I don't dodge questions, not reasonably ones anyway....You get lots of questions that involve research which is just work on an opinion forum. I've been down the research route multiple times and its pointless. For example, I proven points about crime rates and population rates and all you get is denial....So really you end up putting in the work for nothing. So I've come to the conclusion that unless you know the poster and have time for them it's just a way of wasting your time.

I'm not saying that's you and you saw that I did respond with links. You were partly right to say I had a couple of them saved from previous but two of them were quickly available from just looking. So as you're polite I looked.

My point about you 'dancing on a pin' is a reference to your tendency (from what I've seen on posts) to make a claim about racism and then sit on the fence to any counter reference.

Do I regard this as kosher? Well, when you appeared on this thread it was to agree with Watson's detractors that he had 'cherry picked' evidence. You didn't for example choose to agree with anything he said or make a point about the leftist media and anti white racism. Hence your general priority of stance on this matter appears reasonably straight forward to me.....You are obviously free to object to those observations.

On other threads, if I remember correctly, you have also posted in contention against crime rates and groups and yesterday you seemed to be highlighting racial sensitivity to any criticism regarding blacks....some of which is maybe racial but I don't have a window into men's souls so I mostly stayed out of it.

But what that showed to me was that you're happy to accept a low threshold on what would be thought as 'racism'.....again, these are my asked for observations and you are free to object.

As for my position on 'racism' it's probably closer to Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali's view in the sixties and seventies. I don't believe that multiculturalism or integration works well in unfiltered environments and ultimately ends in ethnic repression and surveillance against the groups the elites don't favour......Repression and surveillance isn't something that is required in homogeneous societies and hence is evidence that it doesn't work naturally.

So you might ask why I focus upon anti white racism as my position is that racism is natural and inevitable. My answer to that is that I attack double standards that pretend to believe in equality and egalitarianism when in reality they are just as biased and one sided as the people they attack.

That's the important thing for me....whether something is honest or not. So I'll attack a media which is essentially far left and pushing critical race theory because it claims it's not racist when in reality it's anti white and fundamentally dishonest.

This movement uses the gains it achieved under 'equality' (which is anti meritocratic) and now pushes for 'equity' (even more anti meritocratic). This is the type of media that Watson attacks and I'm happy to endorse it.

I could write pages on this topic but you asked me for my observations on what I regarded as your position and I gave you some basic general motivations of where I am on the topic of 'racism'.

Edited by Stirlingsays (26 Mar 2021 10.39am)

If that comment section is any indication of modern day Ireland then they are in even bigger trouble than I thought.

Probably for the same reason that the people at the vigil on clapham common didn't or the anti lockdown protesters didn't or the anti vaxer protesters didn't there are too any of them.

I suspect you believe it's because they are muslim maybe maybe not, but explain to me why the police didn't at the vigil on clapham common then because as far as I could see they weren't majority muslim.