Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Second, you've shifted to ad hominem here. Even if you were right that Cliff and I engage in the same thing and reduce dissenting voices to caricatures (which I deliberately try not to do; Rapoport's rules are a good touchstone) it would say nothing about my criticism of your approach to these issues, and to the approach of some on the left that I think you're demonstrating in this conversation by casting anyone who disagrees with you as ignorant.
|
Okay, so you're not going to answer my question? I said in my first post that my first instinct if someone were to say that police brutality, etc., wasn't grounded in white supremacy as likely incredibly ignorant due to my own experiences with these types of debates. Ignorant might have been the wrong term. You can substitute misinformed, uninformed, missing a certain perspective, etc. However, I also said that I'm open to the possibility that they're not, or that I'm wrong.
I mean if you want, I can give you another example. I often have the same approach when people make "Canadian justice system is a joke" post after a decision is made that they don't like. I assume from past experiences that the person making the statement likely doesn't have a firm grasp of how the common law system works, various legal theories, etc., because that's who usually makes those snap statements, but I leave open the possibility that I'm wrong.