–]yoke 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

                            should post on gab as well.

                            [–]Jesus 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

                            Gab.ai = gabai = doing deeds for the synagogue. Tobra is not a Christian, he is a radical Zionist Donmeh Jew working for David Horowitz.

                            [–]yoke 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                            If Jesus was to preach what He preached in Galilee, They would lay poor Jesus in His grave. (woody guthrie)

                            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

                            Thanks, but no way.

                            Saiditors might be mean, but they're not nearly as gullible and dumb as gab users, IMHO.

                            [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

                            Ad homonym. Ad homonym & clarifying honesty through subjectivity.

                            Consistently, insincere an untruthful. Antithesis of honest.

                            [–][deleted]  (5 children)

                            [deleted]

                              [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

                              Some fading star of the early 90s tech boom who just got on the board of a new startup. ;) Oh, and 4 of their 5 kids have autism.

                              What are your thoughts on the cause of autism? It's gotta be environmental. It's was basically unheard of a 100 years ago. I've heard two main theories. Aluminum or other additives to vaccines (A new thing in history). Older parents (also a relatively new thing in history).

                              Even though I think the onslaught of vaccines on for infants is a problem I lean toward the old egg and old sperm issue. If you go to schools with younger families there's almost no autism. Schools in white areas with older parents have LOTS of autism. This also explains why whites seem to be more effective. It might also have something to do with too much estrogen in utero causing the male brain not to form correctly? I'm just spit balling here. Autism does tend to affect males more and it seems to have something to do with gender in the brain.

                              [–][deleted]  (2 children)

                              [deleted]

                                [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                                Thanks for this

                                [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

                                You're definitely projecting.

                                [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                                Not quite. Enjoy your day.

                                [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

                                http://empirestrikesblack.com/2018/08/meet-wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-ex-porn-peddler-paid-by-israel-to-spread-zionist-propaganda/

                                [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                                Good find!

                                [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

                                Thank you, Jesus.

                                (And - OMG - what a website.)

                                [–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

                                OMG in a bad or good way?

                                [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

                                A little of both. I agree with much of what I've read thus far (good), but the journalism isn't corroborated well and not balanced well with other facts (bad) that would help those of us who want to use the site as a factual resource. For example, were I to send one of the articles to someone as evidence, they would correct when noting that the article is not appropriately supported by evidence. I've seen some of the evidence that the articles do not mention, so I find the website useful for articles that can supplement other forms of better journalism (eg. balanced and with better evidence). As I look at the front page, I agree with notes on 911, Israeli lobby, ISIS, Syria, Libya, Chavez &c. But the articles tend toward opinions that are written as rants - and though they might be the start of good research - they are not developed. The biases of the site are so heavily pitched that hardly anyone will take it seriously. Thus the articles are best paired with better examples of reports and evidence.

                                When trying to develop an argument for - say the Israeli lobby abuse of Corbyn - the audience for that argument will only take you seriously if they respect your approaches, your use of evidence, and your way of balancing the argument. One can put together a long list of unwarranted attacks against Corbyn by the Israeli lobby, and develop a good argument for that. He and others merely supported Palestinians. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, by any standard, even among many Jews (supposedly). But Corbyn was also holding his party back when he did not respond appropriately to those accusations. You have to fight fire with fire. He was appropriately criticized as a useless politician. I like him, but when he failed to take on the Tories in his 1st year, he should have stepped down and let another person have a go. He's a good person but a terrible poitician and leader. To be fair, the person who followed him wasn't much better. The UK news media chewed them both up and spit them out. Boris and other politicians have had a way of dealing with this news media, which is essential for politicians. They do so by making deals, developing support, and by working 24/7 on PR. And - try not to piss off too many who are aligned with the powerful opposition and Israeli lobby. It's like navigating through a political gauntlet.

                                Empirestrikesblack.com adds to the discussion, but offers only one side of the argument, without doing the necessary legwork to for some of the imporant the evidence. Why is this? Because they don't have to do this for their particular audience. Politics is now so polarized that websites like this can manage with their respective audiences, without trying to improve their articles for a wider audience. The are useful, however, for starting, or adding to, the broader conversation.

                                [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

                                I wanted to know; do you believe the offical story of 9/11? Do you believe Zionism and specific Jews tied to the Likud and Mossad had a hand in 9/11?

                                [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

                                I don't believe the official 9/11 story

                                I think Mossad has been engaged with several aspects of US foreign policy and military engagements, because their official connections with the CIA &c, but it's very difficult to explain. I think one can locate legitimate circumstantial evidence, dating back to Kissinger.

                                [–]yoke 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

                                i think you've got some good poitns. but unless you get it across the isle it's basically, well, essentially no more than an echo chamber.

                                based on the parler ban, i suppose gab users are going to listen more to your points, that is, assuming you're left leaning.

                                are gab users stubborn in your opinion? cause if ppl are just dumb, there are ways to persuade them. unless someone as smart as you have already done it and they keep a vigilent watch on anyone else to do the same thing. but if dumb ppl are stubborn as well, then i'd stay away from them. (unless i can use their highly predictable way of acting to my advantage, that is.)

                                [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

                                I see your points, but I think I am getting plenty information from the right and alt right on Saidit, and would not want to overdo it (for my own sanity). For example, there was a study years ago of groups watghing Fox News, and groups not watching that Fox, so that the IQ scores were tested before and after watching the two different kinds of news. Those who watched Fox had lower IQ scored after a period of a few weeks. I wish I could find the link to this. If I can find it, I'll return and post it here.

                                I also think that many Saiditors are not as extreme as those on gab. But the real benefit of Saidit - over Reddit, Gab, and other websites - is that it's small enough for discussions and debates, in a manner that one cannot engage at the other sites.

                                [–]yoke 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                                sure, love saidit dude

                                [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                                This is a copy of the note for the ban, to which I had responded with my note (above):

                                You have been banned from participating in /s/debatealtright. You can still view and subscribe to /s/debatealtright, but you won't be able to post or comment.

                                Note from the moderators:

                                No saying 'you're wrong because I deem you wrong' and appealing to authority isn't an argument.

                                If you have a question regarding your ban, you can contact the moderator team for /s/debatealtright by replying to this message.

                                Reminder from the saidit staff: If you use another account to circumvent this sub ban, that will be considered a violation of the Content Policy and can result in your account being suspendedfrom the site as a whole.

                                This is the response I received for my 2 questions:

                                You have been temporarily muted from s/debatealtright. You will not be able to message the moderators of s/debatealtright for 72 hours.