You can’t, in a civil discussion with members of a group, characterize that group as motivated by malice and hurtful intent. The reason I don’t get to refute your characterization of conservatives as malicious actors is because you don’t get to make that assertion in the first place.
I’m surprised at you, Czarcasm. I know you have written similar threads specifically asking for an explanation of conservative viewpoints, especially from conservatives themselves. You of all people should understand that it is inappropriate to challenge the motives of the very group whose opinions are being solicited.
This is not P&E. It’s not the Pit. It is a debate thread where Velocity plainly asked about a particular viewpoint. In P&E we might look at polls of conservatives to back up assertions about their views as a group. Because it’s in GD, I assume the best case scenario is to debate an actual person who holds a contrary position, and discuss why they personally think that way / which opinion is better on its merits. Not to argue about what percentage of people think X or Y. Why on earth would a conservative want to defend their views if they are going to be accused of malice in lieu of debate? Why on earth would you want to debate them if you think they are motivated by malice? Velocity did not poison the well in the original post, but it is certainly poisoned now.
Then there’s a lot of groups we can’t have a civil, honest discussion about. “Malice and hurtful intent” are common.
Also, calling them stupid or insane is hardly nice either, which is what people are in effect doing when they bend over backwards to pretend that obviously ill-intentioned people “mean well”. It’s also self destructive and more than a little immoral in my opinion.
On the contrary; you are demanding that people lie, not have honest discussions. And you are exemplifying how “civil” is usually just a euphemism for “submit to the abuse of the cruel, bigoted and tyrannical”.
You’re also making a probably unenforceable demand, since many posters are likely to outright defy the moderation to the point of repeatedly eating infractions if they are told they are required to lie in favor of people who want to hurt or kill them. I’ve seen it happen on another board, it took years but the moderation eventually gave up since they simply don’t have the power to threaten posters with anything worse than banning. Which isn’t that intimidating to people who fear beatings, torture or death.
Insults. Do not directly insult or personally attack other posters. The general rule when disagreeing is to comment on the post, not the poster – that is, focus on the argument rather than the poster’s personal shortcomings. This rule applies to all insults, including those meant as jokes and quotes from books and movies – we don’t wish to draw fine distinctions between joke insults and real ones. The rule against insults doesn’t apply to off-board individuals, nor does it apply in the BBQ Pit, where you can insult anybody, including other posters, subject to some limitations – see Pit rules and Hate speech .
You are demanding that people make up lies about how blatantly ill-intentioned people, aren’t. You’re demanding that people defend groups that want to hurt or kill them.
Are we supposed to claim that the Nazis “meant well” when they rounded up and killed millions of people in death camps? Because that’s the obvious direction your demand goes.
There’s no definable group of people called “conservatives” any more than there’s a definable group of people called “liberals” or “progressives.” Those words represent a convenient shorthand aggregating hundreds of shifting and mutable position statements.
The linked thread is very clearly and very obviously talking about a group of people with a specific set of abhorrent, malicious, vile views towards queer folks. It just so happens that “conservative” is a convenient word to describe them. Obviously not all conservatives share those views - see the Log Cabin Republicans.
But the cute little “ah ha but I am a conservative and I’m not motivated by malice and therefore your arguments are incorrect” is missing the point in an attempt to score one.
And since we’ve reached this thread’s godwin singularity, the obvious parallel here is, “I’m a Nazi but I don’t specifically hate Jews, so you can’t say that Nazis hate Jews.”
No, I am not. If you honestly believe a group is malicious, don’t participate in a GD thread where members of that group are likely to present their point of view. I am not telling you to lie.
Then it should be moved to the Pit or closed. If it is a foregone conclusion that “conservatives” have abhorrent, malicious, and vile views, necessarily motivated by hatred, then the OP is not a topic for good faith debate.
So, don’t talk about conservatives at all? You are literally just demanding that all discussion of the political position you admit to supporting be either silenced or required to lie in your favor.
Conservatives is not a people. The rule does not cover this.
If someone is specifically insulting you, please flag it.
But Republicans, Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives are not protected from insulting language.
I obviously disagree with the premise that conservatives are malicious. But for you, yes. Please stop talking about conservatives in GD. If you think all conservatives are malicious, I think the rules prohibit you from expressing that in GD. Maybe with the exception of a thread specifically about that question, but I think such a thread would be better suited for P&E.
Respectfully, the rule you are thinking of is hate speech. Different rule. I am not accusing anyone of hate speech.
Hate speech. Do not post hate speech directed against any race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation or other group identity (except for political affiliation or leaning) in any forum. To elaborate:
Hate speech – that is, slurs and other pejorative remarks about groups that in our opinion are clearly hateful – is prohibited in all forums. If you see instances of hate speech on the SDMB, please flag the post and we will take such action as we think appropriate.
Not all pejorative comments about groups rise to the level of hate speech. We recognize there are differences of opinion on what constitutes hate speech. We leave it to the SDMB community to debate such questions, with the understanding that final judgment on what constitutes hate speech is the responsibility of SDMB staff. If you believe a post is hateful, you are free to say so, provided you abide by our rule against insults – see point #10 below. Others are free to disagree with you. The belief that the truth will emerge from the clash of views in open debate is a cardinal principle of this board.
I do consider it insulting when a group I personally consider myself a part of is accused of malicious intent. For holding views I personally hold, no less.
It’s unambiguously true that conservatives as a group, if not every individual conservative, are motivated by malice and hurtful intent. Thousands of examples in multiple threads exist to back up this conclusion.
Political beliefs are not congenital. One learns them and makes deliberate decisions to mouth them in public. Politicians have since the beginning of the republic responded by incorporating these beliefs, including the lowest, meanest, most deprecating, into political parties. Remember the Know Nothings? For that matter, remember what the Democrats said in the years before the Civil War, and the political violence that they approved?
Not surprisingly, most, if not all, of the worst of these parties were conservatives at base. Today one party that shall go unnamed has incorporated the very worst of those conservatives into its base. Anyone who does not accept this as a basic proposition about the behavior of the group simply cannot engage in any intelligent conversation about the group.
It’s not up to us to rearrange reality to allow malice and hurtful intent to thrive. Nor should we camouflage our beliefs about objective reality in order to suit the convenience of those who identity with those groups.
Conservatives have brought this upon themselves. They insisted that it be true, very loudly. They are trying to impose those beliefs on others. Recognizing this reality is the least possible reaction.