It seems that we have now gotten to a point where the only conversations we can have about a subject resolve to being some form of attack and not so much about the ideas but on the presenter or the alleged bent of said presenters politics. These crude tools of discussion only serve to limit debate to the point about talking about things with quips, quotes and a choice word to paint a box that seals shut the trurth in such a way that we never have to address it.

Calling some a liberal or a neocon is not a discussion nor is it the reality of what any of us are by a long shot. Life is and should be a complicated mess, as it is from this mess that we drag out a glimmer of ourselfs and the world we inhabit. Do we really think that anyone can be summed up in a word. I for one relish a discussion about a politics, which is why I choose to live in Washingtion DC where the world does show up with their A game and one never knows who they are standing next to on the subway or coffee shop and thus spouting off can get one's ego and theories handed right back to them which is why we seem to stick to the superficial.

My hunch is that we are scared and maybe we dont know all the answers so name calling prevents us from having to open up and not touch the core of our beliefs. I am personally trying to get back to some honest dialog about what we hold to be self evident truths just to see if they really stand the test of light and leave the name callin to the contestants on the boob tube. I dont care if anyone joins me as the road less traveled is just that and alone on this road is better than being sheeple on a conveyor belt.
posted by:
  • hard to have an intelligent substantive conversation with a shit throwing monkeybot.

    i can't recall a tribe member on the hard right actually participating in an intelligent rational honest merit based debate. i have seen lots of liberals and independents TRY to so engage them. just doesn't work.

    eventually, the probability approaches certainty they simply lack the capacity.
    • You can't really blame one or the other side d'zoner. Truth is as soon as the topic becomes something to talk about, representatives from both 'sides' will end up injecting the thread with partisan nonsense and grandstanding to derail the discussion.
      • Well I don't know anything about enlilsons politics. His post didnt sound like partisan politics to me at all. His words speak for themselves. Perhaps some of his other words in other places do as well. But I think what he said here is good. It's interesting how someone was just recently stating how certain people that have been bad in the past shouldnt have to always be hounded for it. Yet here is contradiction? Oh let us poo poo and pour hot coals on enlilsons head. Yay. Now all is right with the world.
      • some on the left at least tries to reason with the right. take time to fully and meticulously lay out their case, the rationale, the facts. i don't bother any more. i just have fun lampooning them.

        the right never does.

        i don't count ron as he is a dem and uses this tribe as a way to keep his lawyer's argumentative skills honed.

        differentiation is my guidebook. saying two different realities are the same is not in tht guidebook.

        'both' sides do not act equally in this arena.
        • I'm glad I don't subscribe to any particular political party. I'm just me. Swimming in a sea of bullshit. I think all the current political candidates should be ousted and replaced by the worlds most intelligent people. Ones that currently keep their mouths shut because they are smart enough understand the consequences of opposition and truly challenging the system.
          • I'm always trying to see the good side in the right, even with their jack booting, bullying, child pedophile, sex soliciting in public, nuke war promoting, wife beating, worshipping of the rich, stepping on the backs of the poor, armageddon promoting ways, but it can be difficult sometimes.
            • A better way of doing it might be creating the good side instead of 'reacting' to the bad side. In my opinion, all the reaction does is advertise the opposition and showcase the lack of a better argument as well as an ineffective use of time.

              Basically it's a blueprint that allows a minority view to rule a majority.
              • There are some people who want to blame and defame. For them an attack on another's position creates a drama that adds excitement to anotherwise boring life. And there are those who just want to hate.

                I would just like to see people show a little more respect for others. There is no need to call another person names, or to curse at them. This is not the better part of us. . .instead it is rather juvenile. When I was in junior high, I lived in a small town in red neck texas and we turned the air blue with our cuss words and name calling. Split lips, black eyes and bloody noses were an every day occurrence. . .but that was childhood.

                And the flaming is not productive. When post after post is fighting fire with fire. . .we just waste a lot of time.

                If we would focus more on information sharing about vital issues, and current events, we'd all learn a lot more. We may disagree but we don't have go for the jugular. Now, I want to tell you that I do get really pissed off sometimes. There are a few people here who can annoy the hell out of me in nearly every post they make. But I see no point in pouring gasoline on the fire.

                My suggestion, if you want to curse a public figure or belittle them in any way. . .fine, go for it, especially if you have something to back it up. If you are able to imaginatively express your dissent, and/or make a put down, without being vulgar, go for it.

                example. . . "Lorenzo, you may not have learned to tie your shoes yet, but you actually got about 3% of those facts correct. Congratulations!"

                There is a lot of passion here, and much of that comes from really caring about the issues. Well, if you really care about the issues, please don't clog up the flow by being disruptive or aggressive. If you disagree with me, say why you disagree, don't say you are full of shit.

                If you think I'm totally stupid and unworthy, don't tell me. . .just ignore my threads and posts. If you think I am harmful and destructive of the process, call me on it and tell the moderator.

                Maybe there is some sense in what I am saying and maybe not. . .but I will tell you what I like. . .a healthy exchange of information across the table, that may help us to understand this troublesome world we are living in and perhaps aid us in finding some solutions. Arguments? Okay, but they need to be instructive, not destructive.

                Does anyone agree with me?
                • To some extent I do. But I enjoy cussing and if someone is acting like a dick I like to call people names and use foul language and vulgarity. I like to cuss when people arent being dicks too. I don't need someone to be a dick to enjoy using foul language. lol People can think it's immature all they want. I don't give a damn. Once in a while someone will say that if people cuss they arent intelligent. Use of foul language in no way equates ignorance in my mind. It's been a regular part of my vocabulary since I was about 2. And I like it. Usually the people that are saying they think it is a sign of ignorance are only saying that so they themselves can feel like they are a better person than "others." It's the same old adversarial bs. You against me. Us and Them. Good vs bad. Etc.....

                  FUCK FUCK FUCK SHIT!!!
                  Damn that felt good!!!
        • The only reason both sides don't act equally is because there's more people on one side than the other. Incident to incident they act equally. It just looks like they're not because they're abusing on the right side of your perspective. If one side gets support and the other doesn't, you're going to end up rewarding the attack dogs and leave the minority 'only' the ones that live to be attack dogs.

          All the moderates end up disappearing from the discussion and as a result you end up with 'lefties' and 'neocons' and an equal share of meaninglessness to the debate.
          • <The only reason both sides don't act equally is because there's more people on one side than the other. Incident to incident they act equally>

            this is not factually true.

            i can easlly come up with dozens of fact based rational carefully thought out explainations or refutations by tribe progressives to rightie posts. out of the hundreds of examples in the record.

            i challenge you to come up with five rightie posts that have done the same.
      • < representatives from both 'sides' will end up injecting the thread with partisan nonsense and grandstanding to derail the discussion. >

        the righties don't 'end up' injecting the thread with partisan nonsense. they START by injecting the thread with partisan nonsense. granted, they seldom have a foot to stand on, so that's usually all they have. rationally defending the iraq war and darthco or the neocon ideology that has become the republican reality is next to impossible.

        even ron can't successfully defend the POLICIES of the right. he has to settle for attacking the illogics in a lefties argument.
        • << he has to settle for attacking the illogics in a lefties argument. >>

          Which can be riotously funny, like the fellow's antics with the bone at the beginning of "2001: A Space Odyssey."

          I think the reason many are attracted to the Internet and fora (oo that word!) like these is a chance to get out all the personal abuse ya-yas to which they apparently think themselves entitled. My view is a lot of these "trolls" are simply people stuck in conditions demanding a greater-than-usual portion of dissembling, obsequiousness and asskissing. This is release from their ugly reality.

          Another reason for all the hatred is across-the-spectrum adoption of a dumbed-down, decontextualized version of the "personal is political" feminist argument of the 1970s. People are encouraged to invest their entire egos in warped and stupid and antihuman political discourse, the predictable result being an almost perfectly atomized political culture with all the atoms at war.

          An Establishment wet dream if ever there was one.

          Others are attracted to this tribe for a chance to work out their political ideas or sharpen political rhetoric. These include some of the tribe's steadiest players and it's fascinating to see how they've evolved.

          Then again, it is a matter of regrettable fact that American right-wingers traditionally conduct discourse in atmospheres poisoned with words like "treason" and "culture war," so can scarcely whimper at the stripes they must take in return.
    • <hard to have an intelligent substantive conversation with a shit throwing monkeybot.>

      Yes, hard but not impossible.

      <i can't recall a tribe member on the hard right actually participating in an intelligent rational honest merit based debate. i have seen lots of liberals and independents TRY to so engage them. just doesn't work.>

      That's not true. Ron was to the right, and he was very reasonable. Cliff also was (able) to hold a reasonable debate.

      <even ron can't successfully defend the POLICIES of the right. he has to settle for attacking the illogics in a lefties argument.>

      Yeah, but you recognize that he thought the same thing about many issues brought up by the Left.

      That said - it's tough to defend the indefensible...

      In the last year, there are a number of people who have found some kind of commonality - even if they disagree. It's possible, but very difficult.

      <Does anyone agree with me? >

      Lorenzo, you are of course correct on all counts. Sometimes it's tough to turn the other cheek, but...it's not impossible.

      What is difficult is when someone will accuse you of something so egregiously ridiculous that it feels that one HAS to respond. I mean, one does not HAVE to, but it sure is difficult sometimes to not respond.




  • PS it was a post by Sunshine in another thread that really got all of this to click for me and I must thank her for being just that --- Sunshine............
    • I remember that post and am glad she posted it. She and you make sense and don't make me feel agitated and responding with insults and disdain. A true accomplishment on this tribe.
      • I think Enlilson was talking about our lack of tolerance and objectivity in this tribe. And the fact that most people would rather attack and insult anyone with ideas that differ from their own. Maybe people do it because they have thin skin, or because it's easier to throw out an insult that to think up a valid counterpoint. I'd like to think it's just the ambiguity of the internet where you can throw out a lot of bullshit without any significant consquence. But if you joined the politics tribe because you really have an active interest in the direction of our country then it is neccesary to be open and show consideration toward even the viewpoints and opinions you don't agree with, probably those more then the ones you do agree with. I think we should all try to show repect whenever we can, even when the respect isn't being given from the other side. I think we've all proven how disrespect or insults just start a downward spiral. So if you can keep the conversation to the point and respectful even when you're getting insults and intolerance then I think it will show that you're the bigger person and maybe are the one with the valid idea.

Recent topics in "! * POLITICS * !"