Skeptics Getting Gayer

Skeptics pretend we bewitched Mouthy Buddha in some way, and that openness to our ideas rotted his brain somehow. But call us SJWs. And also resort to amateur psychoanalysis and impugning us with malevolent motives when cornered, like...

it's self-affirmation. They get to pretend they stand alone against the world and are enlightened. And that we just have an implicit bias against other races and individualism we need to get over. Like...

Jeff admitting groups exist and can be destroyed, and has nothing to say about whites being dispossessed. He concedes it is happening, but is trained not to care.

https://archive.is/LZ3BR
https://archive.is/5W6CF
https://archive.is/jOqP2

We live rent-free in Jeff's head, so he can only help himself via hitpiece
http://archive.is/wLzQl


And their criticisms are getting worse all around. With a distinct hint of Not Mad™. Always something petty, stupid, and reaching. Like what they complain about Shaun and Jen doing: some minor error is blown up (which often exists in their heads because these people are never to be seen on our videos thumbing down or arguing in the comments).

They weave narratives about how our ideas are wrong for transgressing arbitrary limits which it is clear arent acknowledging many dimensions of human nature and our victories dont count because we cheated somehow. They cant beat us when they engage with anyone remotely aware of their own position.

These include: How will an ethnostate be achieved (partition in the assumed break-up of the US due to polarization and racial tension, or returning the US to eurocentric policy would make us an ethnostate), race is just skin color, why cant you just not be collectivst and we can convince non-whites to do the same (how? It is clear this isnt working based on cursory sociological observation and it is arguable it could never work in diversity. And how could policy cater to individual variation? And individualistic ideas are most prominent in whites, other groups, again, dont care about them as strongly), and why would being a minority be bad (post-white nations suck in general, and anti-white narratives already exist, we will still be privileged and earning more like in South Africa so...), and other very shallow understandings of the issue
https://archive.is/Y5GpN

Or that we just regurgitate the same facts and ideas. Which begs the question why they arent countered

Or they state that any white man should be able to freely associate, to sort of pretend we have no disagreement or call our bluff. But this hypothetical white man has a problem... he cant do what you say you permit him to do, as you criticize attempts to normalize the idea which allows him to do what you say you permit. Free Association not only isnt allowed but diversity is enforced. But you dont seem to think attacking the egalitarian assumptions which motivate this is anything but racist or collectivist.

ie it seems like you dont really value the principle you say you do, and are just using it to get out of the difficult conversation

You can SAY you support the right to do this all you like, the simple fact that is that it's not allowed
And all you can do is densely repeat that "it's racist but you should be able to do it," while ignoring the fact that people can't do it.
Just pointing out your acquiescence means nothing and we have work to do you're in the way of (despite you claiming to support this)

Enforcing diversity is done in the name of anti-racism, in the name of morality and progress. So anti-racist assumptions must be challenged. You oppose the only people who questioning the reality of this, so you essentially tacitly support it.