3 ms·

I'd point out the extreme irony of this comment, but I suspect it'll fall on deaf ears.

• dkdbejwi383 5y ago
  Nah go on
  • jacobr1 5y ago
    I think the disconnect tends to be the assumption that "moralizing" is bad, thus if one is justified in their proposal, they aren't moralizing. That isn't the case. To be moralize, you just need to be making an argument on moral grounds, repeatedly. The abolition (of slavery) movement in the 19th century was a moralizing one. And they were very right! The irony is when one proclaims not to be moralizing in their argument, but are indeed making a moral argument, insistently, including the insistence they aren't moralizing. The challenge is that to anyone who doesn't want to hear the message, having something be repeated continuously is frustratingly annoying. And it sure doesn't help any overall movement when specific extremes of that movement, or cherry-picked instances of that movement can be highlighted as representing the whole thing. This is certainly factor in the increasing polarization of society, for if the other-side is full of moralizing assholes, why should I bother listening to them? Especially if they are just going to keep repeating their same tired BS? This can apply to both sides of some many contemporary debates - independent of the merit of either side!