Question for MMMMMM: Is there any going back?

In a "farewell to Moderation post", MMMMMM said:

[ QUOTE ]
To those that are partisan to the point of being blind to all else: that sort of attitude is a large and real part of the problem in this country. Solutions don't come from bashing the opposing side; they come from seeking real solutions. Real solutions require real analysis. Real analysis requires NOT just towing a party line, whether it be Democrat, Republican or even Libertarian. So try taking off those blinders sometimes, and putting your rage and injury on the back burner for a while, and try looking at things from a fresh perspective on occasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I used to think this way. Not anymore. In a world with "swift boat" liars, Limbaugh, Coulter, BGC, etc. there is no room for "reasonable" disagreement.

There is a certain part of the right-wing agenda that is nothing short of evil. There are right-wing partisans of a certain type that are nothing short of evil. And that agenda, and those partisans, come with the GOP these days.

So, MMMMMM: these people are not going to "try taking off those blinders sometimes, and putting your rage and injury on the back burner for a while, and try looking at things from a fresh perspective on occasion". Why should we?

[lehighguy]

Because you'll become what you hate.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
In a "farewell to Moderation post", MMMMMM said:


"To those that are partisan to the point of being blind to all else: that sort of attitude is a large and real part of the problem in this country. Solutions don't come from bashing the opposing side; they come from seeking real solutions. Real solutions require real analysis. Real analysis requires NOT just towing a party line, whether it be Democrat, Republican or even Libertarian. So try taking off those blinders sometimes, and putting your rage and injury on the back burner for a while, and try looking at things from a fresh perspective on occasion."



I used to think this way. Not anymore. In a world with "swift boat" liars, Limbaugh, Coulter, BGC, etc. there is no room for "reasonable" disagreement.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's seems to me a rather an odd assertion. NO ROOM for reasonable disagreement? Are you sure? And what of those who are NOT the object of your disdain or despair? If you rule out reasonable disagreement then you may be ruling out too much.

[ QUOTE ]
There is a certain part of the right-wing agenda that is nothing short of evil. There are right-wing partisans of a certain type that are nothing short of evil. And that agenda, and those partisans, come with the GOP these days.

[/ QUOTE ]

The same could be said for the Left too, one would presume.

So anyway, what of the GOP'ers who are not evil? What of the platform planks that are not evil? Do you think all people of a group should be lumped and judged together instead of individually, or that every idea of a party is equally as good or evil as every other idea which that party professes?

[ QUOTE ]
So, MMMMMM: these people are not going to "try taking off those blinders sometimes, and putting your rage and injury on the back burner for a while, and try looking at things from a fresh perspective on occasion". Why should we?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because not every Republican is evil, nor is every Republican idea is evil. Similarly not every Democrat is evil, nor is every Democratic party idea evil.

Some GOP'ers will try to look at things with an open mind; some won't. Same with the Dems. Some will fall in between. Do you want to be one of the Dems who won't, or one of the Dems who will try looking at things with an open mind on occasion? Why base your decision on how you want to act, on what the worst of the GOP will do? If you do that, it is guaranteed there will be some GOP'ers operating on a higher plane than you.

Let me tell you something about what I believe.

1. Every single person on the face of the Earth should be considered or judged individually.

2. Every single idea set forth should be evaluated on its own merits.

3. Thinking in goup terms is only valuable to a certain extent. If you think only in terms of groups instead of individual persons or individual ideas, you lose a great deal of precision and may well even derive erroneous conclusions. Moreover you might miss out on something good if you rule out entire groups on the basis of the actions or beliefs of some of that group's members.

[ QUOTE ]
NO ROOM for reasonable disagreement? Are you sure? And what of those who are NOT the object of your disdain or despair?

[/ QUOTE ]

A bit of hyperbole, to be sure. Let me put it another way: there is no point in trying to be reasonable with those that are not trying to be reasonable.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a certain part of the right-wing agenda that is nothing short of evil. There are right-wing partisans of a certain type that are nothing short of evil. And that agenda, and those partisans, come with the GOP these days.

[/ QUOTE ]

The same could be said for the Left too, one would presume.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, no. Sure, there may be some who self-identify as left-wing or that support the democratic party that are evil. But is there an element of the "agenda", as that is commonly understood, that is so? And, more to the point: has evil been institutionalized into the Democratic party as it has been into the current Republican party? No.

EDIT: Actually, I thought about this some more, and will step back from the above a bit. Certainly on the issue of abortion there are some who, in good faith, believe that the Democratic party has institutionalized evil in the same way the Republicans have. To which I say: After the events of the past few years, I understand and respect their opposition to the Democratic party in a way that I didn't before.

[ QUOTE ]
So anyway, what of the GOP'ers who are not evil? What of the platform planks that are not evil? Do you think all people of a group should be lumped and judged together instead of individually, or that every idea of a party is equally as good or evil as every other idea which that party professes?

[/ QUOTE ]

As for the people: what about them? IMO, we should treat them individually with respect, although unless they are fighting it from within there is no reason to respect their choice of party as it is currently constituted. As for Republican "platform planks" or "ideas" -- each one certainly merits consideration. But no matter their worth, the Republican party, as currently constituted and with its current agenda, should be opposed.

[ QUOTE ]
Because not every Republican is evil, nor is every Republican idea is evil. Similarly not every Democrat is evil, nor is every Democratic party idea evil.

Some GOP'ers will try to look at things with an open mind; some won't. Same with the Dems. Some will fall in between. Do you want to be one of the Dems who won't, or one of the Dems who will try looking at things with an open mind on occasion? Why base your decision on how you want to act, on what the worst of the GOP will do? If you do that, it is guaranteed there will be some GOP'ers operating on a higher plane than you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, I see I may have misunderstood your point in your original post. If you are talking about how to internally evaluate political ideas, I fully agree with you. If you are talking about how to communicate is a forum such as this (which is what I thought you were talking about) then I vehemently disagree, for the reasons I have previously stated.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me tell you something about what I believe.

1. Every single person on the face of the Earth should be considered or judged individually.

2. Every single idea set forth should be evaluated on its own merits.

3. Thinking in goup terms is only valuable to a certain extent. If you think only in terms of groups instead of individual persons or individual ideas, you lose a great deal of precision and may well even derive erroneous conclusions. Moreover you might miss out on something good if you rule out entire groups on the basis of the actions or beliefs of some of that group's members.


[/ QUOTE ]

For all you MMMMMM detractors out there, this is what makes MMMMMM a good moderator.....

Good post.

All these people seek is to impose their will. They will use any means necessary to do so, including lying, posturing, threatening (in subtle and not so subtle ways), intellectual dishonesty, and manipulation of the media.

I don't live in America but am shocked when I watch in depth interviews with members of the current Republican Party, and some of the antics of right wing broadcasters. These people don't belong in a civilised society. Their ideals and their goals are not civilised. For those who think I'm some hippy leftist, I am a conservative in my own country in almost every sense of the word. And yes I supported the war.

I don't know how you fight people like this, but there is no respectful disagreement.

[Broken Glass Can]

You may not realize that the American media is dominated by liberals. Perceptions are skewed by media bias in ways people do not even realize.

[MMMMMM]

Well, I happen to disagree with your very broad assessment that the Republican party is 'more evil' than the Democratic party--and therefore must be flatly resisted.

For the sake of argument, howeve, let's presume that it is so. Even then I think you would do better to resist or argue against particular planks or persons within the party, than the party as a whole.

Allow me to elaborate. You gain more by arguing specifically against the certain aspects you view as erroneous or deleterious, than by simply lambasting an entire group.

If I think communism is evil, I stand more chance of convincing others if I explain what aspects of communism I think are so deleterious, and why. If I think Islamic totalitarianism is horrible, I stand more chance of gaining sympathy for my views by explaining exactly what I think is so terrible about it, and why. I don't gain anything at all by just lambasting communism or Islamic fundamentalism as a whole.

Similarly you don't gain anything by taking shots at the entire GOP or by merely lambasting the entire group. However you have a chance of gaining if you pick a certain aspect you view as especially bad, and attack it on reasoned grounds. That could also lead to discussion or deate which might prove interesting and informative for all.

Therefore, I think reasonable discourse and reasoned argument is the only way to go in these matters. It surely is the only chance you have of making an impression that might inform others or perhaps sway another's opinion.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
You may not realize that the American media is dominated by liberals. Perceptions are skewed by media bias in ways people do not even realize.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, clearly, this 'liberal media bias' claim is quite a novel one; so much so, in fact, that 'liberal media bias' almost never gets mentioned in debates with the right; it would seem that, whenever the media is even remotely critical of the right-wing, their elected leadership, and their policy failures, we might even predict that the right would be forced, out of necessity, to fall back on such claims on institutional bias - apparently NOT SO!...as people just don't realize the extent of liberal media bias.

Amazing how the right 'seamlessly' gets their narrative to flow together so 'coherently.'

Let's review said narrative: Liberal media bias is widespread, obvious, and unmistakable. And yet, it's so shawdowy and opaque that no one quite realizes it.

Well, I'm convinced. [/sarcasm]

[vulturesrow]

That is a very elaborate strawman you have constructed. The claim was that "perceptions are skewed by media bias in ways people do not even realize". The claim wasnt about the extent or the degree that the bias is realized.