4 ms·

I read this twice, and I still have no idea what you are trying to say, which side of any issue you are on, or what makes you any different from over-reacting h

I read this twice, and I still have no idea what you are trying to say, which side of any issue you are on, or what makes you any different from over-reacting haters on either side.

ffbellfhtlflf 13y ago
How can you not understand it? He's saying the progressive left has started to go too far in the mechanisms they use to bring about admittedly needed change. You don't go about winning the hearts and minds of people you disagree with by harassing them and getting them fired from their jobs. This only sets movements back. "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it"
bane 13y ago
He must be talking about Eich, since he was clearly supporting the group of bullies who were so flagrant and pernicious that they'd even pass a law to prevent grown consenting adults from having meaningful relationships with each other.
kourt 13y ago
"which side of any issue you are on" Maybe he's on everybody's side. What freedom is more important than the freedom to be true to one's self? What good is free speech[1] when the private, individual exercise thereof results in the professional equivalent of capital punishment? [1] Whether campaign contributions are always identical to speech in all contexts is immaterial here: in this case, they're close enough.
- crystaln 13y ago
  Sure, he could be on everyone's side and trying to clarify the issue. If so, he's doing a rather poor job. However, it seemed rather obvious that he had an intention to take some sort of stance on an issue, something he also failed at.
homulilly 13y ago
Pretending to be on one side while implicitly supporting the other. Fairly common line of thinking amongst self-proclaimed moderates who try to hide, or wont acknowledge their own reactionary politics.

4 ms·

I read this twice, and I still have no idea what you are trying to say, which side of any issue you are on, or what makes you any different from over-reacting h

by crystaln 13y ago

I read this twice, and I still have no idea what you are trying to say, which side of any issue you are on, or what makes you any different from over-reacting haters on either side.

ffbellfhtlflf 13y ago
How can you not understand it? He's saying the progressive left has started to go too far in the mechanisms they use to bring about admittedly needed change. You don't go about winning the hearts and minds of people you disagree with by harassing them and getting them fired from their jobs. This only sets movements back. "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it"
bane 13y ago
He must be talking about Eich, since he was clearly supporting the group of bullies who were so flagrant and pernicious that they'd even pass a law to prevent grown consenting adults from having meaningful relationships with each other.
kourt 13y ago
"which side of any issue you are on" Maybe he's on everybody's side. What freedom is more important than the freedom to be true to one's self? What good is free speech[1] when the private, individual exercise thereof results in the professional equivalent of capital punishment? [1] Whether campaign contributions are always identical to speech in all contexts is immaterial here: in this case, they're close enough.
- crystaln 13y ago
  Sure, he could be on everyone's side and trying to clarify the issue. If so, he's doing a rather poor job. However, it seemed rather obvious that he had an intention to take some sort of stance on an issue, something he also failed at.
homulilly 13y ago
Pretending to be on one side while implicitly supporting the other. Fairly common line of thinking amongst self-proclaimed moderates who try to hide, or wont acknowledge their own reactionary politics.