4 ms·

That's literally the point. Because of reactions like yours (specifically that last line re-paraphrasing), anyone on the conservative spectrum is now afraid to

by cargo8 8y ago

That's literally the point. Because of reactions like yours (specifically that last line re-paraphrasing), anyone on the conservative spectrum is now afraid to express their opinions or reveal such information

amaccuish 8y ago
Just because someone says they're "conservative" doesn't mean I'll sit quiet while they tell me about how disgusting it is that the gays can marry now. But the thing is, originally, "conservatives" weren't like that. They've had their good name stolen by a bunch of thugs.
- morgtheborg 8y ago
  Look, it's HARD to see the other side. I get it. But take a beat. No one is asking you to sit quietly. Your welcome to disagree. We expect the conservative to be able to hear about your approval (from their perspective) of the violent murder of babies for your personal convenience without losing their ability to work with you effectively as a co-worker and treat you with dignity while disagreeing. It's fair to think there'd be reciprocity and you should be able to do the same when they discuss gay marriage. Usually when I point the above out, I'm told that OF COURSE it's cool to expect the conservative to handle talk of abortion or public approval of abortions "appropriately" in the workplace because their perspective it's murder is merely an opinion---and a wrong one at that. But your perspective that gay marriage is not a sin is a FACT, not an opinion, so they should suck it up and keep their filthy biases to themselves. Unsurprisingly, conservatives do not appreciate the attitude that their opinions are wrong and should be hidden as shameful secrets and liberal opinions are right and should be trumpeted from the roof.
  - amaccuish 8y ago
    In this context, I was having a happy conversation and not really expecting to be called "disgusting". That's not argueing against same sex marriage, and is not helpful in the work place. My mum is a staunch catholic and conservative, but never has she referred to me like that. I feel you're argueing the wrong person. I'm happy to listen to respectful conservatives, just as I am intolerant of intolerant "liberals", but sometimes you've gotta be intolerant of the intolerance.
    - morgtheborg 8y ago
      Oh, I misunderstood. Saying that gay marriage is disgusting reads to me as calling out the policy, NOT saying that gays are disgusting. I completely agree that calling a group of human being disgusting is an uncalled for, personal attack that goes beyond sharing your political opinions. Sorry about the misunderstanding :)
      - amaccuish 8y ago
        Well it was more that he couldn't say the gays are disgusting, so used the policy to get round it, so it's a bit of an unusual situation, all understood :)
titusjohnson 8y ago
If you (the figurative you) don't want to be lumped into a group of fools, you should distance yourself from fools. If you're not going to do the work to distance yourself, while still proudly flying the colors, do not be surprised when people assume that you might be a Roy Moore.
- Turing_Machine 8y ago
  > If you're not going to do the work to distance yourself, while still proudly flying the colors, do not be surprised when people assume that you might be a Roy Moore. If you call yourself a progressive, do not be surprised when people assume that you think that gulags are a dandy idea.
  - webkike 8y ago
    If you call yourself a conservative, do not be surprised when people assume that you think that death camps, ghettos, and slavery are a dandy idea. See? It goes both ways. You've convinced yourself that your ideas are less harmful despite absolutely zero evidence to support it.
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      I'm not sure Turing_Machine was trying to convince people that those ideas are less harmful. I think the point was that the far left's ideas are as harmful as the far right's.
      - webkike 8y ago
        Trying to prove both ideas are harmful ends up just proving extremism is bad and that any political ideology can be twisted into something despotic. It in no ways proves that wanting socialized medicine and a less agressive military somehow leads to stalinism.
- amaccuish 8y ago
  Tbf that point often gets made about muslims in that, often after a terrorist attack, there's the "but if this isn't islam, why don't you say so/where are all the Imams who should be denouncing this gone?" brigade. It shoudn't really be up to the peaceful majority to distance themselves from the vocal minority. Sadly the line is blurred here because the "official party of conservatives", the Republican party let these people in and ran with them. The fault lies with them IMHO, and not so much with the rank-and-file members, a lot of whom, be it Dem or Rep, just vote the same way regardless. Here though, I'm unsure how much democratic input there is into central decisions like Roy Moore etc, I suspect very little.
chimeracoder 8y ago
> That's literally the point. Because of reactions like yours (specifically that last line re-paraphrasing), anyone on the conservative spectrum is now afraid to express their opinions or reveal such information One of the pieces of evidence that this article cites is a video published by Breitbart, a self-proclaimed conservative website that was known to actively seek out, publish, and promote the work of neo-Nazis and white supremacists. So it's not really so much, "because of reactions like [GP's]", but because a number of "conservative" outlets have been revealed to be outright white supremacist propaganda, and people who are conservative and not white supremacists have done relatively little[0] to distance themselves from them, on the whole. [0] that's putting it generously
- adventured 8y ago
  Just about every major liberal news organization has promoted Communists / Marxists / Socialists at one time or another in the last 30 years. That's on-going in the present. Bernie Sanders was an outspoken champion of Venezuela and its brand of Socialism. Then he mysteriously (ha) went entirely silent on the matter. What shall we do to hold him accountable for his grotesque beliefs, which are every bit as bad in historical application as white supremacy and fascism? Obama openly championed Marxist ideology when he was younger. Marxism has resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of people in the past century and the brutal enslavement of entire nations for decades. Then Obama got elected President, the left media could not have cared less about his past ideology (and or cheered it on). How is being a Communist better than being a Nazi in any objective historical comparison? Why is it ok for Antifa to smash skulls, routinely threaten and apply violence, wave the Soviet flag and threaten journalists, march around clad in black body armor, but the world explodes about Charlottesville. Both are quite horrible, the liberal media only cares about one of them. There's only one explanation for it: arbitrary left wing bias, which entirely disregards history and facts. When does the aggressive censorship campaign begin for the NY Times? Should they be banned from Twitter?
  - happytoexplain 8y ago
    As far as I've been able to tell, trying to be as neutral as I can, I don't think the lies, hatred, and violence cherry-picked or selectively ignored by the NY Times and similar come anywhere near the volume of the same done by Breitbart and similar. Further, when it does happen, it seems to always be much harder to draw the connection to intent, e.g: NY Times: Support some policy -> Policy could be considered related to communism -> Communist regimes have killed many people throughout history Breitbart: Support hatred and rejection of broad groups of people directly. Further, Breitbart and similar seem much more willing to engage in propaganda rhetoric and purposeful deceit. *Edited for clarity

by cargo8 8y ago

amaccuish 8y ago

Just because someone says they're "conservative" doesn't mean I'll sit quiet while they tell me about how disgusting it is that the gays can marry now. But the thing is, originally, "conservatives" weren't like that. They've had their good name stolen by a bunch of thugs.

morgtheborg 8y ago
Look, it's HARD to see the other side. I get it. But take a beat. No one is asking you to sit quietly. Your welcome to disagree. We expect the conservative to be able to hear about your approval (from their perspective) of the violent murder of babies for your personal convenience without losing their ability to work with you effectively as a co-worker and treat you with dignity while disagreeing. It's fair to think there'd be reciprocity and you should be able to do the same when they discuss gay marriage. Usually when I point the above out, I'm told that OF COURSE it's cool to expect the conservative to handle talk of abortion or public approval of abortions "appropriately" in the workplace because their perspective it's murder is merely an opinion---and a wrong one at that. But your perspective that gay marriage is not a sin is a FACT, not an opinion, so they should suck it up and keep their filthy biases to themselves. Unsurprisingly, conservatives do not appreciate the attitude that their opinions are wrong and should be hidden as shameful secrets and liberal opinions are right and should be trumpeted from the roof.
- amaccuish 8y ago
  In this context, I was having a happy conversation and not really expecting to be called "disgusting". That's not argueing against same sex marriage, and is not helpful in the work place. My mum is a staunch catholic and conservative, but never has she referred to me like that. I feel you're argueing the wrong person. I'm happy to listen to respectful conservatives, just as I am intolerant of intolerant "liberals", but sometimes you've gotta be intolerant of the intolerance.
  - morgtheborg 8y ago
    Oh, I misunderstood. Saying that gay marriage is disgusting reads to me as calling out the policy, NOT saying that gays are disgusting. I completely agree that calling a group of human being disgusting is an uncalled for, personal attack that goes beyond sharing your political opinions. Sorry about the misunderstanding :)
    - amaccuish 8y ago
      Well it was more that he couldn't say the gays are disgusting, so used the policy to get round it, so it's a bit of an unusual situation, all understood :)

titusjohnson 8y ago

If you (the figurative you) don't want to be lumped into a group of fools, you should distance yourself from fools. If you're not going to do the work to distance yourself, while still proudly flying the colors, do not be surprised when people assume that you might be a Roy Moore.

Turing_Machine 8y ago
> If you're not going to do the work to distance yourself, while still proudly flying the colors, do not be surprised when people assume that you might be a Roy Moore. If you call yourself a progressive, do not be surprised when people assume that you think that gulags are a dandy idea.
- webkike 8y ago
  If you call yourself a conservative, do not be surprised when people assume that you think that death camps, ghettos, and slavery are a dandy idea. See? It goes both ways. You've convinced yourself that your ideas are less harmful despite absolutely zero evidence to support it.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    I'm not sure Turing_Machine was trying to convince people that those ideas are less harmful. I think the point was that the far left's ideas are as harmful as the far right's.
    - webkike 8y ago
      Trying to prove both ideas are harmful ends up just proving extremism is bad and that any political ideology can be twisted into something despotic. It in no ways proves that wanting socialized medicine and a less agressive military somehow leads to stalinism.
amaccuish 8y ago
Tbf that point often gets made about muslims in that, often after a terrorist attack, there's the "but if this isn't islam, why don't you say so/where are all the Imams who should be denouncing this gone?" brigade. It shoudn't really be up to the peaceful majority to distance themselves from the vocal minority. Sadly the line is blurred here because the "official party of conservatives", the Republican party let these people in and ran with them. The fault lies with them IMHO, and not so much with the rank-and-file members, a lot of whom, be it Dem or Rep, just vote the same way regardless. Here though, I'm unsure how much democratic input there is into central decisions like Roy Moore etc, I suspect very little.

chimeracoder 8y ago

> That's literally the point. Because of reactions like yours (specifically that last line re-paraphrasing), anyone on the conservative spectrum is now afraid to express their opinions or reveal such information One of the pieces of evidence that this article cites is a video published by Breitbart, a self-proclaimed conservative website that was known to actively seek out, publish, and promote the work of neo-Nazis and white supremacists. So it's not really so much, "because of reactions like [GP's]", but because a number of "conservative" outlets have been revealed to be outright white supremacist propaganda, and people who are conservative and not white supremacists have done relatively little[0] to distance themselves from them, on the whole. [0] that's putting it generously

adventured 8y ago
Just about every major liberal news organization has promoted Communists / Marxists / Socialists at one time or another in the last 30 years. That's on-going in the present. Bernie Sanders was an outspoken champion of Venezuela and its brand of Socialism. Then he mysteriously (ha) went entirely silent on the matter. What shall we do to hold him accountable for his grotesque beliefs, which are every bit as bad in historical application as white supremacy and fascism? Obama openly championed Marxist ideology when he was younger. Marxism has resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of people in the past century and the brutal enslavement of entire nations for decades. Then Obama got elected President, the left media could not have cared less about his past ideology (and or cheered it on). How is being a Communist better than being a Nazi in any objective historical comparison? Why is it ok for Antifa to smash skulls, routinely threaten and apply violence, wave the Soviet flag and threaten journalists, march around clad in black body armor, but the world explodes about Charlottesville. Both are quite horrible, the liberal media only cares about one of them. There's only one explanation for it: arbitrary left wing bias, which entirely disregards history and facts. When does the aggressive censorship campaign begin for the NY Times? Should they be banned from Twitter?
- happytoexplain 8y ago
  As far as I've been able to tell, trying to be as neutral as I can, I don't think the lies, hatred, and violence cherry-picked or selectively ignored by the NY Times and similar come anywhere near the volume of the same done by Breitbart and similar. Further, when it does happen, it seems to always be much harder to draw the connection to intent, e.g: NY Times: Support some policy -> Policy could be considered related to communism -> Communist regimes have killed many people throughout history Breitbart: Support hatred and rejection of broad groups of people directly. Further, Breitbart and similar seem much more willing to engage in propaganda rhetoric and purposeful deceit. *Edited for clarity