White Supremacist Journal attacks Towson Debaters

[stannard67]

http://www.vdare.com/stix/080626_judges.htm

[Yas]

Consider the predicament of a team that plays by the rules, yet after spending hundreds of hours preparing to argue each side of constructive engagement, is matched up in the CEDA finals against a dishonest team with a racial agenda. The honest team never had a chance.


Apparently honesty is not the best policy.... heh heh heh. Pun intended.

[asmitty]

the mau mau reference was especially touching.

[aec]

So, it's been Nick Stix all these years writing bad "Ks are for cheaters" blocks...

"But, contra Baron, there is no reason in the world why teams entering a debate tournament would be obligated to "debate debate," instead of the official topic. Otherwise, why have an official topic? And what are rules for, if members of certain groups can break them with impunity?"

"Signing up for a tournament implies consent as to the topic and the rules. [...] The only reason for making an issue of the rules was to sabotage the competition—and thereby distract everyone’s attention from the saboteurs’ competitive shortcomings."

"Consider the predicament of a team that plays by the rules, yet after spending hundreds of hours preparing to argue each side of constructive engagement, is matched up in the CEDA finals against a dishonest team with a racial agenda. The honest team never had a chance."

[Aly_F]

that is so utterly depressing. *sigh*

[yourmessiah]

This guy has great points. I do hope that there will be debate rounds spoken only in Spanish or any other language for that matter. If Towson paved the way for that then more power to them.

[Aly_F]

Umm that already happened. CSUF MM to name one of several teams that I know of that spoke in spanish during debates. they did this primarily in the year of 05 to 06 i think? or it may have been 04 to 05. One or the other :-)

[Aly_F]

oh and i forgot to ask. what good points does this guy have? just curious :-)

[GiantsFan]

CEDA was like 3 months ago. Don't the white supremacists have anything else about which they can annoy? Or does it just take Baby-Bob three months to come up with something to say?

[KCalderwood]

i remember when dd cut some cards about videotaped police interrogations from one nicholas stix. i can't remember if dudley/shaw/kyle ever won on the stix is racist indicts

[yourmessiah]

oh well I learned something thanks

[CShaw]

Originally Posted by KCalderwood

i remember when dd cut some cards about videotaped police interrogations from one nicholas stix. i can't remember if dudley/shaw/kyle ever won on the stix is racist indicts

We did. He also has associations with the KKK.

Seriously.

[KCalderwood]

Originally Posted by CShaw

We did. He also has associations with the KKK.

Seriously.

i thought the name sounded right- good ole' nick stix

[John Doe]

Regardless of Stix' history, am I the only person on the board who thinks he has a point and that Towson probably should have lost sems?

[AdamK]

Originally Posted by John Doe

Regardless of Stix' history, am I the only person on the board who thinks he has a point and that Towson probably sould have lost sems?

Hopefully, yes.

Not to say that voting against Towson is inherently bad, but saying that Stix "has a point" is just pretty shitty.

[KCalderwood]

Originally Posted by John Doe

Regardless of Stix' history, am I the only person on the board who thinks he has a point and that Towson probably should have lost sems?

stix has a point? no. even if you disagree with performance affirmatives there are much better ways to articulate these points.

alone in voting against towson in sems? i haven't seen the round. finals? yes, ethic of love and openness, ftw.

[stannard67]

The interesting and rather repugnant point about both Stix and "John Doe" (hey there loser, you wanna tell us who you are?) is that teams win "controversial" decisions all the time--even at the championship level--but only two African Americans winning a national championship occasions negative publicity from outside the debate community--and genuine anger and ridicule inside of the debate community.

[John Doe]

Even is Stix is a white supremacist, and that is his motivation for writing the article, it seems as if his principle argument is that people ought to debate the topic under discussion. He doesn't make any overt arguments about why discussion of racism is bad, he merely contends that it clearly doesn't follow from the topic provided.

I think it's fair game. Even if Stix is a racially-motivated individual who has connections to the KKK, that doesn't mean we need to reject on-face anything that he says, even those comments are directed toward a black team. I'm not endorsing his racism, or even his motive for the article, merely some of the basic facts.

[UberNovi]

I don't find anything repugnant or even racist in this particular stix article. For stix, the writing is fairly subdued and free of supremacist overtones. I would dare to say that in some parts of the article Stix comes close to what i would call..."a point".

Which parts of the article are racist?

Why is vdare a white supremacist publication?

[stannard67]

VDare routinely features articles that posit the racial inferiority of African Americans. Some samples:

"What you won’t hear, except from me, is that 'Let the good times roll' is an especially risky message for African-Americans. The plain fact is that they tend to possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups. Thus they need stricter moral guidance from society."

"In contrast to New Orleans, there was only minimal looting after the horrendous 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan—because, when you get down to it, Japanese aren't blacks."

The article in question needs to be judged in the context of the purported reason the magazine exists in the first place, as well as its willingness to include quotes such as those above.

As I already mentioned, debate teams have won national championships using controversial arguments before (eg, Fort Hays and NYU, both CEDA national champs) but Towson was the ONLY team that's been called out by a writer with ties to the KKK writing for a paleoconservative publication. If you don't see what's going on here, or continue to claim not to see what's going on here, you are either hopelessly naive, or you are pursuing an agenda of your own.

The question is, why would a publication that has nothing to do with intercollegiate debate, BUT has a history of publishing articles that posit that blacks are inferior, CARE about the CEDA national championship? Because two African Americans won it, that's why.

[ddirgo]

Originally Posted by stannard67

The question is, why would a publication that has nothing to do with intercollegiate debate, BUT has a history of publishing articles that posit that blacks are inferior, CARE about the CEDA national championship? Because two African Americans won it, that's why.

I'm not sure that's a bad thing. It means that people who didn't care about debate before, care about debate now--even if they don't like it. They're welcome to come and offer their point of view, any time.

Not to mention that a "white supremacist" publication just printed an article about how a couple of African-American kids outsmarted some of the smartest white kids in the country.

[wchamberlain]

A few things:

1. I think the characterization of VDARE as "white supremacist" is an unfortunate stretch. My reading of VDARE is that they are white nationalists. Now, I am not a white nationalist, but I don't dismiss what they have to say out of hand, in the same way that I don't dismiss what people on the other side of the spectrum have to say out of hand. Characterizing VDARE as white supremacists unnecessarily taints their arguments with the stench of KKK. (Apparently Nick Stix does have some KKK connections - fine. Call Nick Stix KKK, spare VDARE.)

2. Stix doesn't understand the world of debate. At all. His attacks on Cooper and Love and especially on the judges of that debate are stupid. If Cooper and Love are actually destroying the activity, then those arguments need to come out in-round. Judges are just messengers. I thought that Kansas got spanked and on that point, I think Stix has maybe his one correct argument in the entire column:

"Nate Johnson may not be the first white mugging victim who refused to press charges. But he’s the first white mugging victim I’ve come across who wasn’t even aware that he’d been mugged."

3. Stannard's last point - "The interesting and rather repugnant point about both Stix and "John Doe" (hey there loser, you wanna tell us who you are?) is that teams win "controversial" decisions all the time--even at the championship level--but only two African Americans winning a national championship occasions negative publicity from outside the debate community--and genuine anger and ridicule inside of the debate community." is well taken.

[KCalderwood]

sparing myself the google tool what is the difference between white nationalist and white supremacist?

[wchamberlain]

KC,

From the link in my original post,

"...a white nationalist is someone who believes that whites should act collectively to further their collective interests. Much as, say, a French nationalist believes that Frenchmen should act collectively etc."

and from wikipedia:

"...White supremacy is a racist[1] ideology based on the assertion that white people are superior to other racial groups. The term is sometimes used specifically to describe a political ideology that advocates social and political dominance for whites.[2]"

[stannard67]

Originally Posted by wchamberlain

"...White supremacy is a racist[1] ideology based on the assertion that white people are superior to other racial groups. The term is sometimes used specifically to describe a political ideology that advocates social and political dominance for whites.[2]"

Several of the articles published on Vdare fit that description in that they posit the inferiority of African Americans. I trust you are neither defending that position, nor have missed that those articles exist on Vdare. Please clarify your position and stance.

[wchamberlain]

Then those specific articles are white supremacist articles, if they posit what you suggest.

I identify VDARE with individuals like Steve Sailer, Peter Brimelow, Paul Craig Roberts, etc., individuals who I don't consider to be white supremacists.

[stannard67]

Originally Posted by wchamberlain

Then those specific articles are white supremacist articles, if they posit what you suggest.

I identify VDARE with individuals like Steve Sailer, Peter Brimelow, Paul Craig Roberts, etc., individuals who I don't consider to be white supremacists.

Except that Steve Sailer wrote both of the quotes above, positing the inferiority of blacks.

[Aly_F]

Okay theoretically at least you can be conservative and not be a racist. but making comments ABOUT Towson's race, being the reason why they were allowed to "cheat" or that the polite white midwesterners were just too nice to know they were mugged. i think that if not having supremacist undertones which it does it at least has very very racist and offensive undertones.

what are the "good points" of this article?

is it the comment that only black people(men) are non traditional cheaters? if that's the case i'm not sure where that leaves me :-\

[John Doe]

In my defense, I should indicate that, like Chad, I didn't think that this specific article makes any blatantly racist arguments. Even if the author is racially-motivated, that doesn't mean that all of his ideas are illegitimate, and I support his argument in a context that applies them to all members of the debate community, regardless of race, without endorsing his anti-black motive.

When Stix asks, "What are rules for, if members of certain groups can break them with impunity," I'm apt to agree with him. I think that it's apparent, for example, in the 1NC CX during Towson's sems round, when asked how their kritik wasn't "plan-plus," and Towson responded that "they didn't understand that jargon," that the judges held them to different standards of accountability than they typically would other debaters in the tournament.

Even if you think that Towson's story isn't a good example of disproportionate treatment, I think that Stix' appeal to fairness in every round and his rejection of emotionally-motivated judging is an ideal with which I can sympathize without endorsing the racism that motivated his comments in the first place.

I guess I should just have clarified my original post to indicate that I'm in agreement with Stix insofar as I'm not a big fan of performance, of plan-plus kritiks that have essentially no meaningful link other than the fact that the affirmative isn't already kriticizing the same thing, or of arguments that in absolutely no manner adhere to the topic.

I disagree completely with the author insofar as I think that these ideas are best left to the debaters, and that if Towson can defend their argument and win the round, then no one should care whether they were topical. I also still think that they should have lost in sems.

[wchamberlain]

This is also from Sailer. As is this and this and this.

Is Sailer coarse, offensive, and politically incorrect? For sure. Is he a racial realist? I think he probably self-identifies as one. Is he a white supremacist? I don't think so. The first article linked is hard to reconcile with the idea that "whites are superior to other racial groups." The best manifestation of this line of thinking is Hitler blowing up when Jesse Owens won the gold in Berlin, angered by the fact that a black man beat his Aryan sprinting machine.

The quotes that you mention, I'm not a fan of them. They are certainly manifestations of racial realism at its most crude, and they are Sailer at his worst. Maybe those specific quotations do fall under our definition of white supremacy. However, it's a leap from that to "Sailer is a white supremacist."

Why all this matters: This is about as critical as I get. Language does shape reality. When you call a thinker a white supremacist, you marginalize that thinker in such a way that closes your mind, and others' minds to everything that person has to say.

If you haven't read Why I'm not a white nationalist yet, this would be the time. It's long, but worth it.