@Background Pony #89DB
I said, “Except the sources that [the Wikipedia page is] using are the Oxford and Collins dictionaries. ‘It’s Wikipedia!’ isn’t an argument; discount the sources that it cites,” and you only replied, “And Almost anyone can edit a wikipage.” You didn’t discount the Oxford and Collins dictionaries; you just relied on a genetic fallacy and then when I asked you to address my argument – discount the actual sources the Wikipedia page
used – you doubled down about how, “Almost anyone can edit a wikipage,” when it was completely irrelevant because at that point I wasn’t even talking about Wikipedia (nor was I defending it as a platform); I was talking about the Oxford and Collins dictionaries.
What about your claim that the definition I put forward “seems a little too broad for [you] to trust”. You could put forward a better definition of ultra-nationalism, citing actual ultra-nationalists, but you haven’t; you haven’t met the burden of proof. I’m going to use the dictionary definitions unless you demonstrate that they aren’t adequate.
You then asked me to focus on your point regarding US’s relation to NATO when it had absolutely nothing to do with what I actually said; I said absolutely nothing about the US’s position regarding NATO being ultra-nationalist; all I said was that the idea of always putting “America First” is ultra-nationalist. But let’s act as if I said that the US’s position regarding NATO
was ultra-nationalist. You essentially said that it wasn’t ultra-nationalist because it was, to you, rational(“Is it really ultranationalism when it’s the logical thing to do?”). Whether ultra-nationalism is rational or not had nothing to do with the definition that I put forward; nowhere in the definition was the claim that ultra-nationalism is irrational; extremism is not necessarily irrational (and, in fact, what counts as extremism is dependent on the society’s Overton window, whereas whether something is rational or not is objective).
You said, “I am listening to your conversation and I don’t see how I’m apparently not,” but I never said that you weren’t
listening to me; I said that you weren’t
addressing my argument.