People that want to discuss issues without harassment or undue contentiousness need moderation and I think a suggestion of "moderation is censorship" is simply wrong, but it can end up stifling discussion if applied injudiciously. The balance is difficult to maintain - there has to be enough tension to produce challenge and discovery, but it has to be thoughtful, respectful and inclusive. It is not just a pattern of interrogations. These posters are known by their pattern of behavior. They will almost always ask questions, but if it is an endless series of questions, you get the idea that you are being asked to "dance". I got that feeling and said so.
There are people on SI of both sides of the political spectrum who just want to fight and I'm tired of that. There would be no piece of data that would change their mind because they have target lock and will drill and drill until there is some perceived chink in the armor. Then they attach themselves like a parasitic wasp larva and will consume the "enemy" if they can. There are good things in any political philosophy and I have had friends who were politically much different than me. The past 2 administrations has done nothing but polarize opinion in this country and that has been to the benefit of the lawless rulers who are really only manipulating the public opinion to their favor. What we have in this country is not a political philosophy but a theft of the government by extremist elements and neofascist mobsters.
Usenet was ruined because it was unmoderated and pornographers and snake oil salesmen took over this area of the Internet. I'm almost ready to stop posting on SI in general because it feels like I'm in some sort of anime storyline. There are stereotyped villain and heroes and neither ideology will contribute to finding our way out of this quagmire.
If people care about the environment, for instance, they may do so for a variety of reasons... no one has preserved and protected more open space and habitat than hunters. Democrats should be chasing these people and drawing them in. Go after the thugs on their weak environmental positions. We need to embrace anyone who does the right thing and not delve too deeply into the philosophical underpinnings behind the behavior, especially if it is divisive. Malcolm X said, "Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it." This can be inverted and applied to people doing the right thing. Right is right, no matter who does it. Democrats better realize that and embrace it.
If there is to be a coalition to be formed that can take back the country from the Texas Mafia, then it will come from a variety of viewpoints, some of which will be social democrats and some who will be social libertarians. It had better be populist. Some might even be rightists who don't want to be dominated by federal regulations. The opposition should do everything possible to avoid emotional hot buttons and see broad based appeal on every matter.
I don't know where the forum is that would do this would be, but I've wasted a better part of a week defending scientific thought and principles with people who don't care about truth or the discovery of truth. They are playing a game of "gotcha" and I for one don't want to play any more.
End of rant. |
