To be fair, you're using extremely common debate techniques, especially from the far right. Unfortunately this means I recognize them and they're pretty easy to combat.
Using the word "rant" to discount the post and summarize it as something it is not -- This was a post about Anonymous combating White Supremacy. While I did have to spend some time introducing the problem that they are combating, that's not the issue that the post was centered around.
Using the word SJW -- an immediate buzzword for those on the far right, it's generally used to lump anybody who cares about basic human rights into a bucket labeled snowflake. Very common tactic, very ineffective against somebody who recognizes it.
Quoting the word semantic -- the most basic of debate strategy, throwing "bunny ears" or quotation marks around the word that makes up the core of my argument is an easy way to discount what I said.
LOL -- that's just weak, using internet terminology to make up part of your argument honestly just makes your argument look weaker.
The core of the post was Anonymous combating White Supremacy online. White Supremacists have also targeted non-ethnic religious Jews, those of non-religious backgrounds, and others for reasons not entirely based upon race. Nazism was the exact same way. Discounting extremist ideology because their target doesn't fit the usual bill still makes it extremist ideology.
Again, polish up your debate skills. I saw right through it.