4 ms·
My take is that it's the scale of things that pits the entire world against itself in every issue. Because irregardless what belief you have, whatever your take
by mnsc 4y ago
My take is that it's the scale of things that pits the entire world against itself in every issue. Because irregardless what belief you have, whatever your take is, chances are there exists an individual that is passionate about the exact opposite of your take. And the global interconnectedness has removed all barriers from instantly arguing, in some cases letting you setup keyword searches that notifies you when your "enemy" dares to speak up. Add to that the fact where there's lots of passion there's less of reason. Which will make you more inclined to argue in bad faith.
- dsign 4y agoI think that you nailed it. I would add that as long as we don't reach for rocks to throw at each other (or the online equivalent), having and respectfully expressing diverging opinions is okay.
- nonrandomstring 4y agoSlaboj Zizek had something to say apropos this that still troubles me. Former Yugoslavia was obviously built on an uneasy, contrived social balance, but it was not beneath the surface. According to Zizek humour was racist, disgusting, commonplace and absolutely accepted part of life. It started to disappear leading up to 1991, replaced by a "chilling political correctness". He suggested that a culture of rude banter was a necessary safety valve, and silence portends violence. It seems plausible, but I've never heard another former Yugoslav confirm that, and Zizek talks a lot of tosh sometimes.