Well, then, they should be dealt with for that pattern of behavior, which is jerkish, rather than for the content of what they’re saying or the nature of their opinions.
If posted in GQ, I would definitely regard it as being a jerk, and issue a warning for it as being deliberately inflammatory. While there may be some factual information included, there is also a lot of opinion interjected in it. I suspect it wouldn’t fly in GD either (although I am not a GD mod). Even in the Pit, I think it would be edging into hate speech territory.
The same information presented in a non-inflammatory way would probably be permissible.
I heard on the news this week that there are now as many black people in prison in America as there were slaves.
We all know, I think, that blacks are treated differently in our judicial system than white people are and that explains a lot. I won’t go beyond that for now. They are treated differently mainly because of very, very ingrained racism all over this country.
For the record, I think that the perpetuation of that situation is a crime against humanity. Anytime that we support racists with a place to spread their propoganda, we have encouraged the jerks among us. And “jerk” is a very mild term for someone who is filled with such bile.
If they are not jerks, who is?
Words can have different meanings in different contexts. Like in physics, where “work” has a specific formulaic meaning – different from normal every-day usage. So with “jerk.”
I think almost all of us would agree that racists are jerks, in common, every-day language. However, on the SDMB, “jerk” means misbehaving, not simply holding minority (or offensive) opinions. Different context.