I very rarely post in the Pit, but enough is enough. Anyone who claims that December is not inflammatory in his attitude is blinded by misplaced tolerance. I have yet to see December engage in any useful dialectics with posters who do not hold his opinion on geo-political issues. Sparc complimented December by claiming he argued in ultrumque partes. Personally, I see no evidence of such high end rhetoric.
Decembers claims are outlandish and inflammatory. What I find great about this board, especially GD, is that you can engage in meaningful discussions with well informed people from various fields who do not necessarily share your world view. Although many of us are very convinced of our various opinions most of us maintain a constructive civility and are willing to consider the other side of the argument. December, in my opinion ruins that spirit with his simplistic and speculative commentary in the guise of well researched and reasonable claims.
I stay away from any thread with the world Israel in it since I know December will just drop his bigoted remarks about tyrannical blood thirsty child eating Arabs. Now my question is: is it right of me to stay away or should I engage December in a hope that a crack may eventually open in his hermetically sealed skull?
You can stay away all you want, it’s a free message board. I view him as a good look at the other side. And he’s more rational that a few other people. Plus he made me modify my profile, no one else can claim that!
I don’t usually engage december with the hope of actually beaming a thought through the aluminum foil covering. I engage him so that those who might be interested in the issues he “debates” will not get a one sided view. Some folks will read his posts and just shrug, but there might be others who think “we’ll no one is arguing with him, so he must be right.”
Isn’t preventing that what this board is all about?
Sparc said december did not argue in utrumque partes.
This thread seems unnecessary since you could have posted in the december “bashing” (sort of) thread from which you misquoted the utrumque partes stuff.
I think december defends a postition that many people - especially here in the U.S. - believe in. Debates without a worthy opponent are best conducted in front of a mirror. Therefore, two threads in the pit devoted to one thread in great debates which was merely an example of using erotema to build a pysma resulting in a pathetic epiplexis seems excessive.
Perhaps all of this has caused the OPer to have a borborygm, in which case I understand. We all need to vent sometimes.
I have mostly stayed out of any GD thread with “Israel” in the title. I know what I’m getting into when I read it, plenty of posters whose opinions on that topic I consider tiresome. The debate has been done to death, IMHO, but that’s not for me to decide.
Aside from december’s apparent decision that a request for a cite about Palestinian “atrocities” could be met with a link to a website called jewishjournal.com, I don’t really mind the fact that he holds his position. I don’t care for his presumptiousness recently that anyone who doesn’t agree with him holds an inconsistent opinion, as if he could just claim that everyone who doesn’t agree with his opinion is sharing identical beliefs in opposition to his. Still, he can do as he pleases and use whatever arguments he wants to, there are plenty of people in those threads to call him on his points if need be.
Anyways, go ahead and stay away from certain threads, but be sure that if you mention staying away to link your aversion to a topic rather than a person. The latter might be construed as “implying who is on your ignore list,” which is a no-no. For instance, I freely admit that I never read a thread containing a discussion of the general morality/immorality of the medical procedure called abortion. If I name a particular person who I consistently ignore because of his views on abortion, that’s considered (as I understand it) going too far. I am relatively new here and may misunderstand this, but I thought I’d issue that advice just to be on the safe side
I don’t post to try and correct him, as it is obvious that he has his worldview and nothing will change that. I post to put my view of events to counter his for anyone reading the thread.
If we do not answer them, the bigots will have won.
Silence does not equal assent, but it’s easy to interpret it that way, and it’s best to prevent that misinterpretation right up front. This place is about fighting ignorance, not ignoring it and hoping it will go away.
Can you give me an actual example of a remark by December that you consider “bigotry”, with some explanation as to why it falls in that category? Thanks!
What the……? december posts his opinions in a forum labeled “Great Debates” and then invites people to debate them. What exactly is your idea of engaging in useful dialectics? Some sort of fustian circle-jerk where all participants immediately gravitate to the most moderate and least offensive possible position and then proceed to oil each other down with self congratulatory adulation?
Granted, an attitude of “….can’t we all just get along….” Is highly commendable and virtually flame-proof; but it didn’t stop the riots in LA and I seriously doubt that it’s going to solve the problems in the Middle East. Debating alternative positions is both legitimate and acceptable.
Does your idea of constructive civility include:
or
When it comes to inflammatory bigotry, december is a lightweight.
**
No; for a lot of people, this place is about hopeless ego-centrism. And the ridiculous notion that what they believe = intelligence; what others who disagree believe = ignorance.
Inflammatory bigotry belongs in the Pit, not in GD. zigaretten, you obviously have a pathetic and flawed view of what it means to be a moderate, equating it with rosy-eyed stupidity.
If I want to debate, I go to GD. If I want to flaunt, I go to the Pit. December obviously does not know the difference between the two. He thinks the difference is that in one forum, vulgar vernacular is more permissible. There are those in the world that engage in debate to resolve things. There are those, like yourself, who engage to show how big their balls are. Fine and good. Let each have their forum!
I’m not looking for a fucking rub down, I’m looking for someone who can say “you’re wrong, you’re out of you’re fucking mind as a matter of fact, because as shown here…”. Decembers debating is more along the lines of “you’re wrong because the very well respected Johnny told me so and Jean told him and Tommy told her, and Tommy was told by the very well respected Johnny. Ergo, my point is clearly demonstrated”.
If I want to engage in that sort of useless debate, I’d go hang out with White Supremacists and have a field party. There’s a difference between fighting ignorance and whacking yourself in the head with a steel bar…
I guess he can’t. Or won’t, but I am inclined to think the former.
Pending such evidence, I assert that this OP (as well as subsequent posts along the same lines) is “outlandish and inflammatory”. Quite possibly “simplistic and speculative” as well. “hermetically sealed skull”? Can’t say.
IzzyR, the “whoosh” is on zigaretten, who mistook Collounsbury and ethicallynot’s comments as racism, and not the parody of december’s writting style that it was.
