Letter To The Dope

[John_Mace]

Wow. Are you, like, Der Trihs’s alter ego or something? The content, so different, but the style, so annoyingly similar!

[Ambivalid]

@Spice_Weasel

When it comes to politics, and whether I view someone as a meaningful contributor, it has nothing to do with the ideology. It’s all about the delivery. It’s all about whether one can demonstrate a modicum of critical thinking without behaving like a condescending ass.

Exactly.

[Starving_Artist]

Oh, please! :rolleyes:

Bricker and Sam Stone are probably the two least aggressive and insulting conservative posters on this board who still manage to take on political issues in a substantive way, and they get insulted, ridiculed and dismissed constantly on this board. It’s pretty much impossible to be even a moderate conservative on this board and engage political issues in any way without coming in for a ton of abuse. Were the majority of the board’s posters to take lessons from Spice Weasel the discourse around here would be much different. But then, if frogs had wings…

[septimus]

I apologize to OP, if I am one of the assholes who offended him.

I admit to being soft-shelled. If I feel slighted, I may respond a thousand-fold. But I do not recall insulting you – I don’t remember typing a sarcastic Mr. Bean, but if I did, I apologize. My behavior is very immature. That’s one of several major problems I’m still wishing to solve in my late 60’s. :smack:

As for politics, I agree with you: There is a hive mind here, often brooking no debate. As just one example, I am alarmed at the rise of GMO foods – they exacerbate the loss of diversity which is increasingly acute. There is no easy solution – but I didn’t dare even click on the new thread on the topic. One hint of bemoaning ecological degradation and risks and the SDMB hive would jump on me: “Why do you want to kill billions of babies, you heartless evil man?”

I am fairly conservative on many social issues. Abortion? I’d be happy to leave it up to the States (though there are good reasons Federal regulations are more effective and efficient in many other cases). Gay rights, including marriage? Just accept it now and move on. What I do not support are sick and intrusive bathroom laws. Gun control? Forget it!

“Economic conservatism”? E.g., balancing the budget? Anyone who doesn’t know that Democrats do better at budget balancing in Washington than present-day Republicans do is too ignorant to vote. (Is there where I called you “insufferably ignorant” or such, Stringbean?)

@Stringbean

… The board has become increasingly insular and incapable of entertaining viewpoints that run contrary to the general consensus. This is a leftwing discussion board, and I am center-right. I voted for Obama in ’08, Romney in ’12, and Hillary in ’16. I am not the alt-right…
… What I see now are the roaming morality militias comprised of a handful of posters who feel compelled to enforce the correct group-think, and once they have decided you are the enemy, the very notion of honest debate is rendered incomprehensible. As though my disagreement could only be the result of hatred and bigotry. And they are not hesitant to label me with these pejoratives.
…

Please give examples where I may have accused you of hatred or bigotry.

[Spice_Weasel]

@Starving_Artist

Oh, please! :rolleyes:

Bricker and Sam Stone are probably the two least aggressive and insulting conservative posters on this board who still manage to take on political issues in a substantive way, and they get insulted, ridiculed and dismissed constantly on this board. It’s pretty much impossible to be even a moderate conservative on this board and engage political issues in any way without coming in for a ton of abuse. Were the majority of the board’s posters to take lessons from Spice Weasel the discourse around here would be much different. But then, if frogs had wings…

I don’t think it’s most posters doing it, but I do remember we had one thread about why people had become so politically divided. I think many of us were there in good faith, but there was a certain contingent who wanted to make it into an extended discourse about how terrible conservatives are.

As I said, it’s probably confirmation bias. I do it myself; I’ve had memories of threads where it seemed like everyone was ganging up on one viewpoint, gone back to them later, and it was really only one or two posters being collossal dickbags, distorting my view about the reaction of the majority. It’s always the negative things you remember.

[BigT]

None of the conservative posters who actively engage on political issues do so without some element of enjoying pissing the other side off. And, if you do that, you will wind up getting insulted.

Plus, in the Pit, anything people don’t like can get you insulted. In the Pit, expecting anyone who says anything of substance that people may disagree with to not occasionally be insulted is ridiculous.

I don’t know about Sam Stone, as I rarely see him saying much. But Bricker has a lot of habits that a lot of us find really irritating. For example, he has a less forthcoming debating style that many of us find extremely frustrating, and not conductive to debate. And then he often crows about his own integrity.

[Plumpudding]

@Starving_Artist

two least aggressive and insulting conservative posters on this board

Not a compliment.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Here’s MY letter to the Dope:

L

Thank you.

[tnetennba]

I thought it started fine. It did go downhill fast but the unexpected turn at the end saved it. Overall a capital effort.

[E-DUB]

Spice Weasel wrote: “I don’t think it’s most posters doing it, but I do remember we had one thread about why people had become so politically divided. I think many of us were there in good faith, but there was a certain contingent who wanted to make it into an extended discourse about how terrible conservatives are.”

You say that as though the two were mutually exclusive.

[kambuckta]

@Bryan_Ekers

Here’s MY letter to the Dope:

L

Thank you.

Libruls, Libtards, Losers?

[elucidator]

The letter “L” corresponds to “El”, one of the earliest cognomens for a monotheistic deity. Therefore, the poster is offering an “inside joke” about ancient Semitic languages.

Either that, or the poster is Canadian.

[Superdude]

Hey, OP, would you be willing to take Starving Artist with you?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[Monty]

Whether the op takes sa or not, all I have to say is “Good riddance”.

[El_Kabong]

@elucidator

The letter “L” corresponds to “El”, one of the earliest cognomens for a monotheistic deity. Therefore, the poster is offering an “inside joke” about ancient Semitic languages.

Either that, or the poster is Canadian.

Hey, I try to be a decent person, but God-like? Not really.

[Ace309]

@Stringbean

Dopers,

After serious consideration, I have decided to end my time here with the Straight Dope. I may loiter now and then, but other than that I think it is time for me to move on.

When I first found the SDMB, I was amazed at the topics being discussed and the quality of discourse. I felt like there was something to learn in every thread from someone with true insight on the matter being discussed. I grew a lot from these discussions, as the exposure to such a broad range of perspectives will tend to do for someone who is still maturing intellectually.

The past couple years, I have been in-and-out of the forum as the general devolvement into tribal politics (exacerbated by the election of Trump) seems to leave little room for any discussion on pure intellectual grounds. But I have also noticed something far more odious. The board has become increasingly insular and incapable of entertaining viewpoints that run contrary to the general consensus. This is a leftwing discussion board, and I am center-right. I voted for Obama in ’08, Romney in ’12, and Hillary in ’16. I am not the alt-right. I vote my conscience and deliberate seriously on the views that I hold and the beliefs that I espouse. I like debating with people who hold views different than mine. I actively sought such debate on this board for several years because I felt that, despite our disagreements, we could discuss in good faith and learn a little more about the way others view the world.

I no longer feel that such good faith exists, at least among those who more regularly frequent the Dope. What I see now are the roaming morality militias comprised of a handful of posters who feel compelled to enforce the correct group-think, and once they have decided you are the enemy, the very notion of honest debate is rendered incomprehensible. As though my disagreement could only be the result of hatred and bigotry. And they are not hesitant to label me with these pejoratives.

It is a great shame that the forum I once considered the paragon of intellectual discourse has entrenched itself into a bubble where outside thought is seen as threatening. It is not easy voicing conservative viewpoints on this board, given the simple demographics. But I used to relish the challenge and look forward to the counter-arguments that such bright people could throw at me. Now, frankly, I no longer see the point. I don’t think the regulars here have any interest in hearing conservative views nor in rebutting them honestly. If we encounter an impasse, they see fit to ascribe ulterior motives to me and the inevitable “asshole” or “bigot” or “troll” epithets spew forth.

I hope this trend of increasingly polarized discourse comes to an end. It started with Obama and has hit its full furor in the “fake news” age of Trump. Maybe it was just a dream that couldn’t last. Actually - fuck that - you guys fell for it and let it happen to your board. To your own detriment. If you truly believe everyone who disagrees with you is just an alt-right troll, you need to recalibrate your perspective, or else this board will lose all vestiges of openness and fully devolve into the echo chamber I sincerely fear it is headed toward.

My final words: thank you. I still have hope for a return to the golden age. For us as Dopers, and for us as a society.

Sincerely,
Stringbean

This is performance art, right?

[silenus]

Good. One more asshole I can clear from my “Ignore” list.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

I remember stringbean as kind of a jerk. That said:

@WillFarnaby

Conservatives will always be vulnerable to moral grand-standing by progressives, lefties, liberals, moderates, moderate libertarians or whatever the ultra-statists wish to call themselves. This is because they have largely bought into the idea that the progressives et al. have the moral high ground. They believe that egalitarianism is a good idea, but not practical. They believe government can and should sculpt society into an ideal form, but their form is maybe a little different. They believe government should end sin and deliver salvation. These beliefs are foundational to today’s politics, at least to 95% of the politically aware.

The progressives et al. know that calling you a racist is effective. They know that appealing to your desire for equality or homogeneity is effective. They know they can browbeat you all day long

You’re not this fuckwit, so you’ve got that going for you. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, I’ve spent a fair amount of time on other forums. If you’re looking for intellectual debate with a rightward bend, or even just a non-liberal bend, good fucking luck. Your party leadership is intellectually and morally bankrupt, and in order to support the positions and politicians of your party, you have to be either intellectually or morally bankrupt as well. Your best bet is probably the neoreactionary movement, and that’s really saying something, because as verbose and intellectual as these guys are (there are a lot of them at Less Wrong, apparently), they do happen to be using that intellect to argue for the position that we’d be better off if we turned the clock back not 50 years but 500 years, to the time of feudalism, kings, serfs, peasants, and “unquestioned divine rule”.

[E-DUB]

Perhaps someone might take my earlier post as evidence of belief on my part that conservatives are terrible people. Most of them are not, most of them are not even bad people. However, the term “conservative” has, in my opinion, been effectively hijacked by some people who are not merely bad, nor even merely terrible, but whom are utterly reprehensible. And too many people who should have known better have allowed themselves to be swept up in that, QED.

Barry Goldwater, who said, “We can disagree without being disagreeable” would be appalled at the number of "conservatives who view being disagreeable or worse as a side benefit of their position. William F. Buckley, who gave the eulogy for the liberal lion Allard Lowenstein, would be spinning in his grave.

[BigT]

Thanks for quoting WillFarnaby. So I will simply say of course we think the government can solve the problems. That’s the entire point of democracy. Why do we want the people to rule? So that they can solve the problems, rather than trust someone who may not have the people’s needs at heart.

What else can solve the problems? Capitalism, without government regulation, leads to the rich controlling everything, and poor people can’t get what they need. Altruism is great, but it lacks any incentive to continue. If you aren’t altruistic, then you won’t be.

The entire point of rule by the people is to try to make society better for the people. The government may have junk in it, and it needs to get that out. But it is the only institution that has a chance of making society better. If it didn’t, democracy would be pointless.