Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Do progressives WANT an instance of racism to exist so they can feel justified in virtue signalling?

I find democrats to be better on economic policies than republican and definitely better on Global Warming. But progressives and are different. Jazmine Barnes, covington high school kids and now jussie smollett...? Progressives just want to find racism so they can push their narrative of who the enemy is, so they make shit up. That is a huge reason why democrats will loose more elections

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Theseus · 46-50, M

Progressives are conflict theorists by nature. It's not so much about virtue signalling as it is about fomenting discord. Peace between races/genders/orientations is actually injurious to the progressive ethos. They MUST have chaos or they lose their raison d'etre.

daisymay · 51-55, T

@Theseus Like this progressive:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47295551

Theseus · 46-50, M

@daisymay In a manner wholly divergent from the intended connotation, yes! This would be an example of manufactured discord, or discord highlighted for effect.

daisymay · 51-55, T

@Theseus So, what you're saying is that when a conservative calls for lynching Democrats it is a peaceful and unifying event, and pointing it out is manufacturing discord.

Wow, is there anything that conservatives can't do right?

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

daisymay · 51-55, T

@AgapeLove Try to tell me how to exercise my freedom of speech some more.

Theseus · 46-50, M

@daisymay [quote]So, what you're saying is... [/quote]

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth or ideas in my head which are otherwise not there.

In fact I do [b]not[/b] "say" anything of the kind. What I AM saying is that progressives thrive on chaos and will foment it when there is no cause, or will highlight it when there is...precisely as you've done here.

Theseus · 46-50, M

@AgapeLove [b][u]Spot the fuck on!![/u][/b]

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Theseus · 46-50, M

@AgapeLove No. Using the specific phrase "so [thus=a priori assumption/conclusion] what you're saying is..." is putting words/ideas in the mouths/heads of others. It's also known as a fallacy of false attribution.

If you do not understand what I'm saying, ask me. Do not presume you know, as by using any form of "so you.."

[b]Edit: the original respondent in this sub thread has removed his/her posts.[/b]