Who didn't see this response coming?If you don’t go on somewhere with this delusion of grandeur bullshyt. Who do you think you are? I don’t need to continue with you. My point was proven with this bytchass cop out. Thanks for playing.
. Honestly it's a couple of go to arguments they make in regards to iq and crime, if you debate a supremacist without being able to counter their basic go to moves then that's on you and you probably not equipped to "represent" us in those kinds of debatesThe problem with so-called black people like you is that you’re too quick to give credence to white people’s bullshyt. Why are s critiquing Tariq’s response to a bullshyt “point” instead of calling out the bullshyt? First of all India is in Asia so Indians are Asians. More importantly tho, just because Asians make more money on average than whites doesn’t negate that there is a system of white supremacy in America. Asians are less than 5% of the American population and who controls how many Asians are allowed in the country? White people, that’s who. Whites can decide tomorrow that they don’t want Asians to earn more than they do and that in fact they want Asians to leave America. So this idea that Asians are some examples that whites don’t have a system in place to ensure they’re ultimate superiority is such a silly argument that it shouldn’t even be taken seriously.
Unless you’re going to defend Taylor’s silly position and explain why you think he won this debate we have nothing to discuss. You can go fukk yourself.
This has always been my issue with Tariq. I remember the Taylor debate. He came off awkward, emotional, and underprepared.
I don't know about all that but he's 3-0 against cac supremacists like Jared, Tucker and Andy Shultz.I don't think I've ever seen Tariq win a debate. He's not good at thinking on his feet I think. Strange because he has a show where he talks off the dome for hours at a time.
Not sure how he can improve really, maybe expand his audience and allow ppl who may disagree to call in.
And btw a debate isn't necessarily won on nuanced understanding of facts. It's who makes better arguments and forces the other debater into corners and shyt like that.
If a cac says cacs are naturally smarter then argues that many more have won a Fields Medal compared to blacks....you need to be able to counter that somehow.
THIS.
. Same thing with Tucker Carlson when he got deep sixed by Jon Stewart, who exposed his show for the hollow partisan hackery it was.
It’s really that simple. It’s so simple that you have to assume that people are being willfully ignorant and have ulterior motives.
All the people here cheerleading for Taylor know that all he was doing was trolling yet they still excuse his trolling while holding tariq to seem high standard of debate acumen.
No one here is cheerleading Taylor. Taylor is evil. However, he did win this debate. Tariq was clearly out of his element and had trouble defending his statements. He stumbled over his words, got emotional, made hyperbolic statements, and made several factual errors. Tariq made the mistake of not clearly and concretely defining white supremacy. By keeping it nebulous, Taylor was able to poke holes in it by saying fore example, "Well, if Asians are succeeding in America, and surpassing whites in wealth, how is America white supremacist?" Like I said in my earlier post, pop debate like this isn't meant to prove yourself right, it's to prove the other guy wrong for the audience. A better debater like Cornel West, HL Gates, Ta-Nehisi Coates, etc would have bodied Taylor.
This is why it’s almost impossible to have productive discussions here. Unfortunately I’ve got to tell you like I just told the other poster.....you’re either utterly stupid or you’re trolling. I’m not even trying to insult you just to insult you, it really has to be either or.
