3 ms·

You've read right past everything the parent comment said and wrote a generic comment demonizing the "MAGA crowd". This is not what a dialogue looks like and un

by blub 6y ago

You've read right past everything the parent comment said and wrote a generic comment demonizing the "MAGA crowd". This is not what a dialogue looks like and until people start controlling their fanaticism - especially the American left - the USA will make no progress on healing the divisions that have been building up for decades.

ABCLAW 6y ago
>This is not what a dialogue looks like Yes it is. You just don't like it. The post you're replying to lays out, from their perspective, a list of actions that they believe are self-evidently unjustifiable. Do you agree with that assessment? Do you believe there's justification to be had? I think most of the real arguments in favor of them have been left unsaid, because they fundamentally contradict a number of modern western paradigms regarding inherent rights and human dignity. But that's not really fatal to the philosophic position; maybe those paradigms are false.
- blub 6y ago
  What I like does not define what a dialogue is. Dialogue means engaging with the opposite party. No engagement, no dialogue. Enumerating a bunch of random things in reply to anything is not dialogue.
  - pqhwan 6y ago
    The comment is talking about how the gp has their priorities wrong. Separation policy, etc are actual problems, and more important than “my neighbors don’t love this country like I do: they don’t admit to being inspired by its founding myths, they don’t like to sing the anthem or say the pledge of allegiance”. Come on, in a country with a reputation for rough, independent individuals, that’s your top grievance? So the comment has a clear point, and it relates to what the gp stated. That’s a dialogue. You’re the one refusing to further engage with the counterpoint, which is how the dialogue was disrupted.
prox 6y ago
Lets flip back to the parent message : > People on the left think that anyone on the right is a lunatic, and everyone on the right thinks the same thing about the left. You thinking you’re right is ingrained in your belief system, and maybe reinforced by certain signals you pick up. I think an exercise is to start walking or thinking a mile in the shoes of the opposite camp, can make a lot of difference. A step further is to actually start a dialogue with someone from the opposite camp where you both actively try to see it from the others perspective.
- blub 6y ago
  I can't help but think that the recent militant/aggressive behavior of left-wing activists and the left-wing establishment and mainstream media almost completely ignoring the concerns of their citizens around immigration and globalization pushes a lot of them to the right, even if they don't necessarily agree with the other policies of those parties. This is interestingly enough happening both in the US and Western Europe. That's why I think that the left digging in is a losing strategy. The more radical they appear the more people they'll push in the other direction. Currently that's 50-50 in the US and the Democrats didn't seem to learn much from the past 4 years. Neither have a lot of the people paining Trump as a monster and making him as the scapegoat for everything that's going wrong in the US (and the world).
  - mcny 6y ago
    > That's why I think that the left digging in is a losing strategy. I think the meta is that lacking a scientific approach, we have to have some things we are not willing to compromise on. Yes, having almost seventy million people vote for 45 is alarming but we don't have any option but to dig in because it is clear that the right is not digging in. They are stuck in a perpetual tracter control beam right as to speak. I know what the counter argument will likely be: you have to be in power to be able to do anything at all but this appeal to moderation is what I'd argue has allowed the right to go to the extreme right: the overton window. The whole premise of "both sides" is flawed here. Of course, it is silly to think 45 is a monster and things will be good once he is no longer in the picture. However, it is just as silly to think that just because seventy million people voted a certain way that their grievances are legitimate. They are not. And as long as we coddle them with "both sides", we can't begin the work we need to do to to undo all the lunacy of the last four years. The will of the majority is incredibly overrated. Just because a large group of people believes something does not make it true. Often, you need to teach people and help them understand. We have to understand that we can't default to a middle ground approach because there is no end to this spectrum: the right continues on its march right and if we continue reaching for the middle we will be where they were n - 1 time ago. I can get behind one thing though: we have to be grateful to the 45 administration because he has exposed some serious systemic flaws that we must address if we are to avoid a repeat of the last four years. Edit: spelling
mcphage 6y ago
> This is not what a dialogue looks like and until people start controlling their fanaticism - especially the American left - the USA will make no progress on healing the divisions that have been building up for decades. Ah the ol’ open dialog two step—the right wins? Time for the left to open up dialog with the right. The left wins? Time for the left to open up dialog with the right. The left is a broad coalition, the right is not. Maybe it’s the right’s turn to finally try opening up some dialog.

by blub 6y ago

ABCLAW 6y ago

>This is not what a dialogue looks like Yes it is. You just don't like it. The post you're replying to lays out, from their perspective, a list of actions that they believe are self-evidently unjustifiable. Do you agree with that assessment? Do you believe there's justification to be had? I think most of the real arguments in favor of them have been left unsaid, because they fundamentally contradict a number of modern western paradigms regarding inherent rights and human dignity. But that's not really fatal to the philosophic position; maybe those paradigms are false.

blub 6y ago
What I like does not define what a dialogue is. Dialogue means engaging with the opposite party. No engagement, no dialogue. Enumerating a bunch of random things in reply to anything is not dialogue.
- pqhwan 6y ago
  The comment is talking about how the gp has their priorities wrong. Separation policy, etc are actual problems, and more important than “my neighbors don’t love this country like I do: they don’t admit to being inspired by its founding myths, they don’t like to sing the anthem or say the pledge of allegiance”. Come on, in a country with a reputation for rough, independent individuals, that’s your top grievance? So the comment has a clear point, and it relates to what the gp stated. That’s a dialogue. You’re the one refusing to further engage with the counterpoint, which is how the dialogue was disrupted.

prox 6y ago

Lets flip back to the parent message : > People on the left think that anyone on the right is a lunatic, and everyone on the right thinks the same thing about the left. You thinking you’re right is ingrained in your belief system, and maybe reinforced by certain signals you pick up. I think an exercise is to start walking or thinking a mile in the shoes of the opposite camp, can make a lot of difference. A step further is to actually start a dialogue with someone from the opposite camp where you both actively try to see it from the others perspective.

blub 6y ago
I can't help but think that the recent militant/aggressive behavior of left-wing activists and the left-wing establishment and mainstream media almost completely ignoring the concerns of their citizens around immigration and globalization pushes a lot of them to the right, even if they don't necessarily agree with the other policies of those parties. This is interestingly enough happening both in the US and Western Europe. That's why I think that the left digging in is a losing strategy. The more radical they appear the more people they'll push in the other direction. Currently that's 50-50 in the US and the Democrats didn't seem to learn much from the past 4 years. Neither have a lot of the people paining Trump as a monster and making him as the scapegoat for everything that's going wrong in the US (and the world).
- mcny 6y ago
  > That's why I think that the left digging in is a losing strategy. I think the meta is that lacking a scientific approach, we have to have some things we are not willing to compromise on. Yes, having almost seventy million people vote for 45 is alarming but we don't have any option but to dig in because it is clear that the right is not digging in. They are stuck in a perpetual tracter control beam right as to speak. I know what the counter argument will likely be: you have to be in power to be able to do anything at all but this appeal to moderation is what I'd argue has allowed the right to go to the extreme right: the overton window. The whole premise of "both sides" is flawed here. Of course, it is silly to think 45 is a monster and things will be good once he is no longer in the picture. However, it is just as silly to think that just because seventy million people voted a certain way that their grievances are legitimate. They are not. And as long as we coddle them with "both sides", we can't begin the work we need to do to to undo all the lunacy of the last four years. The will of the majority is incredibly overrated. Just because a large group of people believes something does not make it true. Often, you need to teach people and help them understand. We have to understand that we can't default to a middle ground approach because there is no end to this spectrum: the right continues on its march right and if we continue reaching for the middle we will be where they were n - 1 time ago. I can get behind one thing though: we have to be grateful to the 45 administration because he has exposed some serious systemic flaws that we must address if we are to avoid a repeat of the last four years. Edit: spelling

mcphage 6y ago

> This is not what a dialogue looks like and until people start controlling their fanaticism - especially the American left - the USA will make no progress on healing the divisions that have been building up for decades. Ah the ol’ open dialog two step—the right wins? Time for the left to open up dialog with the right. The left wins? Time for the left to open up dialog with the right. The left is a broad coalition, the right is not. Maybe it’s the right’s turn to finally try opening up some dialog.