Hacker News Reader

You're proving his point.

He edited his comment to include the additional information. I assume that's easier than confronting that his worldview "has no basis in fact"

No, I was referring to the subtle implication that he belongs to or identifies with one or more of the following groups:

>right-wing politicians, fundamentalist religious leaders, political commentators in mainstream print and television media, and white supremacist terrorists

Which is basically dismissing his argument by calling him a racist. Instead you should quantify how different the situation at hand is than bolshevism or marxism. This would help people who have less information one way or the other to identify the truth more easily.

I would have rather replied but because I participate in these sorts of discussions from this side I'm often not allowed to.

And when you say this side, you're referring to the side with no basis in fact? What a self-own

Reply on news.ycombinator.com