3 ms·
I've made no claims of equivalence between the two parties. The topic we are discussing is moral grandstanding on social media. The comment I replied to sugges
by fingerlocks 7y ago
I've made no claims of equivalence between the two parties.
The topic we are discussing is moral grandstanding on social media. The comment I replied to suggested that only one "side" is guilty of this behavior. I'm interpreting a "side" as the supporters of particular party and their actions on social media, and not the policies and actions of the party's politicians.
I believe there are people on both sides of the spectrum that routinely cringe at the behavior of those they agree with. There are many staunch Republicans that wish to distance themselves from the social policies of their constituents. Likewise, there are Democrats that are unfairly given stigmatizing labels from their peers for having fiscally conservative views.
Both "sides" are guilty of tribal tendencies, ignoring any possibility of nuance, and pigeon-holing "centrists" into Team Red or Blue. And I'm not distancing myself to relish in my own smug either, I've been guilty of this as well.
Just like with football, neither side likes the guy that supports both teams when it's convenient.
- bena 7y ago"I’ve witnessed an equal amount of tribalism from supporters of both sides." "I've made no claims of equivalence between the two parties." Which one of those statements is the lie then?
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoNeither. Both sides can be equally tribal without both sides being equally right. But as for you, you seem to be playing language lawyer with the GP's words, to try to find a sliver of a way to accuse him/her of lying. Why?
- bena 7y agoHe literally made an equivocation then said he wasn't trying to make an equivocation. I don't know how that's not immediately obvious.