this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
139 points (96.6% liked)

World News

32324 readers
660 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Restaldt@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"No one wants to have a civil discussion here with me"

"No not like that this is the literal dumbest shit ive ever heard"

Go have your enlightened centrist discussions with an ai chatbot that wont challenge you. Ever.

[–] ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com -3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Edited because I wrongly assumed the reply was from the person I responded to. Changed subject/pronouns below in response.

What.

They replied to me literally stating that my opinions were flawed from the get go based on very big assumptions. Not only my opinions but everyone calling themselves moderate or centrist, we're talking millions of people you just said hold an inherently compromised position. That's some seriously dumb shit. That doesn't make them dumb, just that opinion and I clearly stated that paragraph was what I called out. I then addressed their other concerns and statements.

It's them who are shutting down any debate here. Not me. And yeah "enlightened centrist" is for sure a problem, people that think their position is inherently better because it doesn't adhere to an extreme. But I do not subscribe at all to that line of thinking and hold extreme opinions that I stand by.

And "civil" discussions are impossible over text, It's literally impossible to read and respond correctly to feelings in text and human beings aren't, by and large, capable of disconnecting their emotions from discussions, even less when it's political. And I argue we really shouldn't either. If we can't respond to strong emotions then we're not fit for debate either. Just look at literally any political debate anywhere in a democratic nation, it tends to get pretty heated. I argue more heated than necessary/reasonable right now but that circles back to my point about politics being too tied to morals and identity. But still, emotion is an inevitable and reasonable part of political debate.

That said my intention was never to hurt their feelings, my intent was to strongly reject what they stated, and "I strongly disagree" does not capture even close to how strongly I feel about that statement.

As such I'm sorry and I understand if they have no wish to engage in any debate. I really don't even see anything to really debate here either. Unless they want to defend their first paragraph I guess.

[–] RedWizard@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You replied to me literally stating that my opinions were flawed from the get go based on very big assumptions.

Typical Redditor behavior, you don't even stop to look at who you are speaking with, you just assume every comment below yours is somehow the same person, and not possibly someone else who also thinks you're a total chud.

[–] ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com 3 points 9 months ago

Valid, a poor assumption on my part.