Posted by Ernest Wesley on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:45 | #

Really? So how is it not true?

and?

No, ‘racist’ is pejorative but the truth is never bad.

Posted by John on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:04 | #

<Double over laughing. Look at the name-caller and laugh again, harder. Just when he thinks you’ve composed yourself, start laughing again. Repeat> After about 10 minutes of this, say, “okay, now that we’ve got the juvenile name-calling out of the way, do you have any substantive, fact-base criticism of what I said?”

Posted by John on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:07 | #

This first part of my comment got cut off somehow. I said basically, uncontrollably laugh, appear to have controlled yourself, look at him and start guffawing again

Posted by Englander on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:11 | #

Three sentences which could be reduced back to two, or one, depending on how snappy you want to be:

If acknowledging reality makes me racist, then I’m racist. Just how much reality are you willing to ignore so that you might dodge the label? Have you thought about what the cost might be?

or simply:

A racist or a realist?

Posted by guessedrefuter on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:34 | #

I said basically, uncontrollably laugh, appear to have controlled yourself, look at him and start guffawing again

That’s what I’m doing these days. Sometimes I pretend to get huffy, raise my finger in accusation and just say: “...Ok then.” Sometimes you don’t have the energy to controvert. But with the help of MR’s Snappy Refutations Exercises, the work is all done for us!

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:21 | #

Sometimes you don’t have the energy to controvert.

This is true.  After a while, the sordidness of these graspings after liberal morality can infect the will.

Anyway, back to the breach:

It is not important to me to escape your little moral label.  It is only important to be truthful.

or

What matters is what is correct, not what is politically correct.

or

Racism is another word for an inconvenient truth.

or

If I am wrong and a racist, then let me be punished.  But if I am right, then you must take the pain.

Posted by Tanstaafl on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:33 | #

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

I think you just hate White people.

Pull the log out of your own eye before you complain about the mote in mine.

Life is racist. That’s your answer to it?

“Racialist” actually. Better than being a deracinated sheep marching to slaughter bleating at “racists”.

Yeah. I’ve been called sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamophobic and anti-semitic too. The truth is I hate anyone who thinks calling me names will shut me up.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:35 | #

“That’s racist!”

“Racist??  Race has nothing to do with it.  We’re talking about different species.”

Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:59 | #

Fred’s contribution is the one best suited to causing Liberal apoplexy. Congoids seem very much like Man/Ape hybrids to me and so often display behaviour which indicates a distinct bias towards the latter category.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:53 | #

“Are you profiling me?”

Posted by flippityfloppity on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:21 | #

And your point is ...?

Posted by the Narrator... on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:30 | #

That’s racist! Its fundamentally racist, what you’re saying.

There’s no such thing as race! Didn’t you get that memo!

...

Posted by Genophobe on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:50 | #

For non-whites:

You sound genophobic.  Are you a genophobe or do you fear the white man?

For whites:

You sound genophobic.  Are you a genophobe or expressing a social phobia?

Posted by Armor on Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:37 | #

I am the anti-racist here. I defend my people and my right to exist.
It’s your point of view that is racist. You are basically saying that the whites should shut up and accept to be victimized and replaced by non-whites. But if a white government decided to invade a third-world country and replace its population, you would object. Why the double standards?

Posted by BGD on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:23 | #

It’s either true or not true, not good or evil. If I didn’t know better I’d say you were something of a Victorian prig

Posted by BGD on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:29 | #

Define ‘racist’

Posted by Thunder on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:24 | #

Thank you.  Once again, all good and all useful and they help you direct the ensuing discussion, although I may need to call on Loriver to pursue the racist objective line.

Posted by guessedrefuter on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:40 | #

Yeah. I’ve been called sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamophobic and anti-semitic too. The truth is I hate anyone who thinks calling me names will shut me up.

Good one, man. Most of these are perfect and can be used according to one’s mood and general humor. Sometimes one wants to be sage lik GW, other times mischievous like the Narrator, and the other times steal away in silence, as Mencken prescribed for arguing with Christian Scientists.

Posted by stari_momak on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:03 | #

Depending on the audience, I sometimes go with ‘You’d have to unpack “racist” for me. Sometimes I elaborate—do you mean that I seek to dominate other groups? Or that I recognize the biological fact that population groups differ in non-superficial, non-trivial ways? Or something else?

Posted by Dasein on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:47 | #

Someone to whom I was once reporting the results of that the study back in the 60s (?) where they tested the reactions of white, black, and Asian babies to having a cloth placed over their nose said that that it ‘sounded racist’.  In such a situation (i.e. discussing group differences), I would just ask them whether someone who comments on differences between poodles and labradors is a ‘breedist’ and whether that term should be used in a pejorative sense.  As others have mentioned, the best thing is to get them to define what ‘racist’ is.  Few have examined the term, they only understand it as a trigger response, something their over-developed antennae have been trained to pounce on (they are addicted to the hormonal rush that comes from such moral do-good acts).

Posted by MB on Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:00 | #

72963 & 72976, the latter I intended to post.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:36 | #

I would tell the guy that just because I had an order of these,

https://www.licoriceinternational.com/licorice/pc/Ape-Heads-Apekoppen-500g-1-1-lb-Bag-4p185.htm ,

sent to Obama as an Easter gift it does NOT mean I’m a racist, not at all!  It was a completely innocent gesture!

Posted by Steven E. Romer on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:30 | #

I just tell them that there is no such thing as “racism”. It is a mythical term invented to shut people up who have genuine political concerns. If they aske who, what, how, or why this is I just point them to Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s book on the Jews “The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements (Paperback)” Available in downloadable PDF version here:

http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail~bookid~8622.aspx

I also like the point where one of the commenters uses our love of family to make the point that loving your race is also natural and fundamentally no different. I refer them to Frank Salter’s excellent book:

“On Genetic Interests: Family, Ethnicity, and Humanity in an Age of Mass Migration”

Posted by Svigor on Sun, 19 Apr 2009 04:05 | #

Sorry if I’m repeating, haven’t read replies yet (feels like cheating):

“No, YOU’RE a racist.  And unlike you, I can make my accusation stick.”

“Racism is ‘heresy’ for post-Americans; you’re the modern equivalent of the medieval peasant screeching ‘witch, heretic!’ with little to no understanding of what’s going on; you’re just doing what the pope tells you to do.”

“It’s kind of creepy how people like you have deconstructed the word ‘evil’ and all its synonyms, and more to the point, the very concepts these words represent, yet you turn on a dime and scream ‘racist’ when it suits your purposes, even though everyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that you really mean ‘evil!’ when you screech ‘racist!’  Do you have no respect at all for anyone’s intelligence?”

“Racism has become the duty of all people of conscience,” or, “if you make facts ‘racist,’ all good men will choose racism over ignorance.”

“Conclusions come after facts, not before.  Let’s put the cart back behind the horse and discuss the facts.  Or were you the kid who always had to read the ending first?”

“Flattery will get you nowhere.”

“That’s not an argument, it’s a label.”

Posted by Svigor on Sun, 19 Apr 2009 04:08 | #

“That’s hilarious!  An Uncle Tom using ‘racism’ to silence criticism!”

Posted by Mentious on Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:13 | #

Response:

“I prefer the term racially aware.”

This completely confuses them and opens new windows in their mind. “Racially Conscious” is also a great one. Fuller version:

“I have no idea what “racist” means. I prefer the word ‘racially conscious.’”

If you don’t even allow them their loaded buzzwords, it’s hard for them to proceed forward to their train wreck.

Posted by Chi on Wed, 27 May 2009 04:50 | #

Are you a creationist? Why is it that leftists say they believe in evolution but attack people for talking about the implications of evolution?