> Unfortunately, that doesn't leave me a good term for the people like the ones that murdered most of my grandmother's family because of their race.

This is what you said.

Nukes are just a convenient way to eliminate an entire race these days. If you don't think right wingers calling for the middle east to be nuked is in any way related we're probably done here.

Pity. I'm morbidly curious to see what other silly things you're willing to say.

It'd probably feel less silly if you were able to appreciate the context of posts.

You literally went from "I wish that passports and police interaction were at lower levels, like they used to be" to "I want to nuke the middle east!"

There is no context where that can be taken seriously.

You're the one who asked me what you should call the people that murdered your grandmother because of her race since I'm using the term "racist" too loosely for your taste.

I'm saying, call them racists just like the people today that would gladly return to a time where people get killed just because of their race, as evident by their espoused politics.

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.

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?

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

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.

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