4 ms·
Where do you draw the line between "personal politics" and "fundamentally wrong?" In the 1950s and 1960s some people felt the line was segregation. The problem
by duped 5y ago
Where do you draw the line between "personal politics" and "fundamentally wrong?" In the 1950s and 1960s some people felt the line was segregation.
The problem is when human decency is equated to "personal politics" (or vice versa). Some of the lines are obvious to me, but others are more blurred. At the end of the day, reasonable people can work around those fuzzy boundaries without issue.
- sokoloff 5y agoMany of the people on both extremes of “I want only work, never politics, at work; the world was perfect in 1948” and “work is an ideal place to bring my politics into, because others cannot escape hearing me and my crusades” are quite incapable of working around those fuzzy boundaries without issue.
- BackBlast 5y agoFor starters, if you can define a specific known crime being committed by a specific person. It is fundamentally wrong and you absolutely should bring it up at the right time and place. If your accusations are about groups and the actions committed aren't specific actionable crimes that you are aware of, you're very likely in politics and/or advocacy. Human decency is a very nebulous term when it comes right down to it. What I find right or wrong may not match what you find right or wrong. Without an agreed upon objective measure you can't define who is actually right - regardless of how clear or blurred the lines appear to you. Without that objective measure, especially if debate skills are bad and participants are low on listening and high on fallacies, then it's really just an unproductive shouting match.