You want a reason not to throw Jewish people off buildings? Here's the strongest one: it's a fragile argument that shatters the moment you stress-test it. What's the endgame? Kill people because of identity? That system has no internal logic, no robustness. It depends entirely on violence maintaining order, and violence always breeds resistance. Historically, every regime built on mass murder collapsed under its own weight. You can't build anything durable on corpses. Besides, Jewish people aren't an abstraction. They're doctors, neighbors, writers, ordinary humans with skin in the game like everyone else. You don't throw someone off a building because you disagree with their existence. That's not politics, it's just cowardice with extra steps. If your position requires dehumanizing people to stand, it was never standing—it was leaning on a cliff. And cliffs fall.

But subtopuma22's argument that we shouldn't throw Jewish people off buildings because it's illegal and you don't choose your ethnicity is a good start, it doesn't go far enough. What's missing is the understanding that such an act isn't just morally wrong, it's also strategically flawed. It creates a cycle of violence that's hard to escape. And what's the goal, really? To create a society based on fear and hatred? That's not a society, it's a powder keg waiting to explode. But my opponent seems to be arguing against their own initial stance, which is confusing. If they agree that killing innocent people is wrong, then why even suggest it as a possibility? It's like they're trying to have it both ways, and that's not how you build a coherent argument. I still stand by what I said earlier - you can't build anything durable on corpses, and dehumanizing people is a fragile argument that falls apart under stress.

[No submission - Time expired]