Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
I could wish that this being a discussion forum, and not a party election leaflet, we could engage with the issues critically rather than just repeating personal attack lines, but it’s a faint hope indeed.
|
I am afraid that you are part of that very problem as indeed we all are. I also wish that what you describe could come to pass but the majority on this forum are more intent of endless games of hyperbole and wind ups. Your recent posts on this thread have been very combative especially your reply to Den yet you then profess to want to rise above all this petty, tribal mud slinging? This seems inconsistent to me.
To be honest, I am tired of this toxic approach. It is not debate in any sense of the word. I have some ideas that I will submit via the appropriate channels but my expectations are low in this regard.
There are a few scenarios that are the major contributors to where we are today:
The Wind Up
Someone decides he wants to comment on a new Labour/Tory/Whoever policy. So what do we not get? A reasoned post, ideally with citations, detailing why this is a dumb idea. What we do get? A post specifically designed to wind up the "other side". Common techniques are the use of pejorative adjectives & descriptions: Marxist Corbyn, Facist Johnson, Nationalisation equals Venezuela, All Leavers are racists, Unions equal 1970's etc. The list goes on and on.
But here is the kicker, these throwaway retorts, designed to wind up and nothing more, keep getting churned out, day after day. Ok, say it once, make your point (?) but move on. The only objective in this continual process is to wind up and antagonise the "opposition" however you might define that.
Of course, those who these remarks are aimed at can do one of 2 things: ignore them or reply in kind. Human nature, as it is, favours the latter. I mean it is like nails down a blackboard, after a while you just lash out. I include myself in this category.
Honesty
Both sides of the debate make mistakes and do things that, when viewed in hindsight, are just wrong. No discussion, just wrong. What we do not see is admission from either side when this is pointed out. When the Tories pretended to be a fact checking site or presented a 6 week old video of Labour MP Jess Phillips, discussing manifestos, as current, who called this out? There are examples for Labour and the LibDems as well, they all have form.
I do see some, notably Sephiroth, calling out his own side but this is rare. I mean, if you are not prepared to accept the bloody obvious, how are you going to be convincing in arguing a case where the merits are far from certain.
Hyperbole
Many people use extreme, exaggerated descriptions of the person or institution that wish to criticise. Again, that may be fine for the first or second time to make an impact, get attention, etc. although I am not convinced on this one. But when this description is used continually, you just end up in this adversarial, tribal playground fight which eventually distills down to just, basically, name calling.
There may be those who just want to sling mud, maybe it makes them feel good who knows but this is not for me. When I react in kind, I may feel validated for a while but after I ask myself, what have I gained? Nothing, it just does your head in after a while ...