“Whoever shouts loudest may win the debate” - does this apply to your mates in antifa? More seriously the two main flaws are viewing Twitter as a “private company” and not a natural monopoly on a public service, and the inability to actually define “hate”
-
-
Replying to @tomdupresh @hopenothate
And I think our report on GI was much more specific than just ‘hate’ when defining GI. There is a whole section on GIs ideas for a start.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JoeMulhall_ @hopenothate
And also, your criticism of GI is a conspiracy theory. You tell people what we say in public sounds unobjectionable but is a smokescreen for secret views that are. There is 0 evidence for this. We get attacked by the far right for our views regularly
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomdupresh @hopenothate
Not true. We actually say your core ideas (ethnopluralism/remigration/etc) are much more extreme in practise than you say and much more extreme than the image you portray. No conspiracy there.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JoeMulhall_ @hopenothate
I think you deliberately misunderstand those words, ethnopluralism is about as non-controversial as you can get, and you pretend remigration is about mass repatriation when it is nothing of the sort... this country had net emigration until the early 90s
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomdupresh @hopenothate
This is the issue. You may think ethnopluralism is non-controversial yet it is and the means necessary to bring it about would be very extreme. Remigration is repatriation. Your idea of ‘self deportation’ is also extremely ugly.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JoeMulhall_ @hopenothate
Ethnopluralism is identical to Woodrow Wilson's concept of "national self determination" after WWI. If a core progressive such as Wilson is now "far right", we are truly down the rabbit hole...
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
-
Replying to @JoeMulhall_ @hopenothate
Okay, please explain the difference?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomdupresh @hopenothate
There wasn’t prior consideration to civic/liberal/ethnic/collective nationalism in Wilson’s idea of ‘national’ SD. It depends how one defines the nation. Ethnopluralism rigidly ties the nation to an ethnicity thus biologising and essentialising it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I don't believe you seriously think that the Balkans in the late 1910's defined themselves as civic states... Also, what is wrong with essentialism?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.