In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Q: Comment: This country was founded as a white racist nation. The proof is in the original Constitution. Violence has always been at its core. What do you think the 2nd Amendment was needed for? The nation was built on ethic cleansing of the locals and race based slavery. The country has been a giant affirmative action program for people that Europe didn't need or want. We have been working on becoming "a more perfect union" ever since. As we move ever so slowly toward a merit based society, white male privilege is losing power. It is now illegal to kill black people while they are praying in church. That use to be one of the many white privileges that white men had. Lynchings are no longer considered family entertainment. There are photos. White folks invented the "race card" when they decided that being white was more important than being human. The good news is that younger people are generally less racist than their elders. In another 200 years, all lives may actually matter in this country.

A: Identity-attack
****
Q: Comment: What a crock! Scaremongering from an academic hoping if a disaster occurs in the markets, he can be the first to claim he predicted it.

Substitute "mutual funds" for ETFs and you have the same story - a bundle of assets packaged by a provider that includes a variety of holdings, all priced to their underlying value. Since MFs dominate ETFs by a factor of ten to one, why not apply the fear to a much bigger share of the investing world?

And by talking about a bundle of bonds in an ETF fund that masks the bad ones with the good ones -- just to draw an analogy to mispriced MBS -- makes it more ridiculous, because the bond rating services were responsible for treating the overall tranche without looking at the components in the ratings given to them. Deliberate and malicious incompetence, since the providers took out insurance to cover the losses on the products they fobbed off to the MBS purchasers, who suffered real losses from the mis-rating and had no cover.

Lousy analogy.

A: Non-identity-attack
****
Q: Comment: Anyone well educated that has any intellectually honesty will not be voting for Hillary.  Given the choice between a businessman with a rodent on his head (the unqualified and racist tags are nothing more than regurgitated media lines) and a liar who can't be trusted, give me the business person.  Trust the polls, not just yet.

The white trash inbreed thing, wow.

A:
Identity-attack
****