What good does it to be a part of a protest on inauguration day?

According to polling in 2015, 17% of black Americans see the Confederate flag as a symbol of Southern pride, while 72% see it as a symbol of racism. That majority opinion seems entirely reasonable to me, considering that the Confederate flag returned to prominence in the mid 20th century as a symbol of resistance to integration and Civil Rights, not for “Southern pride”. Considering that history, and considering the overwhelming majority opinion of black Americans, anyone who flies or defends the Confederate flag is either a racist, massively ignorant of racism, or entirely unconcerned by racism. The first and last are essentially the same thing, in my mind – knowledge of racism but no concern about it is pretty much the same thing as racism – while the ignorance one is inexcusable for a news organization.

So yes, that headline from Breitbart can very reasonably be characterized as racist.

Yes, I looked at. I’m aware that not all of the people on the page are black. Your original question was:

By giving you the link, now we can both say we have seen “a black man wearing Confederate regalia and symbolism”. I didn’t claim that every person on the page met that criteria, but it was an easy way to show you that there are more than one out there.

You asked a question, I answered. Why is this confusing to you?

So your contention is that Steve Bannon is “a prominent white supremacist”, and as evidence we have … drumroll …

one headline that his website posted that takes the same position as 17% of black Americans that the Confederate flag is “as a symbol of Southern pride”, or in Breitbart’s wording “proclaims a glorious heritage”?

That’s it?

That’s about the weakest-supported argument I could conceive.

Ravenman said way back on page 1 that Breitbart “published an array of racist trash”. Got that? An array! Sounds like it’d be super-easy to find a whole bunch of “racist trash” they’ve published, but you guys haven’t managed to do that. You’ve got one headline that doesn’t even say anything about white supremacy, or race at all. I’m disappointed in you.

You are only proposing that if it is not in that headline that then it is OK. But there are examples of that go over the heads of the Republicans that still think they are not getting into bed with the racists of the alt-right.

Just to be clear - are you saying Brietbart isn’t racist at all, or are you just asking us to prove it?

You understand that I have little motivation to research the insipid stuff they publish because you have already tipped your hand, also on page one. You preemptively claimed that any racist articles we find are likely a small percentage of their tota, which will be insufficient to label them as running racist articles. You then went on an extended hijack that finding even one such article on CNN immunizes Breitbart from responsibility for their stories.

The question of this thread isn’t really, why haven’t we convinced you of something? It is, why do we bother talking to you about this when you’ve clearly laid out your plan to reject any evidence offered?

I can’t find the link to the Breitbart article that (I think) you’re saying is racist. Could you please post it here?

The latter. You said that Breitbart “published an array of racist trash”, but you didn’t provide any evidence of that. Could you do that now please?

What’s the point? As I’ve said, you’ve already said that just because 1% of a news site’s articles may be racist, does not make it a racist website. Why should I lift a finger if you’re already going to dismiss anything anyone provides? It’s a waste of everyone’s time.

I found it here: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/25/drexel-univ-professors-christmas-wish-want-christmas-white-genocide/

Certainly the things Ciccariello-Maher tweeted are despicable and racist, but I don’t think Breitbart reporting on it makes them a racist website. YMMV.

I’m delighted to discuss any evidence provided. I don’t know if you noticed, but I was more than happy to talk about the allegedly racist content in DrCube’s list of headlines, and GIGObuster’s story. I find both of them largely lacking in “racism”, but I’m happy to discuss it.

Just so we’re clear though: you made an assertion on page 1 that you appear to have no evidence of, and no desire to support with evidence. That’s fine, but don’t be surprised if people conclude that you are just posting unsubstantiated bullshit.

No worries, I’m not the least bit confused.

And don’t be surprised if your laments of “I’m just asking questions but nobody will play with me” rings hollow.

See post #144.

The explanation for why it is racist was in the article linked.

Nowhere in the Breitbart article it is pointed out that “white genocide” is poppycock, but claimed that that the “left” (the professor) wanted it. (As it was pointed the Professor reported that it was a parody of what was found in many racist sites)

The accusation in context was bullshit, the right and the alt-right have banged on that for a while, the projection here also did not include a debunking of the “White Genocide” idea, as it is clear that Breitbart knows its audience.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/white-genocide-debunking-the-latest-breitbart-promoted-right-wing-racist-paranoid-buzzword/

But it clearly showed that you were wrong about not having other articles geared towards telling the bigots that they ‘were right all along about the leftists’. Race baiting and inflaming bigotry at its best.

Sorry, I promised myself not to take anything the SPLC says seriously until they correct their report featuring the Greenville, Mississippi church fire.

Thanks for sharing this one. I’ll look into it some more. It’s, to date, the best evidence I’ve seen presented.

So we shouldn’t take anything you say seriously until, say, you admit that it’s entirely reasonable to see the Confederate flag as a racist symbol, and anyone who flies it or defends it is either a racist or utterly ignorant of history?

Or is this just an excuse to ignore an organization that you don’t like because they might have made a single mistake?

Angels have no politics.

Reality isn’t quite so binary.