@EPoe187 This is a very "Supreme Court" style answer. So, you seem to be saying it is accurate that other academics/smart laymen PERCEIVE AmRen writers as bigots.
But, there's an obvious secondary question here: do you perceive it as CORRECT that most or all AmRen writers are bigots?
But, there's an obvious secondary question here: do you perceive it as CORRECT that most or all AmRen writers are bigots?
@EPoe187 (2) As re @mchappenstance's point, we're not talking here about someone being cited by a white-nat website. We're talking about several someones (I mean, they have a contributors' page) associated with the U.S. dissident right or a particular sci-paradigm WRITING for the site.
@EPoe187 @mchappenstance (3) The obvious questions here are: does this indicate serious bigotry (as it obviously seems to), and if so what should be done?
Without a lot of "taqiya," the BEST response from one or more figures Young names would just be: "Yeah, I'm a racist. Can you prove me wrong?"
Without a lot of "taqiya," the BEST response from one or more figures Young names would just be: "Yeah, I'm a racist. Can you prove me wrong?"
@EPoe187 @mchappenstance (4) Last on this for me: but, from an AMORAL analytical perspective, this is still a problem for serious hereditarians.
I don't mess with "NHJ's" work because she's a Communist - and many people, similarly, just won't check through every model in a 'racist' paper for validity.
I don't mess with "NHJ's" work because she's a Communist - and many people, similarly, just won't check through every model in a 'racist' paper for validity.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
