Its the inevitable end of "everything we find gross in a relationship is pedos."
They learned that that word is magical, it instantly wins and makes your opponent look really bad. If they argue against you in any way, people won't listen and they will look worse. Its literally the repeat of every other term these days. Nazi, racist, sexist, etc. It gets used liberally, becomes common among normies, and then people gradually become resistant to caring since they'll be called it no matter what.
And in the case of pedos, that literally helps the actual pedos of the world operate. Because pedophilia isn't a made up social crime, but a legitimate evil. But people will stop jumping as high when they hear the word over time, and it'll be blood on the hands of those who threw the term at everything they disliked. From drawings to "young adult" women.
They literally have no reason to act any differently.
Their job is to make line go up for the stockholders, legally they must do this. Everything else is secondary to that.
Their second job is to secure their escape route when things go belly up. They just need to network just well enough and secure their golden parachute to jump to the next host and continue their parasitic cycle.
Focusing on the worst of the worst, while trying to scare the lesser problems into taking care of themselves is very much a smart plan to maximize limited resources for this task.
His focus on antisemites among this is fully retarded, but aiming for the ultra-felons while trying to get the smaller fries to be so scared they run is absolutely the best plan. Not only in terms of using manpower, but also for setting all the foundation and precedent to "legally" do this in spite of the Dem's blocks.
I'd still prefer we just hung every one of them from every telephone poll in town as a symbol, but in a "civilized society" this is probably one of the better methods.
some dictionary definition
Considering the topic at hand was grammar, its really funny you consider pedanticism about definitions some grievous offense. Guess its fine when you are winning and bad when it works against you.
Jews are white in terms of race.
And few people agree with you on this, since popular consensus seems to be where you default back to as what defines reality. Jews don't think they are white, antisemites don't think they are. I asked it because the only way Jews can count as white, is by coloration. Otherwise they fail every single metric, other than "lived in this country" by which Arabs and Niggers in Europe can count as white too.
You also didn't capitalize it there, in complete opposition to your own words earlier. Oopsy, guess someone was in a rush there huh?
I'd explain to you how even as far as West Germany native people have a large fraction of Celtic (Irish) DNA.
Does my black friend having a white grandfather make him white?
I've absolutely heard more about the "harassment and hate" the black family has gotten than I have the murder itself, let alone the dead kid, his name, or why he was killed. Outside the places I actually trust with bringing me news of course.
They are absolutely trying to scream so loudly it drowns out everything except the white guilt angle.
Those are the literal definitions in the dictionary. You can google it yourself, or whichever your preferred engine is. Even when they are trying to abolish the very idea of race as a whole, they still use that definition.
I do notice you dodged both the question of "are Jews white" and "is the federal government a trustable source to you?" just so you can hide behind insults.
I wonder why that is.
But it's not like we had any viable options who wouldn't have done the exact same thing.
They absolutely would have done worse and we'd not even know about 1/10th of it.
Harris might have talked a lot of shit about pro-Palestine, but her party and handlers would have continued the pro-Israel agenda exactly as it had been for decades without the media even talking about it. Just bills signed in silence and money/arms shipped without a peep.
Regardless of how you feel about Trump, he is rarely able to keep his mouth shut about anything, and the media will absolutely blast everything he doesn't say. So in the "both are bad" categories, at least we know and might be able to say/do something with him.
that listed Iberian?
I've also not seen them list Jew, and most of the time Latino is categorized as "White" with a whole different question for Hispanic as something not racial as it has its own question.
But I feel like you might consider those two "not white." So clearly you only appeal to authority when you think it benefits you without thinking. But glad the Federal Government is what you think of as someone you should cite on race.
There is nothing to admit to being wrong about, I'd happily do so if you said anything that might give me pause. But so far you can't even address the point other than "nu uh."
I mean, the Jews and the Muslims don't have a long and well documented history of sending their people to every corner of this planet to provide aid and other genuine acts of charity to raise the standards of living. But Christianity does. This might be part of an effort to convert them, but its still niceties.
Instead they treat everyone who isn't already one of them as either marks, cattle, or targets for conquest. They have rules upon rules about what you can do to people who aren't part of your group and those rules are rarely kind, and when they are its usually self-interest and gain motivated.
Trump does have some history of making Israel play ball at least partially with him. He has a few times made them either cease or contribute something before going back to riding their dick.
Its still far too lenient for anyone's liking by a mile, but it does give him a little spark of genuineness to his plans.
What's extra funny is the "post limit" rule was introduced mostly because of Imp, and the guy trying to imply "he is totally a fake, a shill and a forum slider" is currently having to post around that every day.
Funny irony there.
True, but its very funny to remind them of how much more similar they are to people they hate and whine about than they are to the "superior peoples" they claim to be protecting.
As I often told Imp, he argues like a woman, and even a Feminist, more than he does anything resembling a man.
In your view, the highest level of ancestry grouping doesn't have a name for itself, it's just "supercategory".
Yeah it does, its called human. It begins there to differentiate us from the other apes. Then it breaks down into the big three, which are hugely vague but still noticeable separations. And then it just keeps breaking down to more and more specialized groupings.
I cannot even follow your logic any longer beyond "nu uh."
At least at this moment we can pretend that every American has a vote, even if its all for show.
Under that requirement, they don't even have to pretend anymore. They can just price us all out until only the Elites can afford to vote.
A race is a group of people with shared physical and/or historical ancestry. The fact that all those various whites can be denoted based on their differentiating physical features alone in a large quantity makes them a unique race.
"White" or "European" or even "Caucasoid" is the pulled back supercategory of race that all of them belong to, to denote their much wider differences away from the Negroid (black) and Mongoloid (yellow, red, brown) categories of race.
I'll grant you, I don't know enough about Africa to know their broad racial categories and just picked three countries I could remember offhand.
There's one White race
I can think of Britons, Slavs, Iberians, Scandinavians. Just like I can think of Congolese, Nigerians, Ethopians for black (if they could remember where their ancestors came from). So yeah I think there are multiple white and black races.
That the words have other meanings is irrelevant
When the other meaning can be a valid usage of the word in context and is intended as such, its completely relevant. The people can be described as white, which means its a traditional coloration usage of the word.
My point isn't that it isn't valid to capitalize it, its that if someone chooses not to its not some 4d political stance they are dogwhistling. Its more likely they are just defaulting to their form of basic grammar without thinking about it.
The Left created a shadow, and its doing more work making us paranoid and fight amongst ourselves than it did to "validate or invalidate" their racial superiority views.
because it's the only thing anyone can ever come up with
Almost like it was in fact the big and usually only reason. Are you upset that when asked "how can I have a baby" people say "have sex?"
Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo paid these companies big money (or invested in their owned dev teams) to hold games hostage on their hardware to help people want to "invest" in this expensive box and get their foot in the door to sell them more games over time. Its literally basic marketing/capitalism.
while they keep popping up in my Steam queue a few years later on
Almost like the PS5 failed as a console and consoles as a whole are dying. Why are you mad that you are winning?
Sony stopped making exclusives people cared about. Its in fact been one of the top topics around here every time it happened. If The Last of Us 2 and God of War Ragnarok were unquestionably masterpieces instead of huge controversies, and the PS5 stick the landing, we might not have seen Sony trying to double dip all the titles it owns via Steam to inject revenue.
They stopped making good exclusives, and made their consoles into worse PCs that were overpriced versus what exclusives people cared they might have, and so they had to tuck in their tail and become Steam's bitch. This only supports my arguments because its once again basic capitalism.
Nintendo by contrast has a storied history of at least attempting to make innovations with its hardware that the PC platform didn't yet offer
The entire reason we have Blu-Ray discs right now is because Sony did this with the PS3 and it helped them kill the HDDVD industry, after the PS2 helped make DVDs themselves a thing and the PS1 was a decent CD player at a time when that was a big deal.
These things are standard now, but the DVD/Bluray thing is literally the reason why those consoles sold ridiculous numbers relatively. People could convince their families that it was a double dip on a game console and an X-player. This is where the bad idea of "media box" began for them.
PC was capable of these things, but in 2000 (when the PS2 came out) they weren't super common overall, and in the mid 2000s for Blu-rays oops, PC decided to start its path towards phasing out CD drives as standard inclusions. And you ran into a lot of the "software issues" trying to play them a lot of the time, though not to a ridiculous degree.
Nintendo did some of their "gimmicks" well and some of them failed so hard its a running joke. Like the WiiU.
I think one could argue that "black" and "white" races are proper
You could, but they are also words outside of races. Words that denote color, of which that color is the skin of the people they are describing traditionally. This is unique to black/white because almost all other races are primarily referred to by a proper proper noun like Hispanic, Asian, Arab, etc. Whereas very few people use yellow or brown to the same extent, though brown does get some usage.
And you are right its not completely accurate (though I've met plenty of charcoal black blacks), but that's because its a traditional label. Our ancestors used it, and that's just what we inherited.
Its one of those English ambiguities, wherein multiple grammatical rules intersect and we just kinda leaned into one direction for a long enough time that it became the way it is.
I do agree that if we are going to make a call, it should be all one way or another. I'll default to the pre-"Current Year" format of keeping them adjectives unless its used as a proper noun, like The Blacks, because I refuse to let the Left make me jump when they say to, but I won't fault someone who goes the opposite direction.
Predictable.
Why, because its the truth? If you wanted to play X game you needed Y console. That was the basic formula. You asked what they did that PC didn't, and that was "played Mario." That doesn't mean they were worth it, that was just the deal.
Its literally by definition a selling point, because its what sold the consoles in the first place.
but that was every console.
And nearly every console had that functionality. You picked your flavor from the exclusives category, and boom it was there.
Play Online account
One of the downfalls of consoles as a dominant force was them aping PC, leaving them as just worse PCs. "Online gaming" was one of the first forays into this, and its what opened the door for "will finish later with patches" taking away that "it just worked" functionality, as well as the much slower and overall less capable system because it was constantly running an online OS in the background instead of entirely focusing on the game.
You can believe that's a good thing. I won't argue with you on it, but consoles trying to become PCs is why they died/are dying. Because the PC will always do it better. And they forgot the things they did well in the process. From "installing" games for hours after you got home to trying to be an "all purpose machine."
You also didn't capitalize black other than the first word of the sentence, almost like they were adjectives, meaning his weak gotcha doesn't even make sense.
This is how the Left buckbreaks people, making them jump at every shadow before they think about it.
The effort was appreciated regardless, though the largeness of it certainly made it hard to appreciate most of the stories beyond the handful that would catch your eye as you scrolled by.