3 ms·
The people who consider themselves "on the fence" aren't enabling the extremists. They are orphaned and alienated by the extremists in all parts of current pol
by q1w2 5y ago
The people who consider themselves "on the fence" aren't enabling the extremists. They are orphaned and alienated by the extremists in all parts of current politics. They aren't the ones trying to storm the capital or burn down federal court houses.
In any grouping of humans, there are bad actors and good actors. Using the bad actors to characterize the entire group, when they're a minority of that population is how you create stereotypes that break-down discourse. Empowering and encouraging the moderates in your opponents camp is is diplomacy 101. Insulting them empowers your enemies.
That's the same logic used to say all young black men are criminals, all young arab men are terrorists, all white farmers are racist, etc...
- t-writescode 5y agoTo compare from the "other side" (though I'm not actually a Democrat), this is how I feel when I see the people I vote for screech propagandized speaking points for anti-gun stances. There are 2A Democrats out there that have to tolerate the insane (to them) things their representatives support.
- cwal37 5y agoOnly insane in the context of recent decades. The vast bulk of jurisprudence (centuries) supported a much more restrictive reading of 2A, and changing that was a concerted effort of conservative groups (starting in the ~1980s), particularly out of more conservative law schools such as those in Tennessee. This was pretty well documented at the time if you would like to read about it[0]. [0]https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/09/21/to-keep-and-bear-arms/ https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/09/21/to-keep-and-bear...
- t-writescode 5y ago> particularly out of more conservative law schools such as those in Tennessee. This sounds contradictory to my understanding, related to the Black Panthers in California back in the 60s.
- cwal37 5y agoSeparate things. Black Panther activity in California led to Reagan passing some restrictions in that state. I'm referring to jurisprudence at the higher court levels, which generally did not support the very strong individual rights to gun ownership that you see stated as "basic" rights now. The popular (and largely in practice) understanding of what 2A means for an individual is pretty different today, and very expansive.
- t-writescode 5y agoI believe that was Malcom X's whole stance and a major part of the argument that the Black Panthers had; and he died in 1965