Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions ›
Social Sciences: "Racism has arguments for...
Social Sciences: "Racism has arguments for...
Started by Jonathan Ortiz2 · · 👁 5 views · 14 replies
Participants
#2 ·
It felt pretty abrupt and harsh, if you ask me. I mean, just when I was getting into the thick of things and trying to actually lay out some solid arguments, they just slammed the door shut on me with a final word and a comment saying there’s nothing left to discuss. 🤷
#3 ·
Glad this thread is finally getting shut down. It was pretty obvious the OP was just trying to push some racist agenda, even if they tried to play the victim.
Thankfully Lastan (and the rest of you) called them out on it. I really hope we don't see more of this stuff here, and that anyone trying to peddle that kind of garbage gets shut down just as fast.
Thankfully Lastan (and the rest of you) called them out on it. I really hope we don't see more of this stuff here, and that anyone trying to peddle that kind of garbage gets shut down just as fast.
#4 ·
It’s honestly a shame to shut down a thread like this—it’s one of the few places where you can actually dismantle propaganda with some actual logic. I’m speaking in general terms here; it’s not as if I’ve been glued to the updates lately.
#5 ·
Anthony Perez9 said:I’m all for shutting this thread down, since the OP was clearly just trying to push some racist agenda, even if he swore up and down he wasn't.
Thankfully Lastan (and the rest of us) shut that nonsense down. I really hope we don't see threads like this popping up on the forum again, and that any more attempts to peddle that disgusting racism get handled the exact same way.
Look, you obviously didn't read the whole thread... or maybe you did, but you were just cherry-picking what you wanted to see.
Lastan, just because you were loud doesn't mean you were right. You basically just gave your crowd exactly what they wanted to hear, while the rest of us just confirmed our own side of things.
#6 ·
casualharbor9 said:Honestly, it’s kind of a waste to just shut down a thread like this—it’s actually useful for tearing apart all that propaganda when people use logic. I’m speaking generally here, though, since I haven't been keeping up with everything lately.
Look, nobody can just push an agenda here forever without backing it up with actual facts. Even if that was the whole point for "them."
Besides, things were staying pretty chill in this thread, so I don't think it should've been killed off. My gut tells me they probably nuked it for the same reasons they shut down those last two threads before they even got off the ground.
#7 ·
Jonathan Ortiz2 said:Nobody should be allowed to just drone on indefinitely without actually backing up their claims with some real arguments. Even if that’s exactly what "we" were aiming for.
Honestly, the discussion was staying pretty civil, and I don't think there was any real reason to shut it down. If you ask me, they probably pulled the plug on this one for the exact same reasons they killed off those last two threads before they even had a chance to get moving.
I’ve been glancing through the "Analyses" section lately, and I couldn't help but notice things have taken a turn. It seems like the language has become increasingly offensive and vulgar in there. Is that why the topic was shut down, or am I just missing something?
#8 ·
Sorry I was MIA over the weekend!
Anyway, I'm locking this thread. It’s drifted way too far from the actual subject and turned into a bunch of random side battles.
Look, the arguments themselves weren't necessarily against the rules, they just had absolutely nothing to do with what we're here for.
I might reopen the topic down the road once we clean things up and tighten the rules, but honestly, we still need to decide if that's even a good idea. I mean, if the discussion is just going to be stuff like "90% of the Rom community are thieves, they gross me out," then no thanks. If anything, that’s on us in moderation—specifically me. I should've stepped in sooner to shut down that hate speech crap and move those users to the graylist immediately.
The last posts that actually stayed on topic and made sense were months ago.
Anyway, I'm locking this thread. It’s drifted way too far from the actual subject and turned into a bunch of random side battles.
Look, the arguments themselves weren't necessarily against the rules, they just had absolutely nothing to do with what we're here for.
I might reopen the topic down the road once we clean things up and tighten the rules, but honestly, we still need to decide if that's even a good idea. I mean, if the discussion is just going to be stuff like "90% of the Rom community are thieves, they gross me out," then no thanks. If anything, that’s on us in moderation—specifically me. I should've stepped in sooner to shut down that hate speech crap and move those users to the graylist immediately.
The last posts that actually stayed on topic and made sense were months ago.
#9 ·
Jonathan Ortiz2 said:Why’d they lock this thread already? Did we go too far off topic or what? 🤷
Honestly, this should've been shut down the very same day it was posted. A few of us can see exactly what's really going on here... ☕
#10 ·
dustyranger64 said:a topic where the debate basically boils down to "90% of Romani people are thieves..."
Why shouldn't we be allowed to talk about this?
Do you honestly think the percentage is any lower?
How much lower?
I can say with absolute certainty that at least 50-60% of the Romani community is involved in criminal activity. I wouldn't push it further than that since I don't have the exact data.
By what standard would this even qualify as hate speech?
#11 ·
Arthur Fowler83 said:I can say with absolute certainty—and I mean one hundred percent certain—that at least 50-60% of the Rom community is involved in criminal activity. I wouldn't go any higher than that because, well, I don't want to be inaccurate.
By what standard exactly does this qualify as hate speech?
The standard is pretty simple: the only foundation for your one hundred percent certainty is your own gut feeling—which, let’s be honest, isn't backed up by a single shred of official data—meaning, it’s just blatant discrimination based on ethnic identity.
Saying "99% of Krinolince are mobsters" is hate speech.
But saying "According to Department of Justice records, 99% of Krinolince are involved in organized crime" is not hate speech.
#12 ·
Nicholas King said:Based on the idea that the only thing backing up your hundred percent certainty—which is just your gut feeling, without any actual official data to back it up
I mean, just because someone is going off their own intuition doesn't mean we can label it hate speech. I guess everyone is entitled to their own impressions, right? We shouldn't be stripping people of that right or pushing some single-minded way of thinking as the default or the only acceptable way to exist.
If we're talking about actual hate speech, I suppose there really needs to be some kind of malicious intent involved. Like when someone targets someone else totally without cause.
But if that isn't there, then there isn't really a problem, I think.
Personal judgment is a totally legitimate part of any discussion! How much weight we give those judgments probably just depends on how informed or objective the person making them actually is. And, well, you have to consider the intent too, right?
Just to expand on that a bit more—even when someone is using official statistics to call someone out, it could still potentially be considered hate speech.
—so, basically your own personal discrimination based on nationality.
That isn't personal "discrimination"—it's just a personal assessment.
Using the word discrimination here feels pretty out of place, honestly.
-Stipe
#13 ·
Arthur Fowler83 said:I can say with absolute certainty that at least 50-60% of the Rom community is involved in criminal activity. I wouldn't go any higher than that since I don't want to be 100% sure.
What exactly makes this hate speech?
Because anyone with half a brain is going to assume exactly what you just implied—that the rest of the Rom population is either too young or just too useless to get into crime. ☕
#14 ·
briskjackal5 said:Everyone is entitled to their own impressions, I suppose.
Back at home in the gutter, sure.
Beyond that—and this is just my impression—the world might actually be a better place if the Krinolince were wiped out. That’s just an impression. Not to mention my other little impression that those gays are nothing but sickos—again, just an impression.
But, honestly? I can't even be bothered. Not feeling it.
The term "discrimination" is misplaced here.
It isn't misplaced; it's just plain stupid 😁.
They should have used "disparagement"—that word is much more appropriate when you're describing some ethnic group as being ninety percent criminal.
#15 ·
The Moderator has already laid out why this thread is being locked, so let's move the conversation over to a more appropriate spot.
🔗 Similar threads
- Censorship in the social sciences. in Feedback & Suggestions · Aug 31, 2019
- The "Social Safety Net" problem: Who actually pays for it? in Economy · Jul 29, 2026
- Is social media just a breeding ground for manufactured drama? in Random / Off-topic · Jul 29, 2026
- Is the "Win-at-all-costs" donor culture actually breaking our social contract? in Economy · Jul 28, 2026
- Does the "parasocial" era ruin our ability to connect with people? in Hobbies & Leisure · Jul 28, 2026