PayPal

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Testimonials from the Academic Debate Community on Behalf of Nicholas Stix


My June 26, 2008, VDARE article, “Towson Debaters Mau Mau Liberal Judges,” was about how a pair of incompetent, black supremacist debaters won the 2008 Cross Examination Debate Association's (CEDA) national college tournament by cheating. The racist black debaters flagrantly broke the rules, by refusing to debate the assigned topic, and instead used the shallowly sophistic dodge of accusing the “debate community” of “racism.” Instead of disqualifying the racist cheaters, a group of white leftist judges threw the tournament, by voting for the black team out of racial and political loyalty—their explanations for their votes sounded like racial loyalty oaths—and screwing a manifestly superior, white University of Kansas team.

The so-called academic debate community—students, high school teachers, and college professors alike—responded to my exposé with what they consider “debate”: They engaged in ad hominem attacks, including guilt by association, cursing me; defamed me by lying outright; engaged in obfuscation; ignored my refutations of their arguments, and simply repeated the discredited arguments; and while bragging about their open-mindedness, gleefully organized to try and get me professionally whitelisted in the MSM (the dunces were unaware that I already had been whitelisted!), by e-mailing poison pen letters to every MSM and even Internet outfit that had ever published me. They went so far as to contact Hotmail, and sought to get the mailbox of a reader who had criticized them on my behalf shut down, using the same sort of language they had employed against me, hoping to cost him all of his e-mail and address list.

The characters I quote below do not merely embody the subculture of “academic debate”; they embody the subculture of academia. And because I need the support of my readers, in order to continue my work, in spite of the defamers and academic Fagins, please hit the gold PayPal “donate” button, and make a contribution. Thanks in advance!
Warning: bad language ahead.


“White Supremacist Website Makes [sic] Cheapshots at Towson, Community
__________________________________
“This made me so fucking angry I had to e-mail the ignorant fuck that wrote it. If you get the inclination, I encourage you to do the same. His email is Add1dda@aol.com [The writer was not man enough to include his own eddress, but I figured it out: He was UT-Dallas student Wes Dwyer, who had e-mailed me anonymously as theouterheavenproject@hotmail.com ]

“This is so absurdly racist and ridiculous that I had to post it here. There are some posts on e-debate about it as well.”
“Startop” (That was Startop’s, aka Wes Dwyer’s complete opening comment. The rest of his post consisted of my first article, which he posted in its entirety.)


“i would prefer that instead of emailing the author, we just attack where it hurts - scrutinize the author's publications across the net, find the failures in journalism ethics (like actually researching the topic at hand), and then repeatedly (en masse) email:

Men’s News Daily
Middle American News
the New York Daily News
New York Post
Newsday
Chronicles
Ideas on Liberty and the Weekly Standard
(and anywhere else he gets his articles published)

“and demand that his articles never be published in the future on the basis of a failure to respect journalism ethics.

“there is nothing like a grassroots war of economics to change someone's mind.

“of course, sending emails to those publications indicating his obvious racism (aside from his failures as a journalist) isnt a bad idea either.”

“Ankur” [Neither Ankur, nor anyone else on the board exposed any journalistic failings of mine; they were simply incensed that I had criticized them, and did not share their radical leftwing politics.]


“Ankur, that's a great idea. People should start posting citations for his other articles right away. Let's just eliminate his income potential.”

“Dan”


“Awesome idea. How do you suggest we organize this? I dont think that sparse, delayed e-mails from various debaters will be as effective as forming a coalitional force with the community as a whole. This will take some form or organizing, and timing on the parts of those involved. I would love to hear any ideas for this that you may have.”

“Startop”


“Perhaps these sites will help with the revolution.” [Provides a list of URLs to Web sites that had published my work.]

Tammie Peters [She had previously offered several arguments that were identical in character to mine, but was criticized by the gang, and now sought to get back in the comrades’ good graces.]

And so I wrote a second article, on July 29, 2008, exposing their machinations against me! “‘Debate Community’ Organizes to Silence Critic—Me!”


“This response by Mr. Stix really bothers me -- mostly because I believed the posts I was making on this forum were for the eyes of members of our community: coaches, competitors and those who have been actively involved in what we do in other capacities. Folks who have a sense of who I am and the broader context of the issues within our community. I wanted to work through some issues that had been perplexing me and I wanted some feedback from those within the community. What I would say to insiders is VERY different from how I would make similar points to outsiders (I probably wouldn't make such points to outsiders as I want to promote forensics in all possible forms). I'm angry, I'm hurt, I feel violated (somehow). I fell like someone spied on a semi-private conversation (after all, what casual observer would want to read posts on a debate forum?). I chose not to email Mr Stix; my role in this issue was limited to providing a list of Mr. Stix's publishers. But now my comments on this forum are out there for whomever to see. My name as a coward. And just when I am hoping to have credibility linked with my study.

“And I do try to make peace -- that's part of my personality. Mr. Stix makes that seem so . . . dirty. I'm not sure how I ‘triangulated.’”

Tammie Peters, after I exposed her attempt to professionally destroy me.


“A writer with ties to the KKK”
(A lie, and thus defamatory.)
University of Wyoming debate coach and blogger, Matt Stannard
Email


“Nuanced” criticism:

“Badge of honor, for sure. More importantly, those racist idiots can't seem to understand nuance. I just spent a week working with debaters from Towson, West Virginia, Western Connecticut, Kansas State, and other schools, at the Baltimore Debate Cooperative. I interviewed Deven, Dayvon, Deverick, Shawntia, and Andy on my podcast show. We had fun. They know I intellectually disagree with a lot of their arguments--including many that got them their CEDA national title. But I also know they won that final round fair and square. That's what these racist douchebags don't get: "Right" or "wrong," Towson did a better job persuading the judges on their arguments. Stix is such a frigging droolbucket that he expected the judges to intervene against the team doing a better job of arguing, in a heroic effort to save white western civilization from evil afrocentrism. [But they didn’t argue at all; they merely changed the subject, and engaged in racial intimidation.] Then he turns around and makes appeals to "objectivity." The judges were being "objective" or at least fair-minded. I doubt they personally agreed with Towson, for the most part. Stix doesn't understand that you can't set up ideological parameters when judging debates (witness the number of times I've voted for "capitalism good" arguments). [NS: I added the boldface type. Honoring the rules is not setting up “ideological parameters,” any more than honoring the three strikes rule is, in baseball.] To do so would actually destroy what he pays ridiculously hypocritical lip service to: open debate and the evolution of ideas. [How does racial intimidation help “the evolution of ideas?”] Most importantly, I can disagree with Deven and Dayvon, but still be willing to take a bullet, literally or metaphorically, for their right to speak, debate, exist, and win. [But they didn’t debate at all.] I don't understand people who don't understand that. But there they are, coming out of the woodwork because a couple of uppity african americans dare to challenge white supremacy on their own terms.”

Matt Stannard, again. [Since “Deven and Dayvon” were attacking the left-wing world of academic debate, not the world of Internet journalism, that means that for them, Stannard and his comrades are the “white supremacists.”]

"VDare is a white supremacist journal," [More pearls of Stannardian wisdom.
The reference to VDARE.com as a "White Supremacist Website" came from The Pretend Encyclopedia, as I call Wikipedia, whose entry for VDARE had only hours earlier been conveniently vandalized—doubtless by a member of the “debate community”—so that Stannard could “quote” it.]

Given the ad hominem attacks of most of my critics, including leading coaches like Matt Stannard, how they could make such accusations of me tells you everything that you need to know about the intellectual and moral quality of these people.


“Name one racist fucking douche like Stix that competitive academic debate has ever produced. There are probably none. And if there are any, it's probably a hell of a lot less than those claimed by bullshit fucking internet rags like the ones that Stix writes for.”

“DEADMONEY” [Ad hominem, and double straw man!]


“I firmly believe that this activity should never be criticized from the outside...”

Author unclear


“Thanks for including [the critic’s] e-mail. I've got a few hours of free time, looks like William is gonna get signed up for as many minority support list serves as I can find. Not as good as killing him, which was my first idea, but it'll have to do.”

“stuthekid” [Bragging about committing cyber-harassment.]


“Wow. I don't understand how people can be so consumed by ignorance and hate as to not only blame others for their feelings of inferiority but also to threaten the livelihoods and lives of those who don't sympathize with them. I hope that someday, somehow people like [the critic, whose e-mail they tried to get shut down] and Stix can learn to give up their hate before it destroys them and people around them, but I'm not so sure how likely that is.”

“andrewthepirate” [This was a textbook case of projection; the only people “threaten[ing] the livelihoods and lives of those who don't sympathize with them” were the commenter’s comrades.]


“You would think these white supremacists would know their german, wouldn't you?”

“TheScuSpeaks” [Unlike “TheScuSpeaks,” who had no idea what he was talking about, I am a German speaker.]


“dont take this sitting down, maaan

“that dude hates you because your brown (and smarter than him).”

“retired” to ankur, who is South Asian


“This response by Mr. Stix really bothers me -- mostly because I believed the posts I was making on this forum were for the eyes of members of our community: coaches, competitors and those who have been actively involved in what we do in other capacities. Folks who have a sense of who I am and the broader context of the issues within our community. I wanted to work through some issues that had been perplexing me and I wanted some feedback from those within the community. What I would say to insiders is VERY different from how I would make similar points to outsiders (I probably wouldn't make such points to outsiders as I want to promote forensics in all possible forms). I'm angry, I'm hurt, I feel violated (somehow). I fell like someone spied on a semi-private conversation (after all, what casual observer would want to read posts on a debate forum?). I chose not to email Mr Stix; my role in this issue was limited to providing a list of Mr. Stix's publishers. But now my comments on this forum are out there for whomever to see. My name as a coward. And just when I am hoping to have credibility linked with my study.”

Tammi Peters, after I exposed her. (Of course, she wouldn’t want outsiders to know that she plotted to destroy someone’s means of making a living.)

“Tammie, had Nick Stix intended to do any due diligence on his ‘articles’ then he would have posted here himself to ask questions of us in the community or at least attempted to arrange interviews with those he cited.”

“Fox On Socks” (I did interview the relevant figures, and quote them in my article. He’s saying that I should have quoted every potty-mouthed, sophomoric Stalinist on their message board.)


“does anyone else find this amusing.

“Whenever a debater tells a project team in a debate round that they should focus on the resolution and maintain a policy-orinted round, they are associated with just maintaining old-school policy, ‘ill read more cards than you’ debaters.

“when somoene outside our social circle calls those projects out, they become KKK, racist pigs.”

“She’s legal in dog years”


Don’t forget to hit the PayPal button on the way out! Thanks again!

Sincerely,

Nicholas Stix

No comments: