Or maybe their argument was stupid. As I mentioned elsewhere, seeing as you decided to take up the baton, and criticised my refutation of their argument, I assumed you were also defending the argument.

You accuse me of strawmanning incessantly (I'll confess to sarcasm when I'm frustrated with obviously weak or ill-informed arguments (I'd have gone insane long ago without it), but I don't strawman), but then don't actually even try to explain what the "it" is. And you haven't, despite me asking numerous times, laid out these "sound and valid parallels" in anything approaching concrete terms.

If you make clear, coherent arguments, it's much harder to strawman them. And I can promise you I'd have no interest in doing so. But if you just claim, apopros of nothing, that I'm going to "bullshit" so it's not with even trying, then this is a waste of both our time.

Where you've actually made arguments, I've responded to them seriously and in good faith. When you've made simplistic, inaccurate claims about my arguments, I've clarified them. I have a very long track record of doing this. I literally have a website where I do this. I just have very little patience for word games and simplistic dogma about white supremacy.

I'm all for conversations where we try to understand and explore solutions to problems. Not unthinkingly shoehorn social media buzzword into every issue.