It just doesn’t. We don’t need “the other side” of the debate or whatever the hell issue we’re talking about if they are committed to anti-intellectualism and deliberately undermining good faith discussion.
Looking at you D_Anconia.
If this place becomes “a hive mind,” fuck it - then that’s what it is. A hive mind for the truth.
I sadly agree. Principled conservatives I can deal with but since they appear to be extinct in the wild we have really reached this point. Trump-maggots, Qanon-acolytes, Covid-denialists and the rest of these 1/6 apologist shitstains can take a flying leap.
Posters like D_Ancona and Sam Stone, just to mention the most obvious, need to fuck off.
And to think that they are the supposedly “sane” or “rational” or “moderate” ones.
Sadly, the reality is that modern conservativism is repugnant to the values that make sites like SDMB work. If we are truly fighting ignorance, we don’t need the “perspective” of people who are viewing an asshole with a microscope, do we?
I have a bad feeling I am about to be suspended or banned for calling out the horse shit of D_Anconia or others. I want this thread to exist and to show I am fighting fraudulent information.
We don’t need “balance.” Christ, look at today’s January 6th hearings. Look at how much better and informative they were without “balance.”
Sorry, but one side is right; the other is wrong. We are at war with anti-truthers.
Concur that even doesn’t equate fair, that having a conviction doesn’t make you right and that the truth can validly reside in a singular minority.
But if you are going to switch SD from fighting ignorance (it’s taking longer than we thought) to preserving the truth (as we define it) then you’ve thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
It’s true that the board technically doesn’t need conservatives; conservatives only account for about 15% of membership or so, based off of IMHO polling; the board won’t die without. That being said, with Dope viewership on the decline, I’d argue that 100% of folks showing up is still better than 85%.
There is indeed no need for false “balance” if one side is clearly true and the other is not; we don’t need Flat Earthers or 9/11 Truthers here, for instance. My concern, though, is that there will be a slow creep where even legitimately disagreeable, both-sides-have-valid-points topics will be classified as “Side X is wholly true and Side Y is wholly wrong.”
Eh, I think they deserve to be judged on a case-by-case or post-by-post basis. I’ve seen informative and sane posts from conservatives when they’re not delving into topics related to politics, and to a lesser extent, science.
IMO, if a poster is spreading egregious misinformation, they should be handled with topic and/or thread bans, before we excommunicate them entirely.
Asahi I’m sure you and I would agree on a lot of things, and that many Republican viewpoints being expressed here are flat out wrong, but your attitude is overly self confident, absolutist, (ironically) anti-intellectual and fascist.
Why? What the last three posts said.
Wait. The earth isn’t flat?
Did I hear a “Bzzzzz”?
Look, asahi, zealots unfortunately ignore science when it goes against their ideology. It’s also unfortunate that we have far too many zealots. Such as the folks on the left that ignore science and evidence when it’s inconvenient or politically incorrect. We had dumbasses on the left who were in favor of mass unmasked protests during a pandemic cause so-called social justice can only be fixed by mass civil unrest. That’s a massive fail on the left’s part. Downplaying the probability that Covid could have escaped from a research lab because of politics is also a massive fail. If you want institutions that are necessary for health and science to be perceived as impartial they need to be impartial and not engage in the so-called virtue signalling resistance.
Yes, the religious right is full of troglodytes. I won’t deny that. But the new religion of woke that the left is following has it’s own misanthropic tendencies and the left tends to do totalitarianism and suppression very well once they get going.
How so? I have become sensitive to the use of the word fascist since we had one in office recently, and yet it took longer than it should have to recognize him (and then be willing to identify him as one) because that word, “fascist,” had been diluted to the point of near irrelevance by over use as a criticism.
So please explain how asahi is being fascist.
I don’t really agree with the OP. Speaking for myself as a liberal (certainly by US standards) I’m always interested in trying to understand how the other side thinks. If it turns out that what they’re doing cannot fairly be described as “thinking”, then that’s useful information, too. And if they’re just being jerks and trolling for reactions, sooner or later they get shown the door and advised not to let it hit them in the ass on the way out.
I participated in a board once where the Head Cheese got fed up with the political bickering and decided to split off political discussions into liberal and conservative forums, and if you posted in one, you couldn’t post in the other. It certainly led to much less hostility, which was the goal, but it also led to much less meaningful discourse.
I do sympathize with your frustration, though, with the current state of US Republican politics.
I’d say that we DO need conservatives, for robust debate and entertainment. What we DON’T need is a peanut gallery full of radical reactionaries.
If you want to live in a bubble then sure, you don’t need conservatives here. If you like a community that continues to devolve into “all conservatives are monsters” then you don’t need conservatives. Personally I find the Dope political thought less and less interesting.
People who are so sure about their dogmatic opinions that they refuse to listen to other ideas are part of the problem, regardless of their political persuasion.
Could you expand on this experience, perhaps in a new thread if need be, please?
If you are interested in it, then start it. Otherwise, I’m engaging in the conversation going on in this thread, responding directly to what another poster has said.
asahi has been accused of being a fascist, or at the very least expressing a fascist attitude, for the OP. If one were to accept “fascist” as the sort of generic insult that might be thrown about willy-nilly for anyone who appears exclusionary of… anyone at all, then the word loses its meaning. And it’s clear to me now that it is a word that’s worth reserving and preserving as a label for actual fascists.
You’re right. You’re suspended for 24 hours.
As to the OP, it’s fair to have a message board without conservatives. There are many out there. But it should be labeled as such.
The idea that one view is Correct and no others are, exclusion of and disinterest in other viewpoints, regimentation, rejection of the need for balance, and a view that a “hive mind for the truth” is a good thing.
Look, I get it - my view is actually correct, and y’all are actually all wrong, and any “balancing” view is actually wrong, and clearly if a hive mind is only about what is, let’s face it, true then what’s the problem, right?
Says every fascist ever. It works well, till it doesn’t. And “doesn’t” tends to be reached very quickly.
What you have described is close-mindedness, pigheadedness, or even prejudice, but that is not fascism. There are actual fascists seeking actual power, through democratic means while they can, but more than willing to engage in a little insurrection if they can’t. There is value in having a word that we can use to describe them, without getting “Oh, but you call everyone that” getting thrown back into our faces. Fascist is, or at least should be, that word.
Save the histrionics for… okay, well, I guess at least this is the pit, but still…
Close-mindedness, pigheadedness, and prejudice are views an individual can have. When that individual suggests it would be good if an institution became a hivemind that adopted their views, that is fascististic thinking. Yes there is an element of hyperbole in what I wrote but I absolutely stand by it.
Where do you think fascism starts?
What really set me off was “a hive mind for the truth”. Fuck me, Orwell could have used that one in 1984.