He of course immediately points to “hate crimes” being mostly anti-black.
Because the government counts every white-on-black crime as a hate crime while counting every black-on-white crime as a non-bias incident. Even when the black offender straight-up says he or she hates whites.
Misinformation? Fine then put it on there but it’s pretty well documented that crime is higher among the same race. The massive disparity is interracial.
"I know the point is to compare the price of apples for the past 10 years, but it's misinformation if you don't include the price of paperclips too." - The left, for some reason.
I’m on record recommending people watch a YouTube series called “The Alt-Right Playbook.” It’s by a hardcore leftist SJW but it’s worth a watch because it’s the best explication I’ve ever seen of how Very Online extremists behave, argue, interact, etc. The overarching theme is that they act with regard to strategic concerns rather than truth/accuracy/consistency. Each video highlights and names a different technique in the toolbox of such truth-free activists. The blind spot in the series, of course, is that the creator thinks it’s just “the alt-right” who does the things he’s noticed, and not illiberal extremists and agenda-mongers of ALL stripes. So if one can ignore the specific references to political allegiance in the videos and recognize that everything the creator says also applies equally to his own illiberal confederates, the series is endlessly enlightening.
But long story short, what the lefty journalist is doing is a combination of the techniques described in the videos “Never Play Defense” and “The Card Says Moops” from that series.
Yep, they just had to find any chain of words that could end in “and therefore this is problematic.” That’s basically their one rhetorical move.
Here they had to force a very square peg of an argument through a round hole, but it’s only important that someone vaguely smart-sounding is saying the thing is problematic. That way Generation TL;DR has something they can vaguely point to that they think defeats the original chart. It’s marketing strategy 101, just get ANY counter-narrative out there, most people won’t read it and the people it’s for (wokesters) will just assume it’s true because they are already on the “it must be problematic” side just from sheer bias. This guy just did the service of providing the thing they can vaguely point to.
the guy is self-owning even harder... if you add same-race crime data, you'd basically see that white-on-black crime is a rounding error when it comes to all crimes suffered by blacks.
If I didn't know better, I'd think they were asking to see black on black crime statistics.
That face when they realize it’s worse.
Sure, go ahead, put "black on black" and "white on white" bars there and let's see what they look like.
"Per capita was invented by white people so they could hide how violent they are" - some absolute retard.
He of course immediately points to “hate crimes” being mostly anti-black.
Because the government counts every white-on-black crime as a hate crime while counting every black-on-white crime as a non-bias incident. Even when the black offender straight-up says he or she hates whites.
One of the biggest redpills is finding out most hate crimes have been black-offender/White-victim going back to like the fucking 1850s.
Oh, please, put it on there.
Misinformation? Fine then put it on there but it’s pretty well documented that crime is higher among the same race. The massive disparity is interracial.
"I know the point is to compare the price of apples for the past 10 years, but it's misinformation if you don't include the price of paperclips too." - The left, for some reason.
If black on white crime doesn't count because it's dwarfed by intra-racial crime, then neither do hate crimes or police shootings.
I'm not sure they thought this one through very well.
Well what do you suppose a graph of intraracial crime per capita would look like?
Ok. Let's talk about overall crime statistics then. lol.
I’m on record recommending people watch a YouTube series called “The Alt-Right Playbook.” It’s by a hardcore leftist SJW but it’s worth a watch because it’s the best explication I’ve ever seen of how Very Online extremists behave, argue, interact, etc. The overarching theme is that they act with regard to strategic concerns rather than truth/accuracy/consistency. Each video highlights and names a different technique in the toolbox of such truth-free activists. The blind spot in the series, of course, is that the creator thinks it’s just “the alt-right” who does the things he’s noticed, and not illiberal extremists and agenda-mongers of ALL stripes. So if one can ignore the specific references to political allegiance in the videos and recognize that everything the creator says also applies equally to his own illiberal confederates, the series is endlessly enlightening.
But long story short, what the lefty journalist is doing is a combination of the techniques described in the videos “Never Play Defense” and “The Card Says Moops” from that series.
They know there’s no defense so they flip the chessboard and scream racism
Yep, they just had to find any chain of words that could end in “and therefore this is problematic.” That’s basically their one rhetorical move.
Here they had to force a very square peg of an argument through a round hole, but it’s only important that someone vaguely smart-sounding is saying the thing is problematic. That way Generation TL;DR has something they can vaguely point to that they think defeats the original chart. It’s marketing strategy 101, just get ANY counter-narrative out there, most people won’t read it and the people it’s for (wokesters) will just assume it’s true because they are already on the “it must be problematic” side just from sheer bias. This guy just did the service of providing the thing they can vaguely point to.
the guy is self-owning even harder... if you add same-race crime data, you'd basically see that white-on-black crime is a rounding error when it comes to all crimes suffered by blacks.