Yes he did work for Breitbart, that sexist, white supremacist. He happened to leave the job to show solidarity with a female colleague who was assaulted by a member of Trump's staff. Then going on to bash the "Alt-Right" God's Trump and Bannon repeatedly and viciously.
Peterson, Harris, etc....
- Thread starter prath92
- Start date
Do you mean a 7 year old article where he essentially mocks the importance of the birth certificate and the people who had been pressing to see it? Right.
When we are reaching that much it is probably time to have a rethink, Shapiro is one of the few people that I haven't seen referred to as racist from everyone on the far left and there is probably a good reason.
The correct answer to birtherism is "Of course Obama is an American" not rambling nonsense about what is and isn't American.
He edited it for 3 years. His broken clock moment doesn't undo his job there.
For reference, this what the correct answer to birtherism is. Starts at 40 seconds.
"The correct answer" for you. Either way 6 word articles probably don't garner many views.
So there must be plenty of examples of overtly racist things he wrote. After all that is the perfect platform for a racist writer to go nuts.
Anyway it is the same debate with you over and again. I am not going to change your view, every conservative is racist or some other ist. I'll leave it there.
Not every conservative was racist enough to engage in birtherism.
"no amount of digging in Kenya and Indonesia is going to solve a problem that now starts right here." The article you posted was him bemoaning an ideological issue he views America having, including education. He literally used the birth certificate row to highlight how irrelevant it had become. Stop clutching at straws. There are plenty of racists out there to condemn.
Very few of them have thread on here with people defending them. If he was using that article to do as you say, why didn't he explicitly reject the central tenant of birtherism? That Obama is not American? This is what racism in a suit is.
He says they are mentally ill rather than actually being accepted for who they are... I'd say that's pretty despicable tbh
It depends what you mean, essentially he spends half the article debunking the importance but at the same time you could say writing an article at all is bringing attention to it.
Regardless if you can't see that you are clutching at straws on this one then there is nothing to be said. If you look at the post below yours you will see someone reference a view Shapiro actually holds and clearly communicates. A view that is genuinely harmful and worth attacking.
Can anyone point to anything he's actually said that's racist though? I can't think of anything at hand, and he's always been quick to back his points up with stats. It's not as if he's spouting ignorant stuff off the cuff.
You will just get some twitter posts from years ago which can almost be looked at as racist if you perform 20 turns of mental gymnastics.
The thing is, Shapiro is very open about his socially unacceptable views. He states them very clearly and doesn't apply much subtlety, if he was a racist it would be very apparent very quickly.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/91092/about-birth-certificate-benjamin-shapiro
"If Obama was born [in America]". Birtherism 101.
They just strike me as typically conservative views to be honest. A little bit overly patriotic, and a bit naive, and a bit xenophobic. I think accusations of outright racism are reaching a bit though tbh.
If you're whipping out the xenophobia scale you're probably on the wrong side of the debate.
"Clouding the Obama administration with conspiracy theories about his parentage I think is not only mistaken but silly. The fact is that we know who is father is, we know where he was born. All the rest of this is nonsense." - Ben Birthist Shapiro
Why? Xenophobia isn't the same as racism. There are people in this country who are against multi-culturalism, the continued islamification, etc. I wouldn't call them racist, even if you do disagree with them.
Some people on this thread are not really different from the college nutjobs who protest at his speeches chanting lots of rubbish
Xenophobia is literally a synonym for racism.
Silva was that the "correct" answer to the birth certificate issue that you had been hoping for?
Nah, it's not. You can be xenophobic without being racist.
Yes. But that doesn't undo his earlier article. Care to link to his new found opinion? Google isn't being very helpful.
Possibly highlights the obvious point he was making in that article in regards to birth place being irrelevant due to ideological issues in American culture and education. I am pretty sure he refers to all American people as being stupid for goodness sake, hardly some white supremacist proudly lauding a "master race".
Have you got a link for that quote?
1:20 onwards.
I don't even like the bloke, I think his views on Trans people is completely outdated (harmfully so) and his arguments regarding pro life are weak and preachy. There is nothing to suggest he is a racist though, people can be bad in lots of different ways but we may as well be accurate when we criticise them.
I was really hoping he's seen the light somewhat. But he immediately launches into more dogwhistle politics, implying the only reason Obama had an okay approval rating is because he's a black man.
He was asked a specific question to which he provided a pretty balanced answer considering how poorly he rated Obama's political performance. If you don't think being the first black president provided a little leeway in broad public opinion then you are blind.
Yeah agree
An article again where he says he supports the veracity of Obama's birth certificate, mostly bemoans Huff Post and says he doesn't like that Obama's biography has constantly changed.
He is a Republican, he doesn't like Obama. Not liking a black man doesn't automatically mean you are racist.
I am done with the subject, you are too entrenched and I have no desire to go around in circles whilst you find any article he has ever written with the word "black" in it.
He is a Republican, he doesn't like Obama. Not liking a black man doesn't automatically mean you are racist.
I am done with the subject, you are too entrenched and I have no desire to go around in circles whilst you find any article he has ever written with the word "black" in it.
It's the BNP/UKIP thing. One party says the really quite racist things, then the other waters it down a little "Clearly those people are super racist and what they say is totally wrong... but"
Okay okay, he's racist...to you, he's not to others, we're not obligated to use your racistometer, okay?
Racism used to be and should be very clearly defined, that has changed because it is easier to smear someone's character when you can take irrelevant "no smoke without fire" examples and then brandish absolute terminology (racist, sexist etc.). Occasionally not even bothering with that irrelevant starting point and just making baseless assumptions.
It is maddening that people doing this are the loudest voices on the left, I genuinely think it is one of the major reasons the right are winning elections, winning referendums and laughing at us whilst they do so. The truly frustrating thing is that if these loud voices stopped the baseless name calling and character assassination, stopped the identity politics (white privilege, male privilege being key) focused on class privilege we would get the job done without alienating millions of potential allies. It would also allow some coherence and actually focusing on the issues in a debate, for example pointing out that when Shapiro talks about how GD and GID were very recently being classed as mental disorders that he totally ignores evolution in psychology, rather than just shouting what a bigot he is.
If you were a young undecided voter and you see one of those videos of "Shapiro destroys SJW" I could hardly blame you for believing you will relate much more with the people on the conservative side of the spectrum.
Last edited:
It's not. The pendulum swings back and forth.
Yep totally ignoring the issues within our own party is another issue, well highlighted.
Judging from my interactions with you on here you are potentially exactly the type of person I am referring to so your opinion on the matter will carry limited weight for me. If you don't believe the inane effect the very vocal minority has had on the American left didn't play a big part in Trump winning for example then I place even less weight on your opinion of the matter.
Hard to tell such things over a football forum but we all form opinions on whatever exposure we have.
There's no stats that support the idea that internet discourse impacts votes. The most predictive stats remain age, income and background. SJWs have the same impact on peoples votes as gamergaters, zero.Yep totally ignoring the issues within our own party is another issue, well highlighted.
Judging from my interactions with you on here you are potentially exactly the type of person I am referring to so your opinion on the matter will carry limited weight for me. If you don't believe the inane effect the very vocal minority has had on the American left didn't play a big part in Trump winning for example then I place even less weight on your opinion of the matter.
Hard to tell such things over a football forum but we all form opinions on whatever exposure we have.
Yep totally ignoring the issues within our own party is another issue, well highlighted.
Judging from my interactions with you on here you are potentially exactly the type of person I am referring to so your opinion on the matter will carry limited weight for me. If you don't believe the inane effect the very vocal minority has had on the American left didn't play a big part in Trump winning for example then I place even less weight on your opinion of the matter.
Hard to tell such things over a football forum but we all form opinions on whatever exposure we have.
Is there any data to support this?
I am not sure where Internet specifically came into it. Of course things like political climate, world events, atmosphere in educational and professional institutions, the current deficit and a myriad of other factors play no part in the result of elections. You are literally saying the most vocal section of the party has zero effect on the election, how am I supposed to respond to that?