-38
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
-38 points (16.1% liked)
Conservative
357 readers
64 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
Because the moment you're preferring race, you're fundamentally not preferring something else, and if you ask me, race is pretty much the absolute bottom of the list of things to judge people on.
I said, let's assume that the best of the best is diverse in demographics.
You're saying that race preferences necessarily exclude other preferences. But what is not being excluded is whether any given person is the best of the best by our assumption.
So, sure, race can be the absolute bottom of the list of things to judge people on, but that's inconsequential. We're still highly qualified candidates.
It seems like I'm missing something: what other preferences should take precedence over race, then? We're already at the top of the top, the most whipped of the whipped cream. What other preferences might you prefer to take precedence over race at this level?
Or are you saying something else entirely?
I mean if you want to work from a false premise, there's no point in further having this discussion
I literally asked you to correct me.
That's where I'm at, too. Thx for the argument.
I did. Multiple fucking times. But it didn't fit whatever stupid strawman you wanted, so you just ignored it and acted stupid. Or more realistically, it wasn't an act
You've my permission to have the last word after this:
None of you that I've argued with so far have any idea what you're saying.
I can't press you on anything because, as far as I can tell, your beliefs are completely (or mostly, in Winter's case) divorced from reality and logic. I mean, you consider thought experiments as strawmen, for god's sake! Your "corrections" fail to correct me when I'm trying to be corrected. You make the same logical mistakes over and over and over with nary a hint of awareness. You're all unable to consider alternatives that might lead to the same consequences, and you can't see that you can't either.
Nonetheless, it was a good argument. So, again, thanks. But I definitely won't be doing this again with y'all.
Lmao I guess this is the shit we're stuck with when a perpetual troll gets brought on as a mod