SJWs we need you, the world is in trouble!

conservative straw man tactic wrote:

Cow Oogie Oogie wrote:

As you noted, that was hyperbole. It wasn't strawman. There is a difference. If your name was Conservative Hyperbole Spotter, you'd be consistent. But your name is Conservative Strawman Tactic.

In any case, the clear point the OP made and I also noted remains, and YOU - Conservative Strawman Tactic - don't seem to want to address it with respect to "Brazilian variant" "South African variant" OR "U.K. variant." Maybe that one guy, Liberal Deflection Tactic, will confirm that assessment of your posting.

Keep attacking stances that don’t exist! I appreciate it! English bad!

That's the point, StrawTack. Those stances on the "Brazilian variant," the "South African variant," and the "U.K. variant" don't exist. Yet, the stance on "China virus" does. There is a glaring inconsistency there, and it suggests that you people are led by various media-inspired emotions, rather than reason. It's almost like you are trying to live up to the SJW label the OP hung on you.

This shouldn't have to be explained to you in this manner. I think part of your problem is you don't read what you are responding to very closely. That's why you are more misses than hits.

Right. That’s why you concoct fantasies to argue your points - because reality doesn’t support it.

Harambe wrote:

This is laughable. Conservatives got steamrolled in the US election in large part because of their apathetic and incompetent handling of COVID.

Their response is to continue to play internet "gotcha" games and meaninglessly virtue signal to their base (who are dying by the thousands on ventilators).

I mean, I'm not surprised! I just figured they might learn a thing or two, but we will take the free wins any day.

You sound mad.

who han solo wrote:

Does this mean COVID-19 v1.0 is the China Variant?

These people do not believe in giving blame where blame is due. They are more concerned with looking for “underlying reasons”, and justifying the poor behavior of those who they consider to be inferior to themselves, as a poorly veiled tactic to make themselves seem “not racist” and “accepting”

Gina wrote:

You sound mad.

I'm not the one trying drum up outrage over a Fox and Friends level talking point. Carry on.

Harambe wrote:

Gina wrote:

You sound mad.

I'm not the one trying drum up outrage over a Fox and Friends level talking point. Carry on.

How would one debunk this Fox and Friends level talking point? Conservative Strawman Tactic was unable to, despite at least two easy prods he could have swung for the fences on. He's not very good at this. I don't think you are either, but I'd be interested in a reasoned response to the underlying inconsistency that the OP pointed out. Recall that a lot of people were trying to drum up outrage over the term "China virus" last year.

Cow Oogie Oogie wrote:

How would one debunk this Fox and Friends level talking point? Conservative Strawman Tactic was unable to, despite at least two easy prods he could have swung for the fences on. He's not very good at this. I don't think you are either, but I'd be interested in a reasoned response to the underlying inconsistency that the OP pointed out. Recall that a lot of people were trying to drum up outrage over the term "China virus" last year.

I think government officials should use the official name of the virus.

If you don't mind looking like a moron, and you clearly don't, then call it whatever you want. Continue with the virtue signalling. It worked beautifully in November.

Harambe wrote:

Cow Oogie Oogie wrote:

How would one debunk this Fox and Friends level talking point? Conservative Strawman Tactic was unable to, despite at least two easy prods he could have swung for the fences on. He's not very good at this. I don't think you are either, but I'd be interested in a reasoned response to the underlying inconsistency that the OP pointed out. Recall that a lot of people were trying to drum up outrage over the term "China virus" last year.

I think government officials should use the official name of the virus.

If you don't mind looking like a moron, and you clearly don't, then call it whatever you want. Continue with the virtue signalling. It worked beautifully in November.

I see. So your saying it's a two-tiered analysis: (1) whether your are a government official or not and/or (2) whether you are referring to the virus or a variant. Is that conjunctive or disjunctive? For example, is Biden required to say the official name for the virus, but still be able to call a variant the "Brazilian variant" without being racist?

I don't think you've done a very good job, Harambo. It wasn't just government officials use of the term "China virus" creating outrage. That was just the example articles I provided to help you recall what a stir this was causing last year.

And this distinction you tried to create between virus and variant as far as offensive names go seems ill-thought out and, as you know, still doesn't explain the inconsistency (if not hypocrisy) that the OP pointed out. You did better than StrawTick, but not much better. In fact, your post could be characterized as a one sentence weak attempt to address the question, then three sentences of irrelevant triggered testiness.

Harambe wrote:

Cow Oogie Oogie wrote:

How would one debunk this Fox and Friends level talking point? Conservative Strawman Tactic was unable to, despite at least two easy prods he could have swung for the fences on. He's not very good at this. I don't think you are either, but I'd be interested in a reasoned response to the underlying inconsistency that the OP pointed out. Recall that a lot of people were trying to drum up outrage over the term "China virus" last year.

I think government officials should use the official name of the virus.

If you don't mind looking like a moron, and you clearly don't, then call it whatever you want. Continue with the virtue signalling. It worked beautifully in November.

My point was a big stink was brought up how the old naming system was not right, Spanish flu, MERS, West Nile, Zika all were wrong last March. We should be better and call the virus by a more official name not the place of its origin. Now it is ok for the variant to be called by the location it was founded. I just find it hypocritical that no one is saying anything now after how big of a deal it was not even a year ago. Not trying to attack one side just pointing something out, sorry you have gotten so defensive you need to respond 3 or 4 times, did not mean to illicit that response.

To some of your other points, I guess this is a "gotcha moment" as you point out though so sorry about that....? I will inform Ocasio Cortez and her subreddit these are no longer in vouge.

I would respect your opinion more about only calling a virus by its scientific name but I doubt you could tell me what the scientific names of the variants are. 20H/501Y.V2 andB.1.1.7, 20I/501Y.V1 is their names and I doubt you or anyone in the world cares or wants to learn them.

There are ethical inconsistencies on every side man, no one is perfect, including myself, obviously. I try and learn from times when someone points out potential inconsistencies in my beliefs and figure out how my beliefs got to a point where they contradict and what I should do to be more consistent. I do not want to attack someone for pointing out something that could help improve my reasoning. Here is my olive branch to you to try and point something out that was wrong with my reasoning.

Dyestat Rumor 2 wrote:

I would respect your opinion more about only calling a virus by its scientific name but I doubt you could tell me what the scientific names of the variants are. 20H/501Y.V2 andB.1.1.7, 20I/501Y.V1 is their names and I doubt you or anyone in the world cares or wants to learn them.

There is a thread on the front page I started using the name B117 for the "UK variant"

Are you confusing me with the media? Or with the people who were stirred up by the name "China virus?"

I think all of this silly debating about the proper name is a desperate deflection from the seriousness of COVID. Conservatives have spent almost a year downplaying the severity of the virus. They have been repeatedly exposed as idiots with each new wave of virus.

I find it interesting that this story is the one COVID piece you choose to dig your heels in and argue about.

By all means, froth about the MSM's hypocrisy and whatnot. I cannot stop you. It's like the little kid playing in the sandbox while the rest of us try to get out of this mess.

Yeah with the way these SJWs all talk behind a keybpard you would think they could solve all the world's problems and cure cancer. Oh wait, turns out they just want validation and attention.

Deshaundae (not a sheep) wrote:

Yeah with the way these SJWs all talk behind a keybpard you would think they could solve all the world's problems and cure cancer. Oh wait, turns out they just want validation and attention.

Well, it's the ones who took CVOID seriously are solving it. The ones who didn't are whining about naming conventions.

Dyestat Rumor wrote:

Last spring I was luckily saved from making a snafu of calling covid-19 the wuhan virus, after where it was originated.

Recently I have been exposed to people referring to the new strains of covid as the "South African variant", "UK variant", and "Brazilian variant." Where are you SJWs we need saving. Last year you saved us all, what has changed we need you!

Help us SJWs....you're our only hope

It's pretty simple really. I'll try to help you understand.

When calling it the China virus or Wuhan virus, these were naked attempts to be derogatory towards China. Calling it a South African variant or UK variant haven't been used in derogatory ways but just as descriptors. Intent is important. But let's cut to the chase - you probably already know this and are just having internet fun, taking pleasure in annoying the world.

It's different naming the virus/variant after a location vs. a people or culture.

Wuhan or China virus is ok but Chinese virus is not.

UK virus is ok but English or Scottish virus is not.

South Africa virus is ok but Afrikaner or Boer virus is not.

Brazil virus is ok but Brazilian virus is not.

Get it? The China virus comes from the country of China. A Chinese virus comes from someone who is of Chinese descent or ancestry, regardless of their country of origin or nationality. 99.9% of people understand this very crude distinction.

Uhh, you’re saying CNN was being derogatory towards China by initially calling it the Wuhan virus? This article is from January last year. I don’t like CNN, but even I wouldn’t say they’re being derogatory.

Huxley wrote:

It's different naming the virus/variant after a location vs. a people or culture.

Wuhan or China virus is ok but Chinese virus is not.

UK virus is ok but English or Scottish virus is not.

South Africa virus is ok but Afrikaner or Boer virus is not.

Brazil virus is ok but Brazilian virus is not.

Get it? The China virus comes from the country of China. A Chinese virus comes from someone who is of Chinese descent or ancestry, regardless of their country of origin or nationality. 99.9% of people understand this very crude distinction.

Ummm...ever heard of Spanish flu?

Huxley wrote:

It's different naming the virus/variant after a location vs. a people or culture.

Wuhan or China virus is ok but Chinese virus is not.

UK virus is ok but English or Scottish virus is not.

South Africa virus is ok but Afrikaner or Boer virus is not.

Brazil virus is ok but Brazilian virus is not.

Get it? The China virus comes from the country of China. A Chinese virus comes from someone who is of Chinese descent or ancestry, regardless of their country of origin or nationality. 99.9% of people understand this very crude distinction.

This is a okay shot at explaining away the hypocrisy, Huxley. Way better an attempt than Harambo was able to put together. But your analysis breaks down pretty quickly.

First, as to facts, Trump - who was practically the only target of claims of racism on this issue - said "China virus" as often as he said "Chinese virus," and the condemnation in the media was universal for either term. Here is the Yale School of medicine condemning as xenophobic, the very term "China virus" that you said was acceptable.

Second, the media is using, and I believe Biden even said, "Brazilian variant" - a term you said was improper - and there were no allegations of racism. Your theory doesn't account for that.

Third, your basic distinction - which is that the country name as an identifier is okay, but the demonym is improper - doesn't work as to "descent or ancestry" as you incorrectly stated. Descent or ancestry is not the only thing a demonym is used for. Your statement "A Chinese virus comes from someone who is of Chinese descent or ancestry . . ." isn't even correct when the demonym is used as an adjective or identifier. The terms "Chinese toys" "Chinese semiconductors" "Chinese beer" "Chinese monitors" "Chinese imports" are commonly used and don't suggest anyone's personal ancestry or descent.

Fourth, your distinction/theory has not been mentioned in the media at all. We see no primers on the use of demonyms to avoid being racist. If your theory was in any way correct (i.e., you didn't just make it up last night), we would have seen this reported by CNN, NBC and the usual suspects by now.

Your explanation is the best one so far, Simple Person. Again, Harambo would never be able to articulate anything like the nuance you have given to this.

But you can probably see the problems with your explanation that raise the concerns in the first place. As you noted, intent is important in analyzing such issues. But you SJW types are all over the map on intent and, almost without fail, infer intent to be racially derogatory on anyone not on your "side" of racial issues. (The glaring exception to that is with the "N-word" where you all seem to have settled on its use being intentionally derogatory no matter the context in which anyone speaks it). Basically, I'm saying that in practice, inferring intent just raises the hypocrisy issue again - you SJWs have the license and forum on branding someone's intent as racially derogatory whether it was or was not.

But anyone, this is a good job by you. Your fellow SJWs on Letsrun should look to you when they can't fight their way out of the next box of their own making.