Being racist

got 'em

You can't be a fake nigger if you're not trying.

Attached: Hmm P1.png (204x214, 53K)

Not everyone is a materialistic whore.

But the average dreg is.

Actually it's materialistic capitalism that promotes ignoring race. Think about it, what big corporation wants you to be racist while working for them? What big corporation wouldn't rather hire immigrants from non-white countries to do your job cheaper? There's nothing more materialistic than disregarding your racial soul.

>racial soul

Attached: 1544092691023.jpg (568x562, 51K)

Based user,
honestly drop this mentality, fucking libs and cons are more than happy to catalogue and oppress based on what's on the surface, seriously get a hobby guys

See what I mean, you're a materialist. You only care about what's trendy, not the racial spirit of your people which can not be bought or sold.
It's not your fault, big corporations put anti racist propaganda all over the television, in the schools, even on the internet.

I don't actually care about race at all, I just think it's funny when faggots like you get upset about it.

>only care about what's trendy
No, I only care about the absurdity of a racial soul. Racial soul? Racial spirit? Are you being genuine right now? Of course a racial soul can't be sold- it doesn't exist!

I don't care what's trendy. My views won't change if it's cool to lynch niggers again. No one has authority on my thoughts- which is why I think you're an idiot for concocting the idea of a racial soul.

>it doesn't exist!
It's not a material thing but here are some absolute facts.
Everything people do, they tend to do with their own race when they have a choice. There are black churches, white churches, asian neighborhoods, italian neighborhoods etc. Also 90% of people will marry someone of the same race, it varies a little by race but it's around 90% for every race. Even murders tend to be racial with blacks killing blacks and whites killing whites etc. Even babies react differently based on the race of the person interacting with them.
So obviously there is some kind of unconcious racial awareness, unless you think 90% of people are openly racist. So you say you're not racist and you probably believe that, but your views on race come from corporations.

Fuck no, only way to combat a problem is to go against it, giving up just makes everything worse.

>Imagine thinking that such a problem ever existed

>It's not a material thing but here are some absolute facts
About a thing that isn't material. And thus cannot be sold. And therefore likely does not exist in any tangible, consequential way. Did you even read what you typed? It's not a material thing, but here are some absolute facts. Absolute facts? About something immaterial?

>Everything people do
>they tend to do with their own race when they have a choice
>So obviously there is some kind of unconcious racial awareness
That's an egregious leap of logic if this is meant to imply that "unconscious awareness" of race equals the existence of a "racial soul".

Lord, grant me strength.

>you say you're not racist
Oh? I did?
>90% of people are openly racist
Well, I wouldn't say 0% of people aren't openly racist. But since you think so lowly of people, 80% must be a ballpark estimate for whether or not you say something about those damned coloreds. Truly, there is some kind of inherent racial awareness in all of us that compels us to... what? Why was the alternative that almost everyone be racist?
>your views on race come from corporations
They do? Do they? What are my views? Likely, what you imagine them to be, despite me giving you no actual indication as to what they are, beyond ridiculing the idea of a
>racial soul
from
>a truly materialistic
viewpoint.

You don't have to want to hang black people to be racially conscious, that's an anti racist propaganda talking point from your corporate overlords.
Obviously the 90% of people who choose to marry within their own race don't want to kill everyone of every other race, that's ridiculous.
Since you seem to have internalized guilt from years of propaganda, here's another fact.
After slavery, it was blacks who demanded segregation. They did not want to compete with white businesses nor did they want to attend white churches and schools. This worked very well, resulting in the so called "Black wall street".
Then, later, it was big government spurred on by big corporations who demanded blacks be bussed into white areas to attend school. That there be a mixture of races working for every business and that a business owner could not discriminate based upon the immaterial racial identity of the applicant.
This has a number of deleterious effects. For one thing, due to the racial soul or unconcious racial awareness, mixed race groups don't form unions as often as single race groups. Meaning less workers rights, which of course the big corporations love. Since black neighborhoods still existed but blacks were outcompeted by large white owned corporations, the local black grocery store became a dollar store, a liquor store, etc.
There is no defense of anti-racism, unless you're a billionaire business man who wants people to shut up and consume.

>You don't have to want to hang black people to be racially conscious
Nigger, slow the fuck down. Who said that? You're still tying racism to this idea of "racial consciousness". Why? Why is it not just "racial consciousness"?
>90% of people who choose to marry within their own race don't want to kill everyone of every other race
I don't know who implied otherwise.

>Since you seem to have internalized guilt from years of propaganda
Since you seem to know me so intimately... why is this exchange still happening?

>After slavery
>it was blacks who demanded segregation
Who asked for this non-sequitur? I didn't. Remember that no one discounted the idea of race, they just ridiculed the idea of a racial soul. But here we are, talking about nignogs demanding their own bathrooms and churches, and how everyone else is racist because they're racist because. Black wall street, y'all.

Wild.

What's stranger is knowing how hard members of some particular government actively fought against watering down segregation, in any case. I can't help but think that you're not being entirely truthful about the history of segregation, or whatever this racism angle is that you're trying to peddle. But it's as valuable as the idea of a "racial soul". For crying out loud, you went to
>communism
halfway through your screed. Not to mention the ass-backwards logic of using the immaterial, non-extant thing to explain why
>mixed race groups
don't... unionize? What? Isn't that... I don't know...

Racist? That'd be ironic, right? Those mutts don't have a soul, they're incapable of unionizing. They're to blame! Burn them!

>There is no defense of anti-racism
I am not a tribal native, and my ability to "transcend" instinct allows me to drink from watering holes I'd of avoided if I weren't otherwise capable. The name of the game is adaptation, user. Adapt or die.

>Why is it not just "racial consciousness"?
Because Joe and Jane normie are so brainwashed any talk of race as a serious topic causes them to flip out. Might as well use their term "racism" to describe normal racial awareness.
>Those mutts don't have a soul, they're incapable of unionizing. They're to blame! Burn them!
That's the thing, they unionize just fine when they don't also have to deal with race dynamics. Having a diverse work force is just a ploy to divide and conquer your employees.
You still see ignoring race as "transcending" when in reality it's just ignoring your race as best as you can.
You may as well apply the same concept to your family. No need for me to impregnate my wife, someone else can do it, I've transcended such barbarism.

>racial soul

Attached: Capture.png (287x316, 208K)

Nigger

Come back when you understand that the human biology leads to materialism, just with different priorities.

>Because Joe and Jane normie are so brainwashed any talk of race as a serious topic causes them to flip out
Well, congratulations, neither Joe nor Jane are here. Feel free to cease making connections between racism and "racial consciousness", as if the two are supposed to directly implicate one another.

For surely you realize that "racism" would be the antithesis of merely acknowledging race. Right? Tell me you knew that.

>You still see ignoring race as "transcending" when in reality it's just ignoring your race as best as you can
As opposed to... what? Needle-point focus on something as melanin, if not culture? I am thirsty, user. I will not survive wringing my hands over the darkies- it would serve me better to visit another water source.

>may as well apply the same concept to your family
>No need for me to impregnate my wife
>someone else can do it
>I've transcended such barbarism
Please explain why this is a worthwhile comparison. I don't see the relationship between my family, if not impregnating my wife, and drinking from Juan's watering hole. What am I "transcending" when it comes to my wife, that's equal to what I'm "transcending" when I go to Juan's watering hole for a needed drink? Is the idea that someone else can "transcend" race for me? Because that's what it seems to imply, and makes even less sense.

Or is it that ignoring race is ignoring my wife? Because that's even more absurd. What in the ever-loving fuck.

White
>muh racial consiousness
Basically just a fancier way of saying "muh racial identity", go fuck yourself.

Attached: yosh.png (404x339, 277K)

Well racial conciousness is a form of racism, it's just not necessarily racial supremacism or so called hate for other races.
>Please explain why this is a worthwhile comparison.
The evolutionary reason we deal more with our own race than others is because we're closer genetically. The "Irish" are like a big loosely connected family. If you don't love your family, you haven't transcended.
It's the same reason we love our children.

>Imagine living the worst way possible, no self-esteem or sense of self-worth, having nothing to be proud of except your race.
>Then imagine having faggots like OP come along and attack what little source of self-worth they have and accuse them of being worthless.

Brainlet / 10, you deserve eachother.

Attached: 31772978_1958624690822646_7580866106370293760_n.jpg (404x539, 40K)

>please don't crush my only personality trait
Get a grip, fucko, you literally admitted to being a race obsessed fag and plead for mercy.
Well no, cunt, go fix your own fucking problems.

Attached: weener.png (250x317, 71K)

Imagine that, 3 words to explain something, instead of some cockamamie nonsense dressed with more cockamamie nonsense.

>Well racial conciousness is a form of racism
I don't think you know what that word means. You're looking for prejudice. Racism would imply that you're somehow disparaging whoever or whatever you're applying the racism towards. Now, I don't think noticing your shirt is the same act as beating the shit out of you for not wearing blue on a Monday. Just throwing that out there.

>The evolutionary reason we deal more with our own race than others is because we're closer genetically
And you're saying that, because of this, I must not love my family? When? Why? Are you listening to yourself? You made a hypothetical where I have a wife. Why do I have a wife?

What did you expect to happen? Cuckoldry? Sure, if that's what gets you going. But I don't think that the average concept of a man and women together equals a black bull factoring into the equation. No, the general conclusion is that a man and a woman make little people.
>The "Irish" are like a big loosely connected family
So why the fuck wouldn't I make children with my wife? What? Honestly, user. I don't know if you're lacking some kind of genetic instruction, or if your brain can't metabolize something, but you just said
>If you don't love your family
>you haven't transcended
after using my
>"transcended"
in the context that I gave it, even using it to imply that "transcending" is just turning a willfully blind eye to something. So what the fuck do you mean when you now use the word itself, again? What, if you don't love your family, you haven't ignored them? And I've "transcended", so I'm not going to make children, because... ? Furthermore, the cause that connects not making children and "transcending" is also the same cause that makes us love our children?

A genetic cause is also to blame for conscious acts of behavioral modification?

For fuck's sake. Explain.

Only the results.

Everyone knows which side are race obesses and playing identify politics, cope

I'm saying the reason whites marry whites 90% of the time is the same reason you love your children more than your neighbor's children.
If you "transcend" that, you may as well get cucked and raise another man's child. After all, you've "transcended" and no longer love your child more than another man's child.

They seem to squint too hard to seething and forgot they are the ones always talking about race

Naturalistic fallacy

>you literally admitted to being a race obsessed fag
I literally didn't. I just pointed out you are playing in the same league.

Attached: 31760108_1958623807489401_1174941698854223872_n.jpg (700x525, 117K)

intended for

So you don't think it's good to raise your own children and not someone else's? Then you are a transcendant cuckold.

>I'm saying the reason whites marry whites 90% of the time is the same reason you love your children more than your neighbor's children
That does not explain why I would not make children. Fuck almighty. Stay on topic, explain why
>"transcending"
equals
>No need for me to impregnate my wife
Because you've given more reasons for why I would than why I wouldn't. Arguments from nature, that it'd be a genetic drive for me to make the sex and care for my young. For fuck's sake, that alone suggests it'd be my neighbor's child instead of my own. And that makes no sense, because you're already pairing up like with like, so if I've got this hypothetical wife, in your world, she's likely to be my own race.

So, what the fuck.

>If you "transcend" that, you may as well get cucked and raise another man's child
>you've "transcended" and no longer love your child more than another man's child
Seriously. Explain this. There is no comprehensive explanation thus far that remains internally consistent here. Just non-sequitur and random new tangents every other reply.

When did it become that I defied the genetic drive to make children? Is that the same as "racial consciousness"? Am I thinking about making kids when I notice any skin color? Do I not notice skin color? So many questions. So many erroneous leaps of logic.

He definitely didn't say that. You either need reading glasses, or remedial classes. One of the two.

Can you provide me with an argument that is capable of solving the is/ought problem?

Why don’t you obsess about accomplishing something with your life instead of focusing on something that you were born with?

A naturalistic fallacy is deriving an ought from an is.
It IS the fact that we love our children more than other children, therefore this is morally good.
So, if it's equivalent to raise someone else's child, you are a cuck.
Natural selection. Does it matter if you were good or evil if you erase your genes by favoring other children over your own? If you were morally good, you removed goodness from the world by doing so which is evil.
>explain why
Oh it's just selfish genes trying to reproduce.
My brother has some of my genes.
He has a son, who has some of my genes too.
He's not my son, but if he survives, it's good for me.
So I favor him over the stranger's son, I'm personally invested.
Why else would we evolve to think the way we do?

How old are you?

65/tf/wisconsin

>A naturalistic fallacy is deriving an ought from an is
Lord almighty, who? Who are you replying to? Where is this coming from? Is there a voice in your head, are you having a conversation with someone we can't hear or see? user accuses you of making a naturalistic fallacy; you respond to another user, only to attempt the explanation for what a naturalistic fallacy is...

And fail to adequately meet the requirements of making a naturalistic argument that would somehow (?) prove that the fallacy you're making is somehow also a strong argument (?). You've outdone yourself. I award you with this bronzed potato, please keep it on a shelf somewhere for display.

>It IS the fact that we love our children more than other children
>therefore this is morally good
What in the goddamn? user, morality? You're going to mention morality after trying to depict a naturalistic fallacy? Non sequitur? Yes! Retarded? Absolutely! Please do not reproduce. We love our children because genetics, therefore it is morally good, and this is an adequate explanation for the asinine reasoning from earlier which already includes 3 whole unrelated premises and conclusions... and I've diagnosed the first lovechild of a woman and nightshade.

>Oh it's just selfish genes trying to reproduce
So what the fuck are you on about? Do you not realize what you've just said? Here you are, arguing for a very materialistic angle, all of a sudden... and it's still inconsistent. Thematically, but logically as well.

Never. Not once, have you made a single cohesive point besides the blatantly uncontroversial, things like "water is good" or "some people have different skin and I notice that". It's 2 pieces of bread with a dead squirrel between, advertised as "tomato soup".

True or not, I'm begat with the burning desire to call you a cheesehead in the most malicious way. You're part cheese.

The only thing materialistic about it is that it occurs in the physical space, it has nothing to do with money.
I'm not saying it's morally good to only raise your own children. I'm saying you're a cuckold if you raise another man's child. Then moral value was placed on being a cuckold by others.
Errgo not a naturalistic fallacy.
My argument was more "Something is, therefore if itsn't, then you is (a cuckold)"

user your taking way to much out of your time to talk with incompetent people. Entertainment is fine to a degree, but you should probably spend that time elsewhere.

>The only thing materialistic about it is that it occurs in the physical space

>Actually it's materialistic capitalism that promotes ignoring race

>you're a materialist

>It's not a material thing but here are some absolute facts
>So obviously there is some kind of unconcious racial awareness

>because we're closer genetically
Motherfucker. Actual individual liable to have mother-fucking in their family tree. You absolute terror.
>has nothing to do with money
Bull, shit. You understand both concepts and have employed them during your time here.

>I'm not saying it's morally good to only raise your own children
But wait!
>It IS the fact that we love our children more than other children
>therefore this is morally good
>Does it matter if you were good or evil
>if you erase your genes by favoring other children over your own
>If you were morally good
>you removed goodness from the world by doing so which is evil
>moral value was placed on being a cuckold by others
Now with 50% more nothing.

>inconsistent statements and unrelated statements have a get together
>Errgo not a naturalistic fallacy
That's not how it works for several reasons. For fuck's sake, you said there was an equivalence while also saying there was an ought/should issue.

I should, shouldn't I.

You're mixing up points. Anti-racism is pushed for materialistic reasons. There is nothing materialistic about racial identity, if anything, it stands against materialism.

>>It IS the fact that we love our children more than other children
>>therefore this is morally good
also this is the ought is fallacy, not what I said.
I was just explaining later that cucking can only be morally good if you are evil, which means you'd never do it for good reasons so even if I said cucking is evil, which I did not, I'd still be correct as a good man who cucks removes his good man genetics from the world , which is evil.

You fucking idiot, you're the one mixing and matching points like it's Tuesday at the Kindergarten activity table.

No living soul said that there was anything materialistic about racial identity. Hell, the original gripe was that a
>racial soul
was a laughable concept- and didn't exist. Specifically in a materialistic sense, economically or metaphysically. Nobody, no one, not one, not anyone, not any single one, not even a body, has made a single utterance in that likeness. Never ever.

And in the same breath, you decided the following:
>Anti-racism is pushed for materialistic purposes
>There is nothing materialistic about racial identity

Are you mad? And as soon as you hop on this morality train, you'll hop off at the next stop. You never finish explaining anything. It's just patchwork sentences. There are half-eaten squirrel sandwiches everywhere, and I wouldn't be surprised if that were literal case for you.

Attached: 1534488639141.jpg (327x279, 27K)

>No living soul said that there was anything materialistic about racial identity
Glad you agree but I've made a strong case for the metaphysical existence of a racial soul or at least, an unconcious set of preferences that could be called a "soul" for the sake of simplification.
>>Anti-racism is pushed for materialistic purposes
>>There is nothing materialistic about racial identity
These are not mutally exclusive ideas, they are complimentary ideas.

>Glad you agree
Motherfucker, you have said both things at this point. Both. You're not real.

>I've made a strong case for the metaphysical existence of a racial soul
Nope! Not ever. I've got unrelated statement 1 through 13, but nothing that stands out as strong reasoning. As a matter of fact, as I literally just got done typing, you've failed to finish any of those lines of thought. It's as if a piece of your brain is missing.

The quick brown fox ju

What? What was that? No, believe me, that's a complete sentence. It totally explains why green is the superior color.

>sake of simplification
Sake of my ass crack, now you're loosening the concept of a soul, and now it's as ambiguous as your conclusions' relationship with their premises.
>These are not
I feel authorized to tell you to go fuck yourself for even trying that. In what world did you think you could do that? The exact way you structured and delivered those things makes them mutually exclusive. For what reason would someone employ "anti-racism"? Materialistic purposes, correct? So, it's done in favor of a materialistic purpose.

It's done for a materialistic sake. It is transitively materialistic, if not inherently. "Anti-racism" is made materialistic, as its implementation can only be such. Otherwise, it's not done for materialistic purposes. Otherwise, it could not achieve such materialistic ends. And your dumb ass suggests that there is simultaneously nothing materialistic about racial identity. And I gave you a chance, and you still went ahead and did this dumb shit.

You stood fast in suggesting that there is simultaneously nothing materialistic about racial identity, despite a whole slew of things, especially the fact that you have finished selling the narrative that forces anyone who crawls in your pen to also treat "anti-racism", something that must by word alone deal with race directly, to be anything but part and parcel of something being pushed for materialistic purposes. Because, as no one should need to explain to you, pushing racism for materialistic purposes, again, means that the means of racism is therein materialistic. It cannot be otherwise and still remain true to the original sentiment of "anti-racism" being a materialistic pursuit. For why would a materialist push a non-materialist agenda, if they're these big bad agenda-pushers? And how would they push a materialistic agenda with non-materialistic means? Why would they? "Anti-race" because muh money.

Complimentary, but not in any shape or form as you might ever even try to postulate.

anti racism is not racial identity.
Also!
>fucking race obsessed fags who think "muh race identity" actually fucking matters. Why is everyone such a materialistic whore?
So there you go, OP got owned.

>anti racism is not racial identity

>they are complimentary ideas

>doing this
>ever

>OP got owned
OP may be a faggot most days. Today is not one of those days. Today you were the faggot.

You can be a racist and tolerant at the same time

Fuck off op you dumb nigger. Op was a fag. Another user is in the right and owning him

>being this much of a faggot

Attached: 1550705740489.gif (267x219, 1.05M)

Let's start a Race War.

I remember when I was 12.

Yikes, try to keep up.
The idea is not "anti racism" the idea is "anti racism is fundamentally materialistic"
Similarly the idea is not "racial identity" the idea is "racial identity is not materialistic".
Errgo the two ideas are complimentary, not exclusive.

>The idea is not "anti racism" the idea is "anti racism is fundamentally materialistic"
>Similarly the idea is not "racial identity" the idea is "racial identity is not materialistic"
Do you not see
the literal words on the screen? And do you honestly think that anyone hadn't said the above otherwise, as if that weren't understood between the sea of random-ass non sequitur?

Hell, you wrote it. It's fitting that you argue against yourself and simultaneously, with confidence, affirm the exact same conclusion you just made, as if anything you said managed to dispel... what you're trying to prove is correct.

Do you see how
>fundamentally materialistic
and
>not materialistic
are different? Are they the same thing, user? Are these two things complimentary? Or are they mutually exclusive?

It always amazes me how Yea Forumsfags can spew absolutely dog shit like this that doesn't mean a thing, and do it with such confidence.
Truly amazing :)

What's your racial identity?
"I'm an anti-racist" would not be a good faith answer to this question as even if you disregard your racial identity personally, others will identify you as your race, not as an "anti-racist"

Who the fuck said they were an "anti-racist"? And who the fuck are you to talk about good faith? Good faith? You want good faith? I have good faith in your lack of semiosis. There's your good faith, you unrighteous charlatan. Choke on it.

Who the fuck are you to ask for good faith. Fuck you, you get nothing. You're in no position to demand anything. I owe you nothing except contempt and ridicule.

Attached: 1537099509559.gif (150x150, 904K)

You getting confused and writing a bunch of nonsense every time I explain simple concepts to you is not proof that I'm arguing in bad faith, it's proof that you mentally can't keep up no matter how simple I make things for you.

>The idea is not "anti racism" the idea is "anti racism is fundamentally materialistic"
>Similarly the idea is not "racial identity" the idea is "racial identity is not materialistic"
>the two ideas are complimentary
Only because I refuse to believe that someone could waste their time and make this shit up without having an fiber of retard thriving in their frontal lobe.

Then show me a single corporation who is unabashedly pro racist.

When the fuck was that ever a requirement? What necessitates that? Hello? I have want to send for someone to ring ol' Liberty, for now is sunrise, and God willing, it'll cast a shadow in that vacuous cave of yours, so that even the vaguest outline of reality paints itself for you to taste. For fuck almighty, there was no glue between whatever the fuck you're asking for, and whatever the fuck the prior implications were. That is left of this goddamned galaxy. You want me to find a single corporation that is unabashedly not racist, when the story is that corporations push "anti-racism", materialistically, and no one has previous discounted what such a corporation is wont to do in terms of race?

Yeah? Yeah, go fuck yourself.

>What necessitates that?
Corporations by neccessity only care about money and they all push for open border, race mixing, and a lack of racial identity.
Prove me wrong by naming one major corporation that doesn't or face the fact that capitalism is anti racist and strong racial identity is it's opposite counterpart.

fuck off, soi-boi.

And in my excited state, I instead typed
>not racist
instead of
>pro racist
Because it's seriously not even a question. It's so plainly one way, and was never even argued, that I even unconsciously cut ahead of myself and said exactly what was true.

No, motherfucker. I'm asking you where the fuck you get the cause to ask for anyone to provide to you an example of an unabashedly racist corporation in current year. Assuming current year, because why would you mention anything about trading slaves when the sentiment seems to suggest things like Nike or P&G?

Does that answer your non-question? The fuck if I really care, because it does, and any further input from you means fuck all. Prove you fucking wrong. You fucking idiot. You straw-manning fuckwit.

>I'm asking you where the fuck you get the cause to ask for anyone to provide to you an example of an unabashedly racist corporation in current year.
Because you claim to not believe that anti racist ideas stem from capitalistic money hunger and that the opposite is true of racists. I've shown you're wrong now it's up to you to provide evidence for your counter claim or admit I'm right and that you're a materialistic whore for your capitalist daddy dom.

>this thread
Imagine feeling obligatory need to prove your opinion true for frens in the internet

Papa Franku approves

Attached: Filthy+franku+watches+animu+too+_3ed83ef9a937ccc2f9ea375b1a050f13.png (303x325, 100K)

>Because you claim to not believe that anti racist ideas stem from capitalistic money hunger
Are you retarded? Here's a litmus test, even though we don't need one. Find exactly where I state that. Find it. Find it and show me. Show me the money. Find that needle, prime choice.

>I've shown you wrong
In what fucking world? The same one with racial souls and unicorns?
>your counter claim
I'll just get in line behind you, so you can finish counter-claiming yourself, and then your imaginary friend, in that order. Then I'll have to wait for a wholesale feckless representation of something that never happened, with a shoddily scrawled note implying that I'm responsible.

How many fucking turns. What, wholesale communism now? We're done with morality already? Not trendy enough? Didn't catch the sole stretch of brain?

Nigger

>being racist
Imagine living life the worst way possible, fucking race obsessed fags who think "muh race identity" actually fucking matters. Why is everyone such a materialistic whore?

>>The idea is not "anti racism" the idea is "anti racism is fundamentally materialistic"
>>Similarly the idea is not "racial identity" the idea is "racial identity is not materialistic"
>>the two ideas are complimentary
>Only because I refuse to believe that someone could waste their time and make this shit up
yawn.

Oh, an argument that something fundamentally x and something not x equals opposing things, complete with the offending statements.