dextralt
Joined 7 years ago
Joined 7 years ago
The states that brought Germany down in both world wars were just as nationalistic at the time. Even the commies brought it back when they needed it the most - and it worked.
Also, since the country in question here is India - without nationalism, they would still be a colony.
But on the bright side, I think if it was Mozilla with 90% of the browser market and not Google, this would've happened already.
Trying to wave away this debate by just shouting “RACIST! NAZI!” contributes nothing meaningful to a debate that is sorely missing from society.
Edit: why is this controversial and the post I'm replying to not? We both advocate the exact same thing: to abolish a founding principle of western civilization because sometimes people die. Hell, there's even a quite large disparity between the number of deaths caused by those two principles - my argument has way more merit.
I'd really love to see why these two cases are totally different and incomparable. Three paragraphs of mental gymnastics or less though, please!
>41.4% Non-Hispanic White
4.8%. that sure makes a world of difference.
I'm wondering if you're implying that there's something wrong with having such a preference though. You have provided some interesting statistics, would you mind if I did so as well?
>Hate speech in the United States is not regulated due to the robust right to free speech found in the American Constitution.[1] The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that hate speech is legally protected free speech under the First Amendment. The most recent Supreme Court case on the issue was in 2017, when the justices unanimously reaffirmed that there is effectively no "hate speech" exception to the free speech rights protected by the First Amendment.
for some reason that phenomena only manifests itself on heavily moderated platforms.
on unmoderated (chans) or barely moderated (youtube) platforms, you get a much more diversity of thought.
yeah, it is their own fault, lmao.