4 ms·

Here is James Hansen being called a 'Denier' by Naomi Oreskes in Gurandiad. That's good faith? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/16/new-form-c

by sien 10y ago

Here is James Hansen being called a 'Denier' by Naomi Oreskes in Gurandiad. That's good faith? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/16/new-form-climate-denialism-dont-celebrate-yet-cop-21 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/16/new-fo... Nuclear Power advocates on the left are frequently attacked by Greenpeace and many others. As far as Acceptable Thought goes the practice of 'no platforming' and restricting free speech at Universities is not something that the Right originated. Again, that isn't debating with any assumption of good faith. That's just trying to block out views that the Left doesn't like.

eropple 10y ago
Greenpeace is not a mainstream leftist organization. A Congressman in favor of nuclear power, or openly critical of Greenpeace as a thing, is going to get, at most, an emoji shrug by anyone in that mainstream. What Greenpeace Thinks is almost wholly irrelevant to the discourse of the left. The Family Research Council is a mainstream right-wing organization. A Republican who runs afoul of the FRC in a solidly Republican state is in danger of being challenged internal to the party. What The FRC Thinks matters a great deal to the discourse of the right. Hell, I'll go one further: that I can criticize the insularity of parts of the left to hearing things they don't like is something that I could not do when I was of the right because then I was a RINO or a "bad Republican". I'm not a "bad liberal" because I make that criticism. I'm pretty normal. So there's a difference, and it's a difference of kind, and the conflation you're attempting to pawn off strikes me as mendacious.