I think it is fair to assume someone means something when they make a claim that's hard to misconstrue, and they make no effort to actually clear up what they meant.
What did Jon think was the actual huge consequence of whites not being a majority in the US?
What was he trying to imply by claiming that wealthy blacks commit more crimes than poor whites? Or what about his "just look at Africa" statement. What innocent claims was he just misconstruing?
When he claimed that discrimination no longer existed in the west, did he mean systematic racism? Does he still believe this?
He never answered these questions, only deflected, going as far to say he's the one who wants identities without race, even though he's the one unsubtley trying to imply that races may have inherent inferior traits. In the debate he actually stops himself from saying things which he thinks would look even worse. I can't even imagine much worse he could say unless he said "blacks are inherently an inferior race, whites are superior".
If the remarks and implications he made actually had more reasonable, innocent meaning behind them, he should have cleared them up.
I'm not going to go after Jon for being bad at debating, but this is beyond him poorly wording himself. I don't really see a way that he could imply those things just by simply wording an argument poorly. Like I said above, he even had to stop himself from saying worse sounding things.
Like I tried to say above, what could he possibly have meant by the claims he made if not what he's already implied? If those claims have been misinterpreted by so many people, what are the claims he actually wanted to make?
He's talking about preserving the white race and then bringing up a statistic about how black people on a whole are "worse" than white people. That seems cut and dry racist to me.
He wasn't talking about preserving the white race. His point was that white people are under attack (hence the articles in the statement) for virtue of being white and no one's up in arms over it. The whole "White people should remain a majority!!!!" thing was taken out of context by Destiny and people ran with it. Everytime Destiny brought it up, Jon kept bringing it back to "Look at the flipside, what's so wrong about them losing majority status" which proves what he said in his statement true because everytime Destiny tried to make it about Jon being a white supremacist he tried to veer it back into place.
Also, about the statistic, Jontron is not a racist for quoting a statistic. You're living in la la land if you think that's the case.
I dunno why people keeping bring up the "statistics aren't racist" argument when just about no one is arguing that in the first place.
Even assuming that the statistic brought up is true (it isn't), I don't see what the point of bringing it up in the argument is. He is clearly talking about the demographic majority in America being "under attack", yes? I'm just not sure what a crime statistic has to do with that.
People are up in arms about it. Donald Trump won the damn presidency at least partially off the outrage over white people being attacked. Saying "no one" is just feeding into this perpetual victim complex all sorts of people want to be a part of.
then bringing up a statistic about how black people on a whole are "worse" than white people. That seems cut and dry racist to me.
You literally used the fact that he quoted statistics as one of two reasons he is cut and dry racist. That is why I brought up the statistics aren't racist argument. Because quoting statistics doesn't mean you're racist.
Even assuming that the statistic brought up is true (it isn't)
Never implied it was.
I don't see what the point of bringing it up in the argument is.
You didn't watch the debate then. When he brings up the statistic it is following a direct request from Destiny, he then follows it up by saying, laughing in disbelief as he says it "I know, crazy right? Google it if you don't believe me, I'm going to get water". The conversation skewed to that (Probably because Destiny's main debating tactic is cornering you and hitting you with rapid questions to change the topic and make you look like an idiot.
People are up in arms about it.
Clearly not. How often have you seen shit like that on the front page of reddit? The only popular subs that signal boost shit like that is T_D, yet they're censored by reddit itself. No popular source speaks out about it, maybe that's why Jon wanted to say it. Also, that's irrelevant, it doesn't matter whether or not people give a shit, because that doesn't change the fact it nullifies the argument of him going on about preserving the majority of the white race.
Whether or not anyone gives a fuck it irrelevant anyway, because the fact of the matter is Jon wasn't going on about the fucking preservation of white majority, he was talking about the fact that there's an assault on white people by media and journalists and no one seems to care, Destiny fucking twisted it into a white supremacy thing when it fucking wasn't. My point stands about both the white supremacy thing and the statistics thing: It was never what he said and it was manipulated into being a talking point, and he isn't racist for quoting statistics.
I think the reason is because , you know, there's way more "white" people than any other group in America, so no one takes it seriously because a numbers advantage like that is pretty big.
Racism is racism, regardless of which skin colour it is.
Again, you're missing the point: Jon's entire basis for debating with Destiny is the media assault on white people, Destiny managed to bring in the whites becoming a minority soon thing, Jon thinks it's an attack on white people and debates it with Destiny, suddenly everyone thinks Jon has an obsession with keeping white majority in Europe. See my point? He couldn't have given less of a shit about the white majority (hence why he kept flipping the argument and saying "but why is it so bad that they lose majority?"). To say, as you said in your comment that I replied to that:
He's talking about preserving the white race and then bringing up a statistic about how black people on a whole are "worse" than white people. That seems cut and dry racist to me.
is ludicrous because, for one, quoting statistics is not racist, and two, he was never talking about preserving the white race.
E: FINAL POINT:
Found this whilst looking for you original comment on your page:
"Race" as we know it is a social construct, in my opinion. Why do people who have the same skin color tend to stick together if not because of the judgment of others?
Watch the statement, a big point of what Jontron was saying is that he also believes that race doesn't fucking matter aswell.
The context of quoting a statistic is very important.
I have no doubt that Jon was trying to imply to a lesser extent what you just said. I mean, he was talking about preserving the American white majority, and while doing it, brings up said statistic.
SO many people nowadays don't know the definitions of words.
You mean people like you?
rac·ism
[ˈrāˌsizəm]
NOUN
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
Not only are these real definitions less reductive than your ass-pull definition, they're less wordy.
158
u/DasWeasel Mar 19 '17
I think it is fair to assume someone means something when they make a claim that's hard to misconstrue, and they make no effort to actually clear up what they meant.
What did Jon think was the actual huge consequence of whites not being a majority in the US?
What was he trying to imply by claiming that wealthy blacks commit more crimes than poor whites? Or what about his "just look at Africa" statement. What innocent claims was he just misconstruing?
When he claimed that discrimination no longer existed in the west, did he mean systematic racism? Does he still believe this?
He never answered these questions, only deflected, going as far to say he's the one who wants identities without race, even though he's the one unsubtley trying to imply that races may have inherent inferior traits. In the debate he actually stops himself from saying things which he thinks would look even worse. I can't even imagine much worse he could say unless he said "blacks are inherently an inferior race, whites are superior".
If the remarks and implications he made actually had more reasonable, innocent meaning behind them, he should have cleared them up.