When world leaders thought you shouldn't need passports or visas

Re:When world leaders thought you shouldn't need passports o... by ori_b on Sunday October 02, 2016 @03:25PM (#12623808)

I might as well call them "people", in that case. The term racist has no real impact if it's used as loosely as you're using it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When world leaders thought you shouldn't need passports o... by zajd on Sunday October 02, 2016 @03:47PM (#12623892)

Oh I disagree the word racist evokes a pretty emotional response regardless of how many times you use it. 2016 and all that. Just look at how much effort you're putting in to trying to prove what a "real racist" is?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When world leaders thought you shouldn't need passports o... by ori_b on Sunday October 02, 2016 @03:55PM (#12623928)

You're right, I should accept that the meaning is diluted enough that good childhood memories makes me racist. It's 2016 and all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When world leaders thought you shouldn't need passports o... by zajd on Sunday October 02, 2016 @04:42PM (#12624138)

No you should probably accept that racism is part of the human condition and acting like it doesn't exist is about as intellectually riveting as the latest Micheal Bay film.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When world leaders thought you shouldn't need passports o... by ori_b on Sunday October 02, 2016 @05:12PM (#12624277)

Yes, we agree. It's 2016, and we should accept that 'racist' means approximately the same thing as 'person'.

[ Parent | on HN ]