I agree the linked tweet is quite tame. But I looked at the 20 most recent tweets/RTs on Richard’s timeline and they include a RT about the Great Replacement, a RT of the “Department of Deportation” about non-white sex criminals and a RT endorsing race realism.
Indeed, I was expecting stuff more like that when I clicked the link.
Why was this interaction cited as damning, instead of much more overtly edgy stuff? Were they just embarrassed to even bring up that other content, or something, and so pointed to a nothing-burger instead?
1) The cited tweet got more attention (see the interaction with Kelsey Piper)
2) That tweet is by Richard himself whereas the ones I cited are all RTs and I think it’s reasonable to form less strong opinions of people based on what they RT than what they post under their own name.
I agree the linked tweet is quite tame. But I looked at the 20 most recent tweets/RTs on Richard’s timeline and they include a RT about the Great Replacement, a RT of the “Department of Deportation” about non-white sex criminals and a RT endorsing race realism.
Indeed, I was expecting stuff more like that when I clicked the link.
Why was this interaction cited as damning, instead of much more overtly edgy stuff? Were they just embarrassed to even bring up that other content, or something, and so pointed to a nothing-burger instead?
My guess:
1) The cited tweet got more attention (see the interaction with Kelsey Piper)
2) That tweet is by Richard himself whereas the ones I cited are all RTs and I think it’s reasonable to form less strong opinions of people based on what they RT than what they post under their own name.