> You're bending over backwards to excuse what is quite clearly racial discrimination.

Blatantly false. I used actual logic to show how the other posters' points were not racism, and then challenged you to cite the exact words of their comments that were racism.

You failed to cite anything. You didn't use any logic whatsoever - you merely repeated the "it's racism" claim without any evidence at all.

Again, HN readers from the future: this is textbook "duck and weave" at work - don't respond to the other's points at all, just repeat your claims of racism like a broken record in hope that it'll stick after the tenth time.

You know who's bending over backward to try to make something that is factually not racism seem like racism? You.

> Discrimination against people born in mainland China is apparently fine because they're a security risk - perhaps they're suspected of disloyalty. Discrimination against people whose parents were born in China is apparently fine, because they might have family who could theoretically be taken hostage.

Yes - neither of those things are racism, because they are not. Discriminating. Based. On. Race. Why is this so difficult to understand?

> If you follow this logic, discrimination against anyone with familial relations in China is fine.

Correct. Again, this is logical, because those people are a security risk, for reasons mentioned above, which you have completely and utterly failed to address.

> That essentially means discrimination against all Chinese Americans is fine - but of course, this is completely kosher and not in any way racist.

False. "Chinese American" has nothing to do with having family in China. You can be a Chinese-American with all of your family outside of China (and, against someone arguing in good faith, I wouldn't have to point out that there's a limit to this (e.g. at some point, you'll have fifth cousins who are in China), but you're clearly not acting in good faith, as evidenced by your refusal to actually use logic, and instead merely repeat "racism" over and over and over again), or you can have absolutely zero Chinese ethnicity and have all of your family in China.

Let me repeat again: whether your family is in China or not has nothing to do with race.

Moreover, as further evidence of your bad faith - your sarcastic "but of course, this is completely kosher and not in any way racist." is clearly meant to imply that it's actually racist, but again, like every single comment you make, you fail to provide any evidence or logic whatsoever.

> This is the same logic used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII, to accuse Irish Americans of disloyalty (because of the Vatican), and the same argument used by antisemites to argue that Jewish Americans are disloyal (because of Israel).

I shouldn't have to explain that that's in invalid use of logic, but because you're not capable of seeing that: it's an invalid use of logic. There are two arguments that could be made: (1) people with family in Japan are security risks (which is valid) and (2) ethnic Japanese are security risks (which are invalid).

Point (1) is valid, but doesn't have anything to do with racism. Point (2) is invalid, and also not the thing that the parent posters were arguing. This sentence has nothing to do with the parent posters' points - you literally just brought it up to try to make it seem like they were being racist by association/similarity.

> But those aren't the ethnic groups being targeted in the US right now.

That's completely irrelevant. Racism is racism, regardless of who's being "targeted" - and non-racism is non-racism, regardless if you think a group is being "targeted".

> Not in the slightest.

If you were serious ("genuinely alarmed"), you would use logic, you would be able to cite the parts of the other commenters' posts that were actually racist, and when you failed to do that, you would have realized that you were incorrect, and stopped trying to pull allegations out of thin air. You've done none of those three things.

> That's where this kind of thinking leads to.

No, that's where thinking from confused and illogical minds that are unable to separate racism from security risks leads to.

Your entire argument has been "it sounds kind of racist, therefore it is." As far as I can tell, you haven't made a single sound argument in this entire thread. You are inciting - driven by emotion and fear and rage, instead of actually using your mind to think carefully and inquisitively. HN is not meant for this kind of illogical blathering.