Originally Posted by rhaikh
I believe Harris is popular because [This is causal claim] he is a liberal willing to lend legitimacy to the foundations [This would be isolationism and racism] of alt-right ideology. He is being paid to do exactly that. [Implication - tainted motivations, he wouldn't do it unless paid] As a result [Another causal claim], he is fueling the alt-right by justifying some people's preexisting biases with dubious "rational" reasons [Claims are either rational or not, there isn't a third kind.], leading [Another causal claim] them to seek out even more polarizing justifications (see the SPLC article linked above).


Lets analyze this gem. [Comments Inserted] in the quote above. Additionally, here they are in line:

"I believe Harris is popular because he is a liberal willing to lend legitimacy to the foundations of alt-right ideology. He is being paid to do exactly that."

Restate for clarity:

Harris popular only as a result of his liberal credentials being used to justify racism. He does it for money.

---

"As a result, he is fueling the alt-right by justifying some people's preexisting biases with dubious "rational" reasons, leading them to seek out even more polarizing justifications..."

Restated for clarity:

Harris is at least partially responsible for alt-right by providing them with false reasons, causing further radicalization.


Pick any one of the highlighted points and justify your positions. For now they are just dubious accusations.

---

Here is alternative explanation, that is simpler.

Harris is an atheist, he opposes any religion, including Islam on this basis. He criticizes Islam rationally, and has an audience of atheists that listen to what he has to say. Your opposition to Harris is rooted not in his positions, that are justified and reasoned, but because it contradicts your narrative of unquestioning inclusivity above anything else. That is, ultimately you value inclusivity and diversity over free speech and personal liberty.



[Linked Image]