Good job, Mr. Newells. It’s always a good sign when you can get the anti-white to say “I’m not such-and-such”. It’s a little worse when the anti-white puts quotes around it like he did there, signifying that those aren’t words he sees as valid.

But, I’ve seen anti-whites try to resist the “anti-racist” label. In
my estimation, what it means is that they don’t want to consider themselves political and they see both anti-white and “anti-racist” as political words… But, it looks like it is working for you, so keep using it. However, there are also a lot of times you want to hit hard without a drawn out debate. You just tell the anti-white, “You are justifying genocide.” And then leave it.

Best regards,

J.P.O.

One thing I am reminded of in this post. it ISN’T about convincing the anti-White you are debating (though that would be bonus points) but about the other people reading the posts. We are trying to influence them. So when you are posting and responding remember you are “on stage”. That doesn’t mean to get all Respectable or anything but does mean that a logic progression to the conversation would enhance the later reader’s chances of getting a good clear message.

If they refuse to answer repeatedly ( 2 or 3 times MAX) answer for them. Use your knowledge of anti-Whites to your advantage and make the response as devastatingly truthful as possible. Make them defend themselves or use THAT to get another angle on their anti-Whiteness.

I am new here but have been debating these anti-Whites for a while. With the Mantra, mini-mantras and Truth behind me, the anti-Whites scatter like so many leaves before a storm. Thanks Bob and BUGS!