# Let me be real clear: this message board does NOT need conservatives **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 28, 2021, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-be-real-clear-this-message-board-does-not-need-conservatives/947474 "2021-07-28T02:12:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 1595
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2021, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-be-real-clear-this-message-board-does-not-need-conservatives/947474/1595 "2021-08-18T00:18:50Z")
I want to highlight this exchange, in one of the many Afghanistan threads, between **Martini\_Enfield** and myself, and **DemonTree** ’s attempt at a “gotcha!” moment: > [@Have we morally failed Afghanistan?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-we-morally-failed-afghanistan/948636/81): > > > [@Have we morally failed Afghanistan?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-we-morally-failed-afghanistan/948636/80): > > > > They’d be wrong to be opposed to even considering essentially annexing a country in an Afghanistan-like scenario on ideological “But that’s wrooooong” grounds, IMO. > > I appreciate your efforts to represent how _you think_ “woke social justice types” think. Unfortunately, I believe more effort is required if you want to get it right. Because on the one hand you’ve highlighted a pretty good reason why such efforts at annexation are maybe not something we should do. But then you’ve specifically discounted the possibility that “woke social justice types” (again, the words you chose to use to describe your envisioned opposition) might base their objections in those _perfectly reasonable_ grounds. > > No, it has to be “But that’s wrooooong” grounds. Sure. > [@Have we morally failed Afghanistan?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-we-morally-failed-afghanistan/948636/86): > > > [@Have we morally failed Afghanistan?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-we-morally-failed-afghanistan/948636/81): > > > > I appreciate your efforts to represent how _you think_ “woke social justice types” think. Unfortunately, I believe more effort is required if you want to get it right. > > Just remember this the next time you see other posters speculating about conservatives/Republicans/Trump supporters. Same shit, different day. Let me see if I can unpack this. We’ve got: **Martini\_Enfield** putting forward a perfectly valid reason why people might think it would be a bad idea to annex Afghanistan. But of course “woke social justice types” are just emotional wah-wah babies (or words to that affect) and that’s why _they_ would oppose annexing Afghanistan. **My response** is to highlight how curious it is (here, in the pit, I’ll go ahead and call his post what it is: bad faith, disingenuous, shit-posting-borderline-trolling) that he would use such loaded language, effectively mocking “woke social justice types” by use of the label alone. I also question how/why he would discount the possibility that these “woke social justice types” might in fact have a good reason to be opposed to annexation, particularly as the one he puts forward seems to rely on premises that I suspect would be shared by people on the left (that annexation would lead to an unending insurgency and that would, at least implicitly, be a bad thing to have to deal with). **DemonTree** then responds to my critique of martini’s incredibly disingenuous and bad faith argument with words to the effect of: “Oh, seeeee! Doesn’t feel so good when it’s conservatives doing it people on _your side_, eh? Now you know how it feels to be accused of holding to positions for stupid reasons!” /summary But you see, **DemonTree** , that **completely misses the point**. This isn’t an instance of diverging facts, with one side chanting “Fake Newz!” and “sheeple!” in response to well-sourced scientific claims and the other side accusing them of being deluded/ignorant/buying into or spouting propaganda. This is an instance where we are to believe that some how, even with shared premises (the whole thing about unending insurgencies being “bad” and all–a strong disincentive to certain courses of action) and perhaps even a shared conclusion (that maybe we shouldn’t _annex_ Afghanistan), **Martini\_Enfield** , conservative jackwad, is just CONVINCED that “woke social justice types” couldn’t have arrived at that perfectly sound conclusion through _reason_. Because even where there may be common ground, he can’t possibly contemplate that “woke social justice types” might arrive at their shared conclusion through logic. So the equivalent left to right argument would be if I were to put forward the proposition that: “I can see how some people might be opposed to kicking puppies because it would be needlessly cruel, and we should generally avoid doing needlessly cruel things, but if a CONSERVATIVE were to come out against puppy-kicking, it’s probably because they somehow have tied puppy-kicking into some whacked-out QAnon-like conspiracy theory involving ‘democrat politicians’ feasting off the life forces of puppies as practice for then doing the same to children. Stupid fascists!” --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-me-be-real-clear-this-message-board-does-not-need-conservatives/947474)._