Some of that stuff is fair criticism, some is indistinguishable from right-wing hit pieces, and some is just sloppy.
We really need to learn that throwing everything you can possibly think of at someone is often a bad idea. The weak or inaccurate stuff that's mixed in discredits the whole bunch. You usually want to stick to criticisms that (1) are significant and (2) are airtight.
I do agree with you that this is the base from which to start, but I am completely fine in specific cases to extend truth, as truth doesn't win discursive conflicts. The problem in my eyes become more significant when within the left we use that as base to draw analysis from.
There is no objective truth anymore so what you believe boils down to who you trust. If an even slightly skeptical person finds out they can't trust what you're saying that can turn them away entirely.
Some of that stuff is fair criticism, some is indistinguishable from right-wing hit pieces, and some is just sloppy.
We really need to learn that throwing everything you can possibly think of at someone is often a bad idea. The weak or inaccurate stuff that's mixed in discredits the whole bunch. You usually want to stick to criticisms that (1) are significant and (2) are airtight.
I do agree with you that this is the base from which to start, but I am completely fine in specific cases to extend truth, as truth doesn't win discursive conflicts. The problem in my eyes become more significant when within the left we use that as base to draw analysis from.
There is no objective truth anymore so what you believe boils down to who you trust. If an even slightly skeptical person finds out they can't trust what you're saying that can turn them away entirely.