So these 6 figure nikkaz on the Coli are Nigerian or tokens?
Also, what's he point of African Americans to strive to become successful if we're not allowed, by white supremacy, to prosper? Are we all fighting to be drafted as tokens?
Tariq Nasheed vs Andrew Schulz on The Brilliant Idiots...VIDEO ADDED
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
So these 6 figure nikkaz on the Coli are Nigerian or tokens?
Also, what's he point of African Americans to strive to become successful if we're not allowed, by white supremacy, to prosper? Are we all fighting to be drafted as tokens?
Bunchy Carter
I'll Take The Money Over The Honey
This dude Schulz talking about there is different types is racism, like different types of rape. Would you rather get raped by a black guy or a asian guy with a small dikk
.
People listen to this guy
.People listen to this guy
Crayola Coyote
Superstar
Crayola Coyote
Superstar
He answer the question by giving equal treatment to blacks as whites get. It's that simple
This dude Schulz talking about there is different types is racism, like different types of rape. Would you rather get raped by a black guy or a asian guy with a small dikk
People listen to this guy
Yea he sounded stupid with that ANALogy
I see what Tariq did with that argument from Shultz. Equal treatment had a different meaning to both of them. Tariq wouldn't say, 'yes that makes, 12% of the population should get 12% of the resources,' so he gave equal treatment a broader meaning. Basically danced around Shultz's definition.
Free White & 21
AAGang
I don't recall Tariq saying ANYONE who is successful and black is a token. If you have proof of that from this debate, post the timestamps.
Tariq is successful and black, i doubt he considers himself a token. I wouldn't consider him a token, but i recognize his success can be thwarted by the WS. I suspect there are attempts to sabotage and subvert his success as we speak.
1/2 Man 1/2 Hennessy
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That cac is insufferably stupid. Just tries to clown him every time his rebuttal is on point and is too shook to take the L
Are you talking about @BrothaZay?
I can't take Tucker Carlson seriously after seeing some of his other interviews. He's a bigger troll than Shultz to me. Dude literally has a "Play Dumb" face.
Kilgore Trout
Banned
Free White & 21
AAGang
I've listened to this debate a LOT (was working and driving a lot yesterday) and here's my take on it.
First off.. Schulz came prepared, tariq didn't. Let that sink in.
Tariq did NO RESEARCH of any current stats so he couldn't counter any statistical data. He literally walked into the boxing gym off the streets, hopped his ass in the ring, and started scrappin with a nikka that's been training for weeks and was already warmed up... AND HE STILL WON.
This is interesting because I don't think they even had a topic of debate. Was it even supposed to be a debate? Other than tariq asking them to explain their opinion on the tucker carlsen debates, i saw no reason for them to be debating. Seems like Schulz just was practicing WS by springing debates on an unprepared opponent.
The good: Tariq won as usual. Debating SWS about whether or not WS exists is a free win every time. To be honest, it's so free that that particular debate is a waste of time for black folks at this point. I enjoy it because i get to learn about debating WS/SWS counter points, but proving WS exists is easier than proving gravity exists (seriously).
The Bad: I think Tariq needs to tighten up on the semantics. He was giving schulz too much ammo to filibuster and waste time. Tighten up on stats too. The current WS/SWS have all kinds of stats to try to disprove WS, along with the usual fallacious arguments. Tariq's debate style is too OG. In the Khalid vs Hannity era you could simply hit the SWS with obvious proofs of hypocrisy, a few zingers, and a MACRO view of the issues and they'd be done. But now in the Molyneux, Shapiro, and Milo era you're gonna need a few more weapons. Those weapons are data sets and stats. I also think tariq dropped the ball heavily on the Nigerian argument.
The Ugly: Schulz is a fukkIN LIGHTWEIGHT Are you nikkas serious? I've been hearing about this clown on here for like a year. A few of you c00ns hyping this lame up. He's a LIGHTWEIGHT. I've never seen anybody try to win whole arguments with attacks on semantics, personal insults, and fallacies. It was like a fox news hit piece... that lasted an hour. I mean what's the difference between him, tucker, and hannity? Serious question.
He got destroyed on most points and STILL wouldn't concede. That's suspicious behavior. If we're debating something that's deadly serious like WS, and you'd rather debate about semantics instead of correcting my error and then conceding, you care more about trying to win a debate rather than fix a problem.
I 100% suspect him of being a WS.
First off.. Schulz came prepared, tariq didn't. Let that sink in.
Tariq did NO RESEARCH of any current stats so he couldn't counter any statistical data. He literally walked into the boxing gym off the streets, hopped his ass in the ring, and started scrappin with a nikka that's been training for weeks and was already warmed up... AND HE STILL WON.
This is interesting because I don't think they even had a topic of debate. Was it even supposed to be a debate? Other than tariq asking them to explain their opinion on the tucker carlsen debates, i saw no reason for them to be debating. Seems like Schulz just was practicing WS by springing debates on an unprepared opponent.
The good: Tariq won as usual. Debating SWS about whether or not WS exists is a free win every time. To be honest, it's so free that that particular debate is a waste of time for black folks at this point. I enjoy it because i get to learn about debating WS/SWS counter points, but proving WS exists is easier than proving gravity exists (seriously).
The Bad: I think Tariq needs to tighten up on the semantics. He was giving schulz too much ammo to filibuster and waste time. Tighten up on stats too. The current WS/SWS have all kinds of stats to try to disprove WS, along with the usual fallacious arguments. Tariq's debate style is too OG. In the Khalid vs Hannity era you could simply hit the SWS with obvious proofs of hypocrisy, a few zingers, and a MACRO view of the issues and they'd be done. But now in the Molyneux, Shapiro, and Milo era you're gonna need a few more weapons. Those weapons are data sets and stats. I also think tariq dropped the ball heavily on the Nigerian argument.
The Ugly: Schulz is a fukkIN LIGHTWEIGHT Are you nikkas serious? I've been hearing about this clown on here for like a year. A few of you c00ns hyping this lame up. He's a LIGHTWEIGHT. I've never seen anybody try to win whole arguments with attacks on semantics, personal insults, and fallacies. It was like a fox news hit piece... that lasted an hour. I mean what's the difference between him, tucker, and hannity? Serious question.
He got destroyed on most points and STILL wouldn't concede. That's suspicious behavior. If we're debating something that's deadly serious like WS, and you'd rather debate about semantics instead of correcting my error and then conceding, you care more about trying to win a debate rather than fix a problem.
I 100% suspect him of being a WS.
Last edited:
Anyone who argued with that troll @The_One in this thread lost. This is the same dude who is was 1 of the main posters co-signing this recent thread in HL: Why Whites aren't the most racist and bigoted people. Research shows it's non-Whites
oh really? and what was my stance in that thread??
Tareeq having success with a dummy like schulz yet he got bodied by Tucker Carlson
Tucker never bodied Tariq. you do realize that Tucker Carlson trolls his opposing guests like that. Here are recent examples: