Hacker News Reader

Comment by philosopher1234 | Hacker News Reader

I’m not playing plausible deniability games with you. Everyone knows what the point of these bills are.

How is anything I said "plausible deniability games"? You claimed that bills exist that would restrict voting access to people of color. I asked you exactly which bills these are, and you can't/won't tell me.

The reason they won't tell you is because you've already presented yourself as someone who would deny the racist goals of a bill merely because it doesn't explicitly mention race.

Differently put: everyone knows what these bills are except people who are in denial of institutionalized racism. You've used an argument structure that is reminiscent of that used by people who are in denial of institutionalized racism. Therefore, it is assumed that you are in denial of institutionalized racism, and thus, there's no point telling you about the bills because you're just going to be in denial about them anyway.

Meanwhile, anyone who is not in denial can just use any random search engine and find articles like this one:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/03/25/vote-m25.html

This is a Kafka trap. You're setting up a world in which nobody can disagree with you without being in denial.

After 4 years of trying to engage thoughtfully and being given the run around, I'm done putting myself out there for people who don't demonstrate an ounce of genuine interest in understanding the issue.

Maybe you don't fully understand the issue then. If you did, then you should be able to argue both sides thoughtfully.

Or maybe you have too much faith in my opponents.

Will a lifelong religious devotee be dissuaded of his faith by one argument with me on hacker news?

I think the lot of you are naive, and unaware of what really motivates your views (its not logic).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com