3 ms·

Welcome to 2017 where we're currently in the throes of an ideological civil war. Politics used to be a gentleman's game. Sure, you argue and huff and puff over

Welcome to 2017 where we're currently in the throes of an ideological civil war. Politics used to be a gentleman's game. Sure, you argue and huff and puff over bills, and the opposing parties viewpoints, but at the end of the day - you found compromise. The last decade or so? No such thing. Politics is now a bloodsport. Total victory is the only option. - Different viewpoints? Not allowed. - Compromise? Not allowed. - Rational discourse? Not allowed. - Don't believe what I believe? Your're a racist, bigot, homophobe, xenophobe, misogynist. The Liberal ideology that has dominated politics for the last decade is now eroding, the Republicans own Washington DC right now and its rather off putting to the people who used to be in power. The whole Google issue just highlights that this isn't going to end anytime soon - but it sure didn't start with Trump, and it sure didn't just "land on Silicon valley's doorstep" this past week. I think the larger question is when is rational discourse going to return? Google had an incredible opportunity to create a forum to discuss the issues the author brought up. Instead, they had a knee jerk reaction, based on the current environment, and fired the guy. They would rather deal with a lawsuit, a ton of backlash and a social media furor I haven't seen in a while, instead of having an open dialogue on what happened and why this guy believes what he believes. Can him, put him the box and label him an evil person and let's move on. Nobody wins, and nothing is gained. Another wasted opportunity. Sad and depressing this is where we are as a country.

tangent128 9y ago
Rational discourse is only possible in an environment where people can agree on what (at least most of) the facts are, and we don't have that today. I don't have a solution.
heurist 9y ago
I'd hesitate to say liberal politics dominated DC. In the last decade there were only two years where Democrats were able to pass liberal legislation at the federal level: 2008-2010. Even then it was a slog. Republican powers keep pushing the Overton window further and further right and liberals are supposed to just accept it? No, they're going to draw a line and learn to fight back. Only "The Party of No" bears the burden of compromise at this point.
matt4077 9y ago
The topic at hand is probably the worse you could start with if you want "rational discourse". Because to a large degree it's about values much more than facts. Yes, this so-called manifesto names some facts, but the opposition isn't to those facts, but to the way they're used. And let's not pretend like the split between left and right in the US is somehow the shared responsibility of both sides. It's no coincidence that both the "reality-based community" as well as "alternative facts" are terms coined by the right. There are literally dozens of lists on the web of actual, proven, indisputable lies of the current President. From crowd sizes to "even the liberal media calls it the greatest speech ever held on foreign soil". To insist that both sides are the same, and that therefore the best course of action is somehow in the middle, is ridiculous.

tangent128 9y ago

Rational discourse is only possible in an environment where people can agree on what (at least most of) the facts are, and we don't have that today. I don't have a solution.

heurist 9y ago

I'd hesitate to say liberal politics dominated DC. In the last decade there were only two years where Democrats were able to pass liberal legislation at the federal level: 2008-2010. Even then it was a slog. Republican powers keep pushing the Overton window further and further right and liberals are supposed to just accept it? No, they're going to draw a line and learn to fight back. Only "The Party of No" bears the burden of compromise at this point.

matt4077 9y ago

The topic at hand is probably the worse you could start with if you want "rational discourse". Because to a large degree it's about values much more than facts. Yes, this so-called manifesto names some facts, but the opposition isn't to those facts, but to the way they're used. And let's not pretend like the split between left and right in the US is somehow the shared responsibility of both sides. It's no coincidence that both the "reality-based community" as well as "alternative facts" are terms coined by the right. There are literally dozens of lists on the web of actual, proven, indisputable lies of the current President. From crowd sizes to "even the liberal media calls it the greatest speech ever held on foreign soil". To insist that both sides are the same, and that therefore the best course of action is somehow in the middle, is ridiculous.