« The "Birther" Issue Gets Trumped | Main | "We do not have time for this kind of silliness" »

Graves law

While I would hope that anyone reading this is familiar with Godwin's Law, I've seen enough silliness over the years to convince me that belaboring the obvious is required.

Godwin's law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies) is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990 which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." In other words, Godwin put forth the hyperbolic observation that, given enough time, in any online discussion--regardless of topic or scope--someone inevitably criticizes some point made in the discussion by comparing it to beliefs held by Hitler and the Nazis.

Godwin's law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread Reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

Although in one of its early forms Godwin's law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions, the law is now often applied to any threaded online discussion, such as forums, chat rooms and blog comment threads, and has been invoked for the inappropriate use of Nazi analogies in articles or speeches.


The frequent enforcement corollary of Godwin's Law is that once the Nazi comparison has been made the discussion is over and the party who made the comparison is deemed to have lost the debate or surrendered their point.

Graves' law


Graves' law (also known as Graves' Rule of Racist Attribution or Graves' Law of Racist Analogies) is an observation made by Rodney Graves in 2011.  It states: "As an online discussion of American Politics grows longer, the probability of an attribution of a position being racially motivated approaches unity [1 or 100%]." In other words, Graves put forth the observation that, given enough time, in any online discussion of American Politics someone inevitably criticizes some point made in the discussion by claiming or insinuating that their opponent's point is a product of racial bias.


The same enforcement corollary pertains: Once the charge of "racism" or insinuation of "racist" motivation has been made the discussion is over and the party who made the charge or insinuation is deemed to have lost the debate or surrendered their point.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/41487.

Comments (69)

Not only is this post Racis... (Below threshold)
cstmbuild:

Not only is this post Racist, to leans very hard towards Nazism.

Someone was gonna post this, so.....


Yah, because we know there'... (Below threshold)
Chico:

Yah, because we know there's no more racism.

The fun part is most often ... (Below threshold)
hcddbz:

The fun part is most often times NAZI and Fascist is used as synonym for a racist tyrannical person with no under standing of concepts involved in the debate. A great example was the Obamcare where new people said how could anyone think the NAZI supported universal health care. However they did not bother reading the planks of the party.
I think it important to really understand what NAZISM lead to. People need to know all the "good Intentions" of the NAZI party and how those goals lead to almost annihilation of a people.

Does this mean that Woop wo... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Does this mean that Woop won this season's Biggest Loser competition?

Ref post 3.But it ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Ref post 3.

But it was for the children. Now where have I heard that statement before.

chicka @ 2,There c... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

chicka @ 2,

There certainly is racism. Those who throw the accusation without proof are some of the worst racists around. The attribution of a behavior or a position due to race is racism.

We've been seeing a lot of that.

"Yah, because we know there... (Below threshold)
DaveD:

"Yah, because we know there's no more racism."

I agree. When we elected an African-American president we were told we had atoned for our sins as a racist nation and I was so glad we could put that behind us. It's nice to know you finally agree with us about something.

ChicoNoone has sta... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Chico

Noone has stated that there is no racism. Geez come on guy. I know we are against Obama but do we look like idiots?

Of course racism exists. It has for thousands of years and I daresay it will exist for thousands more.

I think the issue in the US will get a less serious in the next 100 years or so simply due to intermarrying of the races.

It is the folks whom falsely use the racism charge that do more damage to stopping racism than the racists themselves. Woop was a good case in Point. Lee Ward was another.

Please answer these questions. If Racism was absolutely wiped off the face of the earth today then

a. What would Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton do tomorrow?
b. What would be Woop's (and people like him) response be to the same charges of Obama's incompetence that existed prior to the disappearance of Racism?

BTW ChicoThe same ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

BTW Chico

The same things people are saying about Obama have been said about Kerry, and Gore as well. Only they werent President and they arent black.

Last thing ChicoWh... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Last thing Chico

When folks are calling racism today think of the story about the boy who cried wolf.

You call wolf too many times and people stop paying attention to you. Then when the wolf shows up on the door (the one time out of 50) you have destroyed your credibility with most reasonable people.


As long as the Libs ... (Below threshold)
macofromoc:


As long as the Libs can promote it and make a buck from it there will always be racism.

GarandFan's Corollary to Gr... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

GarandFan's Corollary to Grave's Law:

"Members of minorities CAN NOT be racist!"

Enter the 2012 election, wh... (Below threshold)
kevino:

Enter the 2012 election, where the usual idiots are going to play every race card in the deck ... and then buy more decks:

I’m getting tired to trying not to find things slightly racist. It is very difficult, on a daily basis, to see this stuff and not say, you know, this is what it is. I have been raised to think, ‘Well, maybe that’s not what they mean. Let me figure it out.’ But, being black, when you say, ‘Y’know, this is racist,’ 9,000 people say, ‘Oh, you’re just playing the race card.’ Well, you know, I’m playing the damn card now.

Whoopi ("It wasn't rape-rape") Goldberg

Enter the 2012 ele... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:
Enter the 2012 election, where the usual idiots are going to play every race card in the deck ... and then buy more decks

Yup.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/26/tavis_smiley_2012_will_be_the_most_racist_election_ever.html


One of my wife's friends w... (Below threshold)
hcddbz:

One of my wife's friends was wanted to share pictures so she on my face book page. Every now and then their is some snide comment. About Tea party members being dumb or the like. There was post on how republicans favor a law banning interracial marriage. Then this was one on how not even the KKK supports the Tea Party. Indicating that they were too racist for even the Klan. So i have de-friend her. The Race card is full on.
However here the true danger. You have a political group open to all Americans, trying to get our country into a fiscally stable place. So that we can take care of our own. Yet the demagogues will take the side of Racist organization that took pride in intimidating, hanging Negroes and burning churches. This is the danger of playing the race card so often. Eventually you will become blind to true racist.

chicos-"Yah... (Below threshold)
Sep14:

chicos-


"Yah, because we know there's no more racism."


I would not say none. There is less here without Eau De Woop however.

Political Discourse ... (Below threshold)


Political Discourse in the USA today:
first one to Nazi wins!!!

Yah, because we know the... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

Yah, because we know there's no more racism.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

Chico, with Woop gone, you're now Wizbang's official Stupidest Troll™. You want to be taken seriously, you want to be treated as if you weren't a cookie-cutter leftist, and yet you resort to that pathetic strawman argument. That's really weak.

"Yah, because we know there... (Below threshold)
Alex:

"Yah, because we know there's no more racism."

Chico's hypocrisy could not be more manifest if he tried to make it so. He implicitly advocates at a every turn to increase the demographic percentage of mestizos because he IS mestizo, and for no other reason. Yet, as he would have it, it is wholly beyond the pale for Whites to advocate for an increase in THEIR demographic percentage of the American population (this, you see, is "racism").

Certainly some play a race ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Certainly some play a race card inappropriately. But it's just plain stupid to adopt a "He who smelt it, dealt it" attitude to intimations that racism might be a factor in this or that discussion.

In other words, if a guy says, "Hey, that seems racist to me," that DOES NOT PROVE that that guy is a racist. And only an idiot would say it does.

"The same enforcement corol... (Below threshold)
Alex:

"The same enforcement corollary pertains: Once the charge of "racism" or insinuation of "racist" motivation has been made the discussion is over and the party who made the charge or insinuation is deemed to have lost the debate or surrendered their point."

Mr. Graves, this is a bit of doubletalk on your part at the implicit level. You simultaneously wish to purge talk of race from political discourse and yet ostensibly desire in the final analysis for the charge of "racism" to maintain its (enforced by our society's elites) ability to shame morally. So I'll ask the obvious question, If you do not wish to see "racism" discussed in mainstream discourse, then how precisely do you expect "racism" to be perpetually stigmatized going forward?


Bruce Henry informs us:... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves:

Bruce Henry informs us:

Certainly some play a race card inappropriately.

And water will surely wet us while fire will surely burn us.

But it's just plain stupid to adopt a "He who smelt it, dealt it" attitude to intimations that racism might be a factor in this or that discussion.

Rubbish. The charge of "racism" is hurled to end discussion. Like "fascism" it is hurled when the left don't like the points and facts their opponents are presenting and have no answer to them.

Absent hard evidence the charge of "racism" is an invitation to shut the frack up.

if a guy says, "Hey, that seems racist to me,

Absent conclusive proof in support of the thesis, it's an attempt to silence a conversation, just as Nazi comparisons are.

To ascribe a position or opinion to racism absent proof of the charge is itself racism.

"To ascribe a position or o... (Below threshold)
Alex:

"To ascribe a position or opinion to racism absent proof of the charge is itself racism."

The very concept of "racism" as moral pathology per se is risible. Any people that did not with consistency favor their own over other peoples would not last long on this Earth.

"In other w... (Below threshold)
914:


"In other words, if a guy says, "Hey, that seems racist to me," that DOES NOT PROVE that that guy is a racist. And only an idiot would say it does."


It does not prove he is not either. Ridiculous to form an argument, draw a conclusion and leave no room for dissent. But then, disseminating opposing points of view aren't your strong suit. Being contrary is.


Certainly some play a ra... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

Certainly some play a race card inappropriately.

"Some?" SOME?!? It's been the go-to argument for the left for decades, and now has reached a pitch that only dogs can hear. Get it Bruce? The left has been so relentless with its constant accusations of racism that it's lost all value.

And we haven't seen anything yet. This upcoming election is going to see the tired "racist" accusation worked like a three-dollar whore by the Democrats. It's all they have left.

I disagree, Rodney. When I ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I disagree, Rodney. When I think someone is, or may be, displaying racist behavior, and say so, I don't do it to "end discussion." I do it to get that person, or a third party, to consider that racism might be present.

For instance, when Joe Biden made his infamous "clean articulate guy" remarks, I doubt he thought of those remarks as racist until it was pointed out how freaking racist they were. He's just a 60-something, well meaning guy who said something kind of cluelessly racist. And the millions of people who pointed this out to him (including several Wizbang authors and commenters, IIRC) were not themselves racists for pointing it out, were they? Ditto the Harry Reid kerfuffle about a "black accent" or whatever it was.

And what would "conclusive proof" of racism be? No one in this day and age says and does the things the Klan did in Alabama in the 60s. Does that mean that racism, however subtle, no longer exists, or shouldn't be called out?

And it's my belief, Otto, t... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

And it's my belief, Otto, that the "boy who cried wolf" argument is just an excuse to let one's racist hair down. The assertion that charges of racism have "been made so often they've lost all value" is kind of convenient for racists who don't want to be called racists.

Another aspect NAZI is who ... (Below threshold)
hcddbz:

Another aspect NAZI is who can use it.
Durring the summer a discussion ensued and being on black i was pre judged to be a liberal Democrat. This person was upset that right wingers were using the word NAZI. When everyone knows that it can only be used by the left to describe the right. At which point I showed her the planks of the NAZI party, Trade Unions support, Anti-Capitalism, Universal Health Care, Universal education and asked here which party were they most like Democrats or Republicans?

She then brought up that well there racist and everyones Republicans are racist. I then brought up the fact that she assumed all Black were Democrats and that I was one because of my skin color so isn't she racist?

Bruce Henry,I want... (Below threshold)
Alex:

Bruce Henry,

I want you to put on your thinking cap for me, if you can. What, essentially, is "racism" in your opinion? Why is "racism", as you conceive it, morally wrong? In answering, please do not resort emotional language and well-worn cliches.

Bruce"In other wor... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Bruce

"In other words, if a guy says, "Hey, that seems racist to me," that DOES NOT PROVE that that guy is a racist.'

But if that person says "hey that seems racist to me " on 50 out of 51 different threads than chances are the guy is a racist as he merely looks through the prism of race and this is if he believes what he is saying. If he doesnt believe it and is just saying it than that means he is a liar, fraud, and cant even form a coherent argument for his position. IN Woop's and lee Ward's case you can decide which side of the coin you want them to fall on. personally I think it stood up on edge when it landed for both of them and both sides of the coin are true for both of them.

I have a very good friend who is African American. he got fired recently. Anyone with a set of eyes could see it was coming for months. I tried to speak to him about the situation 3 different times. Not my work area but I was in the general area (difficult to explain). The last time I tried I was basically accused of being a spy for the man (woman in this case) and it nearly ended the friendship.

Shortly after that conversation he was fired for cause.

I spoke to him last weekend and he still believes earnestly that his firing was racially based.

Some people are so blind to the race card that they just dont see.

Racism, Alex, is kind of li... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Racism, Alex, is kind of like pornography. One knows it when one sees it. As a middle aged white Southerner, I've seen lots of it. Do I sometimes see it where it ain't? Probably so. Do I sometimes not see it where it clearly is? Also probably so.

Now put your own thinking cap on, Alex, and defend, if you can, Rodney's concept of "conclusive proof" of racism. What would that be? What would fall short?

For example, do I need "conclusive proof" that racism is a factor in the Birther nonsense, or is that obvious to anyone with eyes and common sense?

Oh Bruce, its all in the de... (Below threshold)
epador:

Oh Bruce, its all in the delivery and the setting.

And you've got it backwards. The problem is that if you make any constructive (or destructive) criticism of a minority, the probability that you will be called racist approaches one and is inversely proportional to the probability that you are being racist. Ditto for "sexist" or "homophobic."

In a similar vein, I would guess that the more a Canadian denies racism or Marxist Progressivism in their fair Dominion, the more racist and Marxist they are.

Bruce:And a PS:</p... (Below threshold)
epador:

Bruce:

And a PS:

There is no denying there is racism in this country. Only an idiot would try to argue against that point. However, only an idiot would call someone an idiot by taking an argument out of context and generalizing the statement.

Certainly the first half of... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Certainly the first half of your statement is probably true, Dr Epador, but where is your evidence that it is "inversely proportional" to the probability that the racism charge is accurate? That's just an assertion on your part, and is more he-who-smelt-it-dealt-it bullshit.

Racism, Alex, is kind of... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Racism, Alex, is kind of like pornography. One knows it when one sees it.

Kind of like I know stupid when I see it and I see lots of it in your post.

Sorry Bruce, racism has a real definition and isn't just a, "I know it in my gut" kind of thing. All your statement tells me is that you haven't a clue as to what racism really is and you are almost certainly quite comfortable accusing people of racism without bothering to examine their motives.

Bruce,I can easily... (Below threshold)
Alex:

Bruce,

I can easily tell you are a man not accustomed to really thinking. I mean no offense by that, it is simply a plain fact.

"Racism, Alex, is kind of like pornography. One knows it when one sees it."

I asked you for an essential description of what you consider "racism" to be, Bruce. Not some vague expression of your (media-induced) sensibility.

You consider "racism" to be 'an explicit expression of ethnocentrism that is obscene, gratuitous, nearly or fully dehumanizing of the Other, and hence morally deforming' if I read you aright. There, that should not have been hard for you if you actually knew of what you thrust out your chest to condemn.

"Rodney's concept of "conclusive proof" of racism."

Conclusive proof of "racism" would be the demonstrable fact of rule by one distinct ancestral group over another distinct ancestral group in which the former invoked their alleged inherent group superiority over the latter as rationale for doing as such, e.g., Jewish rule over Palestinians.

In case you haven't guessed, I do not consider the self-determination of distinct peoples, that is, the wholly natural and salutary desire of peoples to live sovereign and free in their own lands, to be "racism". I take it you disagree. But be forewarned, therein lies to road to true moral debasement.

"Kind of like I know stupid... (Below threshold)
Alex:

"Kind of like I know stupid when I see it and I see lots of it in your post."

If you cannot tell me what a thing is in its essence and henceforth defend your definition against all attempts at deconstruction then you most certainly do not "know" what the thing in question is. If you cannot do the former, self-evidently, you would then be leaning on the crutch of dogmatism.

As an aside, it was not for nothing that the late Sam Francis called the Democrat party the "evil party" and the Republican party the "stupid party".

Don't know what to call it,... (Below threshold)
Ryan Aaron:

Don't know what to call it, but another rule . . .

Any successful answer to a liberal argument will be some sort of 'ist'. 'Racist', 'Sexist', 'Classist', "Chauvanist'. . .etcetera. A liberal is simply incapable of considering the possibility that they could simply be wrong, if they appear to be wrong it must ACTUALLY instead be a flaw in the person who just beat them.

Alex, I was quoting Bruce a... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Alex, I was quoting Bruce and using a device called ridicule to point out that his comment was foolish in the extreme.

You might take note that intelligence is not found in the use of a large vocabulary or the display of an advanced education. It is best found in making one's self understood, without pretense or condescension.

do I need "conclusive pr... (Below threshold)
jim m:

do I need "conclusive proof" that racism is a factor in the Birther nonsense, or is that obvious to anyone with eyes and common sense?

Umm... In general, Yes you do.

While there are certainly some who believe in it for racist reasons I think it to be a crass over simplification to charge all of them with being racist. I expect that many are just conspiracy goons accustomed to wearing tin foil hats. I will remind you again that this was first trotted out by the Hilary campaign and no one is going around calling Hilary a racist today.

The problem with today's left is that they immediately resort to calling all opposition to obama racist. Sure some people who oppose him are racist. Some are racist but oppose him on legitimate grounds. More still are not racist and oppose him on legitimate grounds. The left lumps them all together and declares that there is no other excuse but racism to oppose "the one". It's dishonest and lazy intellectually.

You are simply wrong to ascribe birtherism to racism when the far simpler and more reasonable explanation is that they are just ignorant or ill informed. Much the same could be said of troothers.

"It is best found in making... (Below threshold)
Alex:

"It is best found in making one's self understood,"

What precisely do you not understand, Jimbo? Present trends persisting, your race will cease to exist. I'm afraid it is not as simple as "a return to traditional moral values" and constraining the growth of "big government" and "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps". These are, as should be obvious, placards fit for the brain-dead which serve to render docile those that should be mad as hell. The obvious policy of our elites, of both Left and Right, is one of extirpation and impoverishment of White people in the country that our (White) ancestors build for themselves and their posterity (you know, us White folk). It is obscene. It is a crime of such proportions as to call into question the legitimacy of the extant political dispensation per se. It is to sow the seeds of revolution. You just haven't seen it on Fox "News" yet, so you are understandably in the dark.

Great. Now I have to apolog... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

Great. Now I have to apologize to Chico for saying he was now Wizbang's stupidest troll. because here's Bruce showing that he can match him for unthinking, cliche-filled stupid.

And it's my belief, Otto, that the "boy who cried wolf" argument is just an excuse to let one's racist hair down.

Just because you believe something doesn't mean it's true, Bruce. It just means you believe it. In your case, it's because you're too lazy to think for yourself and judge people on a case-by-case basis.

Make no mistake, I am arguing exactly that: you on the left are crying wolf. You are resorting to the accusation of racism so quickly, so often, and with so little proof that no one (aside from the Kool-Aid drinkers like you) believe it any more. You're like single-celled organisms... stimulus (someone questioning your beliefs) and response (accusation of racism). That's even what you're doing here... you're saying that because I'm arguing that the left is massively overusing the racism argument that I am a racist.

Way to prove my point for me.

The assertion that charges of racism have "been made so often they've lost all value" is kind of convenient for racists who don't want to be called racists.

Then go ahead, Bruce, say it. Say "You are a racist, Evil Otto." Use those words.

Of course, you know what's going to happen next. I'm going to demand you prove it. I'm going to demand that you find something I've posted here that shows my racism. If you want, I'll even give you a link to other blogs and sites I post and you can hunt through my hundreds of comments there too. If I'm a racist, it should be easy for a genius like you to prove.

You won't, of course, because you know how weak that argument is. You know you won't be able to prove it, but in the leftist mindset proof is not required. You said racism is like porn... you know it when you see it. To you, I'm a racist because you think I'm a racist.

Prove it.

After a few hours sleep, I ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

After a few hours sleep, I return briefly to see I've been mischaracterized and called names. What else is new.

First, Otto: I didn't join this thread to call anyone, even you, a racist. Just to point out that I'm-rubber-you're-glue is not a valid defense against accusations of racism. I don't recall anything you've written on Wizbang that was glaringly racist, but I think this cry-wolf nonsense is just that - nonsense - whether put forth by you or anyone else. (Then again, I don't keep archives of every commenter who's ever disagreed with me, as one of your creepier denizens here seems to do.)

So I'm not calling you a racist, Otto. I'm just pointing out what I consider to be an error in your argument.

Second, Alex: I'm not required to dig up dictionary definitions of the word "racism" at your demand. I sense that you are looking for a chance to advance some kind of justification for White Nationalism or something and are spoiling for a fight with someone, anyone. (See post # 41, folks.) It ain't me, dude. I'm not gonna engage with you on that stuff. Be who you are, dude, but I'm not participating.

Maybe a better analogy for racism is sexual harassment. Eye of the beholder. Hence the difficulty of "conclusive proof."

Finally, Jim: I never said all Birthers are racists, or that all opposition to Obama is a manifestation of racism. YOU, on the other hand, seem to claim that all DEFENSE of Obama is based on the false I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I version of racism Rodney espouses. If I HAD made that claim, both claims, yours and mine, would be equally false. But I didn't - I just said that "racism is a factor in the Birther nonsense."

Alex"The very conc... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Alex

"The very concept of "racism" as moral pathology per se is risible. Any people that did not with consistency favor their own over other peoples would not last long on this Earth. "

Bruce Henry
"Second, Alex: I'm not required to dig up dictionary definitions of the word "racism" at your demand. I sense that you are looking for a chance to advance some kind of justification for White Nationalism or something and are spoiling for a fight with someone, anyone"

Gee I actually agree with Bruce Henry here.

Alex go play your white power games some place else please. Gee you have been posting on this site less than a week and I am tempted to ask Jay Tea to haul out Olaf again.

-------

Bruce Henry

REf the Wolf scenario in racism and it helping the racist display racism. Sorry but the ones who cry wolf discredit themselves and not everyone else who actually sees a wolf and calls it out as being one.

After a few hours sleep,... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

After a few hours sleep, I return briefly to see I've been mischaracterized and called names. What else is new.

Aww, poor you. You insult people (don't bother denying it) and then whine when you're insulted back. You mischaracterize people and then claim that you are being mischaracterized.

First, Otto: I didn't join this thread to call anyone, even you, a racist.

Yet you did. You called me a racist. "And it's my belief, Otto, that the "boy who cried wolf" argument is just an excuse to let one's racist hair down." Your words.

Just to point out that I'm-rubber-you're-glue is not a valid defense against accusations of racism.

Except it's not an "I'm-rubber-you're-glue" argument I'm making. I am making the argument that the overuse of the racism accusation is vastly reducing its effectiveness.

I don't recall anything you've written on Wizbang that was glaringly racist,

Was that supposed to be some half-hearted attempt to say you can't prove I'm a racist? That I haven't written anything "glaringly" racist? OK, then, how about something NOT "glaringly" racist? Can you at least prove that?

Here's what we're left with, Bruce: you think I'm a racist, but you can't prove it. The lack of proof doesn't stop you from believing it, though.

but I think this cry-wolf nonsense is just that - nonsense - whether put forth by you or anyone else.

Tough. As of yet, you have yet to make even ONE solid argument against it... just that you "think" it's nonsense.

(Then again, I don't keep archives of every commenter who's ever disagreed with me, as one of your creepier denizens here seems to do.)

Google. Five seconds. Hell, I'll help you out.

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwizbangblog.com%2F+%22evil+otto%22

So I'm not calling you a racist, Otto.

YES.
YOU.
ARE.

And now that you're being called on it, you're desperately trying to back off and weasel your way out of it.

I'm just pointing out what I consider to be an error in your argument.

That's not what you did at all. You made an accusation, provided no evidence, but you made no effort to actually refute my argument.

Just admit it, Bruce: You think I'm a racist. C'mon, man, speak your mind, be honest. Your use of the word "glaringly" above shows it... it is the sort of word that someone uses when they want to cover themselves while not changing their opinion... basically, you believe I'm a racist but am just careful to hide it.

Bruce" "racism is ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Bruce

" "racism is a factor in the Birther nonsense"'

Of course it is. It is a factor in just about EVERY argument known to man.

At the same time and luckily it is a very very very small factor for 99% of the people. For the other 1 % it is always a large factor whether it is a true factor or not.

Alex For the recor... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Alex

For the record. I consider folks who preach white suprecism about 25 levels below race hustlers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

OttoIn Bruce's def... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Otto

In Bruce's defense

"And it's my belief, Otto, that the "boy who cried wolf" argument is just an excuse to let one's racist hair down." Your words.
"

I honestly dont think that he was speaking to anyone in particular but also honestly I didnt read this remarks that thoroughly either.

Ref the word glaring.

Why he put that in there I dont know but I dont feel it had any hidden motive or meaning.

Maybe I am wrong.


I have not come to praise Ceaser but to bury him.

BTW Bruce

"Then again, I don't keep archives of every commenter who's ever disagreed with me, as one of your creepier denizens here seems to do'

If you are referring to me then Screw you. I dont keep archives. It is just excedingly stupid remarks made by my literary adversaries tend to stick in my craw. If you were not referring to me than please state to whom you are referring as from my memory you have accused me of this prior.


<a href="http://news.yahoo.... (Below threshold)
retired military:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110427/ts_yblog_theticket/birth-certificate-wont-end-race-related-attacks-on-the-president

Yes the MSM is guilty of Grave's law as well as providing cover for Obama by paiting his critics as racist.

Yet again the race card gets played.

Alex, Nothing wrong ... (Below threshold)
hcddbz:

Alex,
Nothing wrong is asking people to pull themselves up by their boot straps. The American Dream is that you are born into system where class does not limit one potential. Even during the time of Slavery some blacks were able to rise to positions of power. Born into Slavery owned by several Black Doctors a slave was able to buy his freedom and become a doctor in 1783 and setup his own practice. Black colleges started in 1837 ad by 1881 they were 5. Illiterate Immigrants came to the united states and were able to carve something out for themselves, People came here not because of social programs, not because it was easy but because there was a chance if you want it to succeed. There were always barriers but people fought hard to overcome them.

That does not mean one takes anything for Granted. One has to remember after the end of Slavery segregation was not the law of the Land. In fact there were laws in Congress to prevent it it was the Supreme Court that imposed it. One also has to remember that other groups also faced the same kinds of discrimination, Asian, Irish, Italians , Catholics and jews. However they fought for there rights.

Deciding a case on the merits is what has to matter. I do not like BHO for his policies his skin color does not matter. I come from country where the population is majority black we have good leaders and really suck ones the shade of skin does not factor into it,. History has shown us that Women leaders can be brutal as men.

Now you may ask why I brought up a Black man who had his own practice as Doctor back in 1700's it Because in 1980's NAACP did not like the Cosby show because they felt it was an unrealistic depiction of black family with two professionals one a Doctor the other a lawyer.

That my friends is the worst Racism in America today.
The Racism of look exceptions.

After a few hours sleep,... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

After a few hours sleep, I return briefly to see I've been mischaracterized and called names. What else is new.

It's because of your race.

And the Graves award goes t... (Below threshold)
retired military:

And the Graves award goes to bob Schieffer

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1381527/Donald-Trump-racist-Bob-Schieffer-attacks-Apprentice-host.html

"Trump is a racist"


BTW Alex

It is great to be able to write so flowery. But the impress factor that you are going for is about a negative 100 and going downhill fast.

Alex @ 23,The whol... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

Alex @ 23,

The whole notion of "race" is silly. We're all homo sapiens sapiens. There is less biological diversity in the human genome than there is in the Chimpanzee genome.

There is but one human race. All else is cultural baggage.

retired military @ 52,... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

retired military @ 52,

While I gladly lend my name to the law I have proposed, I object to the "prize" for its fulfillment being in my name. I propose the prize be named for Margaret Sanger.

RodneyMy apologies... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Rodney

My apologies.

RM, No, Brucie was... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

RM,

No, Brucie was speaking specifically to me. I was the one making the "boy who cried wolf" argument, saying that the left's ridiculous over-use of the "racist" charge was diluting its meaning and value. And to prove me wrong, he implied that the BWCW argument is used by racists to disguise their racism.

What it boils down to is that Bruce accused me of being a racist, and then tried to weasel his way out of it. Even then, he wouldn't back off very much... saying that I had never written anything "glaringly" racist here. It's clear what he thinks: that I'm a racist, but I'm just good at hiding it.

We're all homo sapiens s... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

We're all homo sapiens sapiens

"Sapiens" means "wise."

Whoever gave humans that Linnean name obviously had a sense of humor.

Evil Otto,That was... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

Evil Otto,

That was my impression as well. If that was not Bruce's intent, I'm sure he'll clarify his meaning and intent...

Shortly after hell freezes over.

Otto I thought Bru... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Otto

I thought Bruce was referring to my argument earlier about the boy who cried wolf argument.

I will now step my ass out of the middle of you two and pop some popcorn.

Back from work, I'll be hap... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Back from work, I'll be happy to try to explain myself a little.

For one thing, I just comment here for fun. I don't pretend I'm changing the world, or anyone's mind for that matter, and so I'm not particularly careful about what I say here, besides making some attempt to be amusing if not hilarious. And to be polite most of the time.

Now, Otto, you have decided that I have called YOU, specifically, a racist. That's not so. What I said, or meant anyway, is that the Cry Wolf argument has little validity in my opinion, and can easily be used as an excuse for outrageous rhetoric, because, after all, those damn pussy liberals and minorities are ALWAYS saying that stuff!

Since you're so good at Google, Otto, why don't you go through all the Wizbang threads where this issue is discussed? I'm certain I've made similar points here before, so that should reassure you that my remarks were not meant to be Ottocentric.

And the concept of "Graves Law," whereby anytime an allegation of racism is made the accuser has "lost" the debate, is stupid on its face, I'm afraid. Again, "he who smelt it dealt it" is not a defense. The "race card" may be overused, but not nearly as much as some people claim. There is more validity than non-validity in it, in my experience. Your mileage may vary.

"Glaringly" is just an adjective, but I'll concede that inserting it wasn't helpful and could be construed as you have done. So, let me say again that I am not calling you a racist. If I have given that impression I apologize - my intent was to quibble with your argument, not with you personally.

RM, I was referring to you with the creepy archive thingie, but it was a joke - is this thing on? It goes back to you digging up a quote I made ON ANOTHER BLOG that I found, umm, disconcerting. But if I've hurt your feelings, I'm sorry for that, too. Thought I could rib you a little, but I'll be more careful in the future.

By the way, RM, I appreciate you and Jim smacking down this Alex character. He needs to go back to Stormfront.com. I refuse to be baited into giving this warped SOB any legitimacy. I hate Nazis, whether they're your garden variety dumbass or verbose good spellers like Alex here.

Back from work, I'll be ... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

Back from work, I'll be happy to try to explain myself a little.

This should be good.

For one thing, I just comment here for fun. I don't pretend I'm changing the world, or anyone's mind for that matter, and so I'm not particularly careful about what I say here, besides making some attempt to be amusing if not hilarious. And to be polite most of the time.

You're responsible for what you write here, Bruce, just as everyone else is, which means "I'm not careful" isn't much of an excuse. If you don't believe something, don't write it. Whatever arguments or insults I may use (and I openly use them all the time), I NEVER write something I don't believe. Never. If I call someone a mindless leftist drone (like dear, departed Woop for example), it's because I think they're a mindless leftist drone. If I call someone like Hyperbolist vile because he thinks that babies are not people and it should be allowable to kill them (I'm not making that up), it's because I think he's vile.

Say what you mean, mean what you say. Life's easier that way.

Now, Otto, you have decided that I have called YOU, specifically, a racist. That's not so. What I said, or meant anyway, is that the Cry Wolf argument has little validity in my opinion, and can easily be used as an excuse for outrageous rhetoric, because, after all, those damn pussy liberals and minorities are ALWAYS saying that stuff!

C'mon, Bruce. Your actual words are written above in this very thread. "And it's my belief, Otto, that the "boy who cried wolf" argument is just an excuse to let one's racist hair down."

Since I was making that argument, openly so, you were FLAT OUT SAYING that I was using the BWCW argument to let my "racist hair down."

In other words, you called me a racist.

Want to use a little logic? Let's break it down:

A: The "boy who cried wolf" argument is just an excuse to let one's racist hair down.

B: Evil Otto is making that exact argument.

C: Thus, Evil Otto is a "letting his racist hair down."

If A is true, and B is true, then C follows. And C says that I'm a racist because I used that argument.

You can try to spin that away, but your meaning was crystal clear. If you meant so say something different, then you should have said something different. Unlike liberals, with their Shadow-like ability to the know what racism lurks in the hearts of men, all I can go on are your words written here.

Since you're so good at Google, Otto,

Providing you a link is being "good at Google?" Who knew Google was something that had skill levels?

why don't you go through all the Wizbang threads where this issue is discussed? I'm certain I've made similar points here before, so that should reassure you that my remarks were not meant to be Ottocentric.

Ah, so they were just meant to be a generic insult to everyone who thinks the "racist" accusation is being vastly overused? Which, by the way, is virtually every conservative or libertarian here. What you're saying, if I boil it down, is that you think we're ALL racists. I suppose I should feel flattered that you distinguish me enough to say that I haven't said anything "glaringly" racist.

And the concept of "Graves Law," whereby anytime an allegation of racism is made the accuser has "lost" the debate, is stupid on its face, I'm afraid.

It's a Parody of Godwin's Law, which is not really a real rule anyway.

Again, "he who smelt it dealt it" is not a defense. The "race card" may be overused, but not nearly as much as some people claim. There is more validity than non-validity in it, in my experience. Your mileage may vary.

You on the left have been using this accusation for decades as a way of shutting down or shifting debate, but with the campaign of Barack Obama it's become the one... hell, the ONLY weapon in your arsenal. Oppose Obama's election? You're a racist. Make fun of his ears? You're a racist. Laugh at his over-use of the teleprompter? You're a racist. Question his birth certificate? (Which I don't, by the way) You're a racist. Oppose his budgets? You're a racist. Join the tea party? You're a racist. Listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck? You're a racist.

Don't tell me that it's not being overused, Bruce, because I can read. I follow the news. I keep up with political thought and opinion not just on the right side but on the left. I read your side's blogs, and I see how you leftists act on the conservative blogs I read.

And I'm not stupid, whatever you may think.

I see it every single day. You yourself resorted to it in this very thread.

You on the left are overusing, vastly, insanely overusing the accusation of racism. And it's not working anymore.

"Glaringly" is just an adjective, but I'll concede that inserting it wasn't helpful and could be construed as you have done.

Ya think?

So, let me say again that I am not calling you a racist. If I have given that impression I apologize - my intent was to quibble with your argument, not with you personally.

Then, if you're going to quibble with it, do so without implying that those who make it (I'm hardly the first) are racists. That really is proving my first point (that it's overused) for me.

OK, you've apologized, I've vented, and that's that. I'm not going to keep harping on the subject anymore.

Well, Otto, I'm not calling... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Well, Otto, I'm not calling you a racist, but I AM calling you an ungracious, oversensitive, arrogant, supercilious, bombastic, incivil prick. Bless your heart.

You can ALWAYS "say what you mean and mean what you say" if you wish, Mr Forthright Integrity. I might just continue tossing off comments with very little thought if I wish. Other times I might carefully consider what I wish to say and take great care to choose exactly the right words. I'll decide as I see fit, or as the mood strikes me. Appreciate the advice to ALWAYS do as you do, though.

But I do admit that, had I just used the word "often" or "sometimes" in comment # 27, you might not have had an excuse to pretend to be all butthurt. As in, "And it's my belief, Otto, that the 'boy who cried wolf' argument is OFTEN just an excuse to let one's racist hair down." Or "...is SOMETIMES just an excuse..." So excuse me for getting you all riled up for nothing, but, like I said, the stuff I say in blog comments is not something I ever-so-carefully consider before hitting "submit," like you do.

Since you feel free to give me advice about how and with what level of care to comment, I'll give you a little advice as well, Otto. Calm down. Don't be so eager to play victim. Relax, and realize not everyone is so deadly fucking serious about every word they write here. Oh, and accept apologies graciously. You might get more of them.

Bruce HenrySorry I... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Bruce Henry

Sorry I took your joke the wrong way.

It has been a lousy week and on top of everything else I have a damn nasty sty in my eye.

Every time I blink it is like reading Lee Wards posts .. Oh I mean like sticking myself in the eye with a pencil

In reference to your comment on the other thread I tend to google when I am involved in an online discussion and someone says "I Never said ...."

What you say on The internet lasts longer than concrete nowadays.

Take care.

Thanks, RM. You're all righ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Thanks, RM. You're all right, man.

Rodney,"The whole ... (Below threshold)
Alex:

Rodney,

"The whole notion of 'race' is silly. We're all homo sapiens sapiens."

This is simply a (slightly) more sophisticated rendering of the Leftist bromide "one race the human race". It is vacuous in the extreme. It is nothing more than an incantation. The findings of contemporary genetic testing and forensic anthropology stand in manifest contradiction to what you say. In carrying on as some mealy-mouthed cultural Marxist you can only succeed in fashioning a rod for your own back. For instance, if race is a "social construct" then by what standard do you say *species* is not also a "social construct" - that is, defined as such free of any objective, scientifically testable content?

Until you change your tune in light of demonstrable fact, I never again want to hear you say that you are not "politically correct" as you surely are.

"There is less biological diversity in the human genome than there is in the Chimpanzee genome."

And the Europe of native Europeans is the most genetically homogeneous continent on earth. Your point? Wait...I take it you won't be able to resist a snark about the dangers of "inbreeding" and the alleged benefits of miscegenation. Right, all that "inbreeding" is what prevented the White race from being considered synonymous with civilization for the past three thousand years (sarcasm).


I think you do well and tru... (Below threshold)
Alex:

I think you do well and truly know, Rodney, at some level, that something, indeed many things, are disturbingly amiss with the essentially liberal meta-narrative which dominates our age. It will be nothing less than a cosmic outrage if this is how the symphony of Europe ends: not with a bang but a whimper. It is wholly unfitting that White men of the West shuffle forward to the grave as so many zombies, skulls filled with mush. And make no mistake, that is what their minds are brimming over with, the most stupid twaddle imaginable which can be dispensed with summarily by those who can actually think. I do understand, there is a heavy price to be paid for a man in any age who will go against the grain of the regnant ethos, however misbegotten the latter may be. It is to risk being pushed into the hinterlands of moral unpersonhood. It was the price which the spiritually indomitable Charles Lindbergh paid in saying only what was and is eternally true. Yet with the stakes so high, it is a risk we must take, and gladly, for our now dying people.

Alex @ 65,Even a b... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves:

Alex @ 65,

Even a blind pig finds the occasional chestnut. So the Leftists stumbled onto a truth by way of internationalist propaganda which genetics subsequently proved to be true. Homo Sapiens Sapiens is indeed ONE race. One race which can and does interbreed.

While I can see that it really chaps your hide to realize that fewer and fewer folks give a rats ass about your obsession with melatonin content and other fourth order genetic issues, that is indeed the trend, and it is a net positive one.

I'm done with you, as I have no interest in conversing with folks who obviously believe themselves to be subtle white supremacists (even less their more blatant fellow travellers). I suggest you go peddle your schtick somewhere else.

Wizbang readers: was I righ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Wizbang readers: was I right about this Alex asshole in comment # 43, or was I right?

Bruce,Congratulati... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

Bruce,

Congratulations! You win today's blind pig award! Alex is indeed a racist of the white supremacy model, and he is done on this thread.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy