[–] Omnidempotent 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago
You cannot separate the ideas from the man because he, as a jew, uses those ideas instrumentally to push jewish interests.
You can't just isolate one thing that he said and consider it in a vacuum. The context of who and what he is matters and it colors everything he says and does. It is hardly "irrelevant".
You can jerk off over your intellectual purity all you want, but you're really just an egg-headed idiot who is ignoring important information in front of your own eyes.
[–] canbot 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
This exact logic is what underlies all the worst ideas of the extremists, especially the left wing identitarians. This is the reason they give to be racist against white males, because by definition everything white males say and do is to push white patriarchy. To me this is blatantly absurd on it's face, so it's kind of hard to even put an argument together because I don't understand how you can believe it.
For starters you are by default attributing motivation to everything someone does based solely on who they are. Which is obviously wrong because all of my motivations are not based on being white. I have different motivations for different actions I take, this on it's own destroys your argument. Different individuals of the same group often have different opinions. Ben Shapiro often disagrees with other Jews, how can they both be pushing the Jewish agenda? It is just so demonstrably wrong on so many levels.
Then they use the argument that Affirmative Action is not racist because you have to consider it in the context of history and the oppression of blacks. They use that argument for all of their racist policies. But the context they use is cherry picked historical "facts" that may not even be true and are usually taken out of context and they ignore facts, both historical current, that contradict their policies. With this kind of reasoning you can make literally any argument and facts don't matter. You can always make two perfectly contradictory argument on both sides of every issue by simply by cherry picking different supporting arguments. This is no way to get to the truth. To find a reasonable way to act. To solve problems. You may as well just scream at the top of your lungs until you get your way.
You can't just make the catch all argument that anyone who doesn't subscribe to this kind of flawed reasoning is by definition ignoring important information. No intelligent person can think that this actually holds true for everything. It literally can't.
If there is in fact important information that is overlooked than a proper approach to reasoning and discussion will bring it out. You have to support each idea with the relevant information, not just claim that it is always there for all your argument.
Again, the whole thing is so absurd it is hard to wrap my head around how you can actually think this way. There must be hundreds of illogical rationalizations you have and there is no way for me to predict them. But there are so many flaws with this kind of thinking.
Ideas and arguments are right or wrong on their own. Not because of the identity of who said them.
If your argument fails on its own merits and you think you are still right because of some historical argument you are probably using a fallacy to justify your argument.
[–] Omnidempotent ago (edited ago)
The central problem you're having with this, beside your naive autism, is that you are assuming there is symmetry between whites and jews, that we're all fundamentally the same. This is wrong. You, as a white, might think as an individualist, but the other races (and especially the jews) do not think this way. They have an explicit racial consciousness that whites are sorely lacking. It is this conscious that drives them to act and speak in their race's interest.
It is this racial reality that acts as context for everything ben shapiro says. He, fundamentally, does not have your interests at heart, only those of his kin. And everything he does is motivated by this, even if he happens to disagree (on the surface) with other jews on how to defend jewry. Or, if that is too "extreme" for you, he does or says nothing that would be against his racial interests. That's why he is such a strong civnat instead of an identitarian. He fears whites gaining a racial consciousness because he knows that would be bad for jews.
You are correct that this is absurd. Today's whites are too deeply individualist for this argument to make sense. They are simply projecting their own racial consciousness on to us. Instead of stubbornly rejecting racial reality and living in some abstract world of arguments and ideas, however, we should take a page from their book and awaken as a race and look at reality as it is plain before our eyes.
[–] Soyboy69 ago
Who they are and their position in society, if I knew a random jew who isn't in a position of any kind of power or where they are a mouthpeice then I'd be much more willing to give the idea that he isn't pushing jewery, but when it's a public figure that brings into the question of how and why they got to that position.