5 ms·

> This doesn't make scabbing any less vile, however... Friends don't let friends scab. "If you don't actively participate in my exact form of political activis

by wyager 10y ago

> This doesn't make scabbing any less vile, however... Friends don't let friends scab. "If you don't actively participate in my exact form of political activism, you're a bad person!" This is the kind of rhetoric that pushed a ton of people on the fence towards Trump. For some reason, it's a common leftist tactic right now to insist that if you aren't actively engaged in whatever form of extremism the speaker is advocating, you are evil and (propping up the man | part of the patriarchy | oppressing <group> | a literal nazi | etc.). Entirely predictably, this is likely to alienate anyone even slightly to the right of the speaker and push them further right. Maybe most Uber drivers don't really want to protest in this way. Maybe they agree with Trump. (Probably not, given that it's Manhattan, but who knows.) Maybe they feel like they don't have all the facts and don't want to make a stand based on an incomplete understanding. Either way, attacking them for it is counterproductive for you.

tiles 10y ago
> This is the kind of rhetoric that pushed a ton of people on the fence towards Trump. I hate to pick on this quote (I appreciate and suggest people read the rest of your post) but I don't agree with this. A common rightist tactic is to suggest either 1) I was okay with X policy when Obama did something so I have no moral authority to judge it now, or 2) I'm just a liberal whiner, too young, or too weak to appreciate that someone else is in charge so my beliefs are invalid. I am pushed to the left by conservative intolerance just as much as the reverse is true. Both sides have extremes. I think it balances out. You are following your own proclivities of reasoning, fixating on which messaging you're most enticed by or most repulsed by.
- rtx 10y ago
  Calling out people for staying silent under Obama is not a tactic. It's just a way to highlight a person's motivation.
  - jakeogh 10y ago
    It's an intellectually honest way to point out inconsistency. The hypocrisy is asymmetric from my pov. I know people who were horrified Obama got elected and some indulged in variations of the 'he's Hitler' BS, but the current reaction by the extreme neo-left is a magnitude of order worse. There's plenty (a majority I bet) of Dems that are not making that mistake, but the echo chamber prevents them from speaking unless they are willing to piss off their peers.
    - thinkloop 10y ago
      > Obama got elected and some indulged in variations of the 'he's Hitler' BS Being called Hitler by "some" after simply being elected, unrelated to any action is definitely useless "Hitler BS". > but the current reaction by the extreme neo-left is a magnitude of order worse Drawing parallels to current actions might be hyperbolic or extreme or unfair, but not as dumb - definitely not orders of magnitude.
      - jakeogh 10y ago
        "by 'some' after simply being elected" Maybe I should have inserted more qualifiers, but I deliberately didn't say that. The friends I refer to didn't make the "he's Hitler" arg at or before election time. They lost, they knew it, and they thought about why they lost instead of doubling down on the mistake of picking the Obama global government equivalent on the right. Later on some made those implications by inflating relatively minor actions that fit a pattern they were looking for. I was happy he beat Obomney. Better to let the pendulum swing.
    - briandear 10y ago
      Exactly the reason I don't have a more accepting attitude when it comes to left wing positions I might actually agree with. My political disagreements are what they are but the idea of providing any validation to what amounts to Bolshevik-style tactics keeps me on the sidelines. As an example: I am a free market libertarian who agrees with marriage equality, but the means by which 'activists' attempt to engage issues turns me off. For example, harassing Mike Pence at his house -- I found that tactic childish and off-putting and immature (and divisive) as well as ineffective. Those tactics don't create positive change, they promote Balkanization of people who might otherwise be convinced to agree with a reasonable position. France's violent anti-Uber protests -- regardless of issue, I'm less likely to listen to potentially reasonable positions when they are presented in violent or disruptive ways. In fact, those sort of things make me less likely to consider their views. When a child screams for chocolate -- that's less compelling than if they ask in a reasoned, mature way, presenting facts and arguments rather than throwing things and parading around the house in perpetual outrage.
  - facetube 10y ago
    If they're individuals and you've done the research to support your claim of their individual non-criticism? Sure. If you're seeking to demonize a large group based upon the behavior of individuals with no material connection to others in the group you're criticizing – then it's not at all.
- philh 10y ago
  > Both sides have extremes. I think it balances out. You seem to be saying not "that kind of leftish rhetoric didn't push people towards Trump", but "there's also rightish rhetoric which pushed people away from Trump". Which seems true to me, and totally worth bringing up. But the bit you quoted also seems true to me, and your post doesn't parse as disagreement with it.
- facetube 10y ago
  Or they're following a newsfeed algorithm that's determining their information-seeking proclivities for them. I honestly find that much more subtly disturbing and manipulatable than willful ignorance – people have ceded control over their information seeking behavior entirely.
- facetube 10y ago
  A common rightist tactic was also to claim that that the president of the United States was an ineligible non-Christian non-citizen, despite all evidence to the contrary. This was done by elected leaders and representatives of a major political party, not just random people on Twitter. That kind of callous disregard for fact removes the possibility of civil debate and drives people away in a similar fashion as screaming "Hitler" constantly.
edblarney 10y ago
"Maybe they agree with Trump" Maybe living in NYC is very expensive, they are poor, and they need money.
facetube 10y ago
It's a common tactic on the right too. It's a common tactic on social media, period. If you haven't observed similar behavior from the self-described right, get an account on gab.ai or join a few pro-Trump groups on Facebook like "Donald Trump American President". The problem is not unique to those on the left. Search for "MAGA" on Twitter if you want to dive in to the neverending shitshow head-first.

by wyager 10y ago

tiles 10y ago

> This is the kind of rhetoric that pushed a ton of people on the fence towards Trump. I hate to pick on this quote (I appreciate and suggest people read the rest of your post) but I don't agree with this. A common rightist tactic is to suggest either 1) I was okay with X policy when Obama did something so I have no moral authority to judge it now, or 2) I'm just a liberal whiner, too young, or too weak to appreciate that someone else is in charge so my beliefs are invalid. I am pushed to the left by conservative intolerance just as much as the reverse is true. Both sides have extremes. I think it balances out. You are following your own proclivities of reasoning, fixating on which messaging you're most enticed by or most repulsed by.

rtx 10y ago
Calling out people for staying silent under Obama is not a tactic. It's just a way to highlight a person's motivation.
- jakeogh 10y ago
  It's an intellectually honest way to point out inconsistency. The hypocrisy is asymmetric from my pov. I know people who were horrified Obama got elected and some indulged in variations of the 'he's Hitler' BS, but the current reaction by the extreme neo-left is a magnitude of order worse. There's plenty (a majority I bet) of Dems that are not making that mistake, but the echo chamber prevents them from speaking unless they are willing to piss off their peers.
  - thinkloop 10y ago
    > Obama got elected and some indulged in variations of the 'he's Hitler' BS Being called Hitler by "some" after simply being elected, unrelated to any action is definitely useless "Hitler BS". > but the current reaction by the extreme neo-left is a magnitude of order worse Drawing parallels to current actions might be hyperbolic or extreme or unfair, but not as dumb - definitely not orders of magnitude.
    - jakeogh 10y ago
      "by 'some' after simply being elected" Maybe I should have inserted more qualifiers, but I deliberately didn't say that. The friends I refer to didn't make the "he's Hitler" arg at or before election time. They lost, they knew it, and they thought about why they lost instead of doubling down on the mistake of picking the Obama global government equivalent on the right. Later on some made those implications by inflating relatively minor actions that fit a pattern they were looking for. I was happy he beat Obomney. Better to let the pendulum swing.
  - briandear 10y ago
    Exactly the reason I don't have a more accepting attitude when it comes to left wing positions I might actually agree with. My political disagreements are what they are but the idea of providing any validation to what amounts to Bolshevik-style tactics keeps me on the sidelines. As an example: I am a free market libertarian who agrees with marriage equality, but the means by which 'activists' attempt to engage issues turns me off. For example, harassing Mike Pence at his house -- I found that tactic childish and off-putting and immature (and divisive) as well as ineffective. Those tactics don't create positive change, they promote Balkanization of people who might otherwise be convinced to agree with a reasonable position. France's violent anti-Uber protests -- regardless of issue, I'm less likely to listen to potentially reasonable positions when they are presented in violent or disruptive ways. In fact, those sort of things make me less likely to consider their views. When a child screams for chocolate -- that's less compelling than if they ask in a reasoned, mature way, presenting facts and arguments rather than throwing things and parading around the house in perpetual outrage.
- facetube 10y ago
  If they're individuals and you've done the research to support your claim of their individual non-criticism? Sure. If you're seeking to demonize a large group based upon the behavior of individuals with no material connection to others in the group you're criticizing – then it's not at all.
philh 10y ago
> Both sides have extremes. I think it balances out. You seem to be saying not "that kind of leftish rhetoric didn't push people towards Trump", but "there's also rightish rhetoric which pushed people away from Trump". Which seems true to me, and totally worth bringing up. But the bit you quoted also seems true to me, and your post doesn't parse as disagreement with it.
facetube 10y ago
Or they're following a newsfeed algorithm that's determining their information-seeking proclivities for them. I honestly find that much more subtly disturbing and manipulatable than willful ignorance – people have ceded control over their information seeking behavior entirely.
facetube 10y ago
A common rightist tactic was also to claim that that the president of the United States was an ineligible non-Christian non-citizen, despite all evidence to the contrary. This was done by elected leaders and representatives of a major political party, not just random people on Twitter. That kind of callous disregard for fact removes the possibility of civil debate and drives people away in a similar fashion as screaming "Hitler" constantly.

edblarney 10y ago

"Maybe they agree with Trump" Maybe living in NYC is very expensive, they are poor, and they need money.

facetube 10y ago

It's a common tactic on the right too. It's a common tactic on social media, period. If you haven't observed similar behavior from the self-described right, get an account on gab.ai or join a few pro-Trump groups on Facebook like "Donald Trump American President". The problem is not unique to those on the left. Search for "MAGA" on Twitter if you want to dive in to the neverending shitshow head-first.