[jamra]

Are you really defending comments suggesting that Jews should be collectively punished? Did you miss that from the original comment? I really hope so. Otherwise you're basically advocating for collective punishment based on peoples race.

[denton-scratch]

"do you know that you hate Jews or is it a blind spot to your own prejudice?"

That question embodies the logical fallacy of assuming the consequent, and that's all my remark meant. I wsn't commenting on the substance of the discussion.

[jamra]

I think you were. But honestly I was curious. I wonder when people defend prejudiced things if they’re doing it knowingly or if it’s a subconscious thing. Defending the collective punishment of Jews who were expelled from Spain for something a company did is a pretty wild leap. My comment was my attempt at pointing out the collective punishment of Jews, which was my issue with the OP. I don’t buy your argument that you’re somehow defending proper debate etiquette. The grandparent comment was very openly racist.

[denton-scratch]

> I think you were.

Yes, that's clear; your original comment shows plainly that you interpreted my remark as antisemitic. It wasn't; it was pointing out a fallacy (and that formulation is nearly always used to point out that particular fallacy).

You can think what you like, of course; but screeching "antisemite!" based on nothing but your powers of telepathy is rather counterproductive.

[jamra]

Your claim that I was making a baseless accusation is purposefully incorrect. You read the same parent comment suggesting group punishment for an entire people unrelated to the organization in question. I'm not judging you based on my non existent powers of telepathy, I'm judging you for your actions because you were sticking up for prejudiced statements. Your accusation that I was creating a straw man by conflating the advocacy of group punishment to the Jewish people by the Spanish government with antisemitism is wrong. That original comment was plainly and purposely in fact antisemitic. If you really are earnestly trying to be some sort of drive by moderator of debate, you're incorrectly applying it here. It is absolutely okay to "screech" antisemitism where it exists. The original comment was a clear demonstration of vile hatred against the Jewish people and I'm sure you were able to perceive that as well. But I guess you'll continue to evade, deny, and accuse your way out of owning your own behavior. In my personal life experience, I've come across many layers of prejudiced people. Some folks blatantly and openly spout racism. Others don't want to put quotable statements out there so they just sort of offer general support to the hateful folks without directly addressing the hateful statements as if they accidentally missed them. It's usually something about the rules or etiquette. What's the right way to call out racism? Do you suggest a more appropriate alternative? Or are you still suggesting that the racism in this case was a figment of my own imagination?

[denton-scratch]

> sticking up for prejudiced statements

I wasn't. I was calling out a fallacy. And upon reflection, in one short sentence you perpetrated TWO fallacies: you were also arguing ad-hominem.

When I encountered your leading sentence with it's fallacious construction, I stopped reading your comment. I've read your latest wall-of-text reply, stuffed with accusations of racism and antisemitism. I think it's fair to describe your attitude as "screechy".

I'm not interested in debating the substance of the G+P with you; your style of "debate" consists of smears, fallacies and abuse. Not playing.