Sociopath Community

That's a rather cynical position. I take it you don't think America should help make the world a better place?

Foreign aid is potentially also good PR, which you might be in need of.

Immigration can be both good or bad, depending on circumstances, but I agree not all immigration is preferable.

I never would have thought you to be liberal when I first chatted with you lol. 

Look at how China did when they tried to isolate themselves :1

No nation exists in isolation from the international community. Foreign aid when appropriately distributed is not only good for humanity itself, but also preserves the global economy, builds alliances, and prevents problems from spreading beyond the borders from which they originate.

Perhaps he can give a more nuanced response detailing what about it he thinks is bad. Not everything is about fear or hate, although using a simple catch-phrase like that usually points in that direction.

Please provide a scientific explanation of your psychological stuff.

PR

What does this stand for?

Reverse racism is the use of racism to say another race is better than the norm, like claiming that all asians are good at math and martial arts.

... I meant black on white racism. They're claiming it will never exist.

racist.

Which definition of racist are you using?

Fox News parrot

I'll admit Fox News has a conservative bias. CNN has a liberal bias too. Same with Washington Post. Huffington Post. All in all, Fox News is for racial equality. The liberal biased sources are for PoC getting special treatment.

That's like saying Chivalry is a way to control men and make them obey women.

The reason I said anti racism is used to control whites is... because THEY KEEP REDEFINING IT.

Those redefinitions drive me crazy.

Political Correctness is a good aim, it's its execution that needs some work from time to time.

Without PC being the goal, the lack of it would dominate instead.

"What are your thoughts on redefining racism? They redefine racism to keep whites in control."
If you're really worried about streamlined words having their definitions changed, why not just use different words that mean what you intend?

Redefining words is an attempt at communication. Many have to deal with problems regardless of if a word is redefined or not, while those bickering about how a word changed likely aren't the ones facing said problems.

"The liberal left IS A PROBLEM."
People are a problem and the extremes of both sides push away from a real solution.

You either have one side that fears change and wishes to hoard everything for themselves, or you have the other side that wants to give everything away to the needy and aim for drastic changes from seeing our current system as flawed, as needing a tune up in the name of progressivism. Either side when pushed to it's illogical extreme will make for more harm than help, and claiming that one side has the right idea more than the other is a misguided view sold from said side. Both sides have a ton of problems that clash when not leveled out, and both sides are the byproduct of human constructs that each carry more than their share of human error.

It's the "us versus them" angle that blocks off many attempts towards actual progress, an angle that can have a large wave of people refuse to listen just because they're on "the other team".

"As you stopped quoting and arguing against them...?"
A lot of areas I've either already argued against with you to the point of redundancy in the past or I've covered from within other quotes.

Shedding your fear would probably help you, as otherwise you'll find yourself prone to Appeal to Emotion.