Let's say hypothetically tomorrow an actual white nationalist/neo-nazi/KKK rally were held somewhere deep south US, and the participants all decided to wear orange traffic cones on their heads for the rally. And this got widespread media attention worldwide.
Now let's say you're a Canadian anti-lockdown activist planning an anti-lockdown rally. Having seen the white supremacists wear orange traffic cones on their heads in the US, would it be a good idea or a bad idea to have the anti-lockdown protesters wear traffic cones on their heads at your rally?
It's obviously a bad idea because the public are going to see those traffic cones and assume you're white supremacists, because that's the only other place they saw protesters wearing orange traffic cones on their heads.
People's counter-argument here seems to be "Durr but traffic cones aren't inherently white supremacist symbols so why not wear them?!?!" That's incredibly stupid logic. Why would you wear orange traffic cones on your head in that scenario, unless you wanted to be associated with the white supremacists?
Now replace "orange traffic cones" with "tiki torches".
HOLY SHIT RACISTS KEEP LEAVING DOG WHISTLES ON THE ROAD TO SIGNAL TO OTHER RACISTS. I EVEN SAW THEM THROW WHITE SUPREMEIST GANG SIGNS AND I GOT PUNCHED FOR LOOKING!
Hey, you go right ahead and wave a tiki torch at your next protest if you want, just like the Charlottesville white supremacists. Don't say I didn't warn you when everyone points at you and calls you a white supremacist. Only a moron can't predict the outcome here.
For example, the okay ? hand symbol. Is that really a white supremacy symbol? No. It means “okay”. It always has and always will.
No comparison. The ok sign is something normal people do all the time. Marching with tiki torches it not. Most people have only ever seen white nationalists do that (i.e. Charlottesville). Hence my analogy using something nobody does (wearing road cones as hats for protests).
For the intellectually challenged:
Let's say hypothetically tomorrow an actual white nationalist/neo-nazi/KKK rally were held somewhere deep south US, and the participants all decided to wear orange traffic cones on their heads for the rally. And this got widespread media attention worldwide.
Now let's say you're a Canadian anti-lockdown activist planning an anti-lockdown rally. Having seen the white supremacists wear orange traffic cones on their heads in the US, would it be a good idea or a bad idea to have the anti-lockdown protesters wear traffic cones on their heads at your rally?
It's obviously a bad idea because the public are going to see those traffic cones and assume you're white supremacists, because that's the only other place they saw protesters wearing orange traffic cones on their heads.
People's counter-argument here seems to be "Durr but traffic cones aren't inherently white supremacist symbols so why not wear them?!?!" That's incredibly stupid logic. Why would you wear orange traffic cones on your head in that scenario, unless you wanted to be associated with the white supremacists?
Now replace "orange traffic cones" with "tiki torches".
ooooooooooooof
HOLY SHIT RACISTS KEEP LEAVING DOG WHISTLES ON THE ROAD TO SIGNAL TO OTHER RACISTS. I EVEN SAW THEM THROW WHITE SUPREMEIST GANG SIGNS AND I GOT PUNCHED FOR LOOKING!
Hey, you go right ahead and wave a tiki torch at your next protest if you want, just like the Charlottesville white supremacists. Don't say I didn't warn you when everyone points at you and calls you a white supremacist. Only a moron can't predict the outcome here.
No comparison. The ok sign is something normal people do all the time. Marching with tiki torches it not. Most people have only ever seen white nationalists do that (i.e. Charlottesville). Hence my analogy using something nobody does (wearing road cones as hats for protests).
Why are you being willfully obtuse here?
They're going to call you racist no matter what you do because they hate you just for existing.
What kind of person allows his enemy to dictate the terms of engagement and then attacks his allies because they refuse to submit as well.
Who's really being obtuse?
So, you have zero arguments.
Why say anything at all then?