Fair enough and thanks for clarifying. There's still a point in there though. Does telling someone they're racist and genocidal get further than telling them they're supporting such things or than trying to help them understand how the things they're doing are supporting such things?
Violence begets violence. It remains true in violent language. It's a last option and since we're strangers on the internet we should be pretty far from a last option.
the person who is being racist and who I am saying "you are racist" to is not my concern. Myself and them in the interaction is a spectacle, it is a public communication, it is more than just one person talking to another, I don't fuck with nazis cause I think it will change their mind, I do it so they LEAVE.
Educating others who are reading, providing more context, or making it publicly clear bigotry is unacceptable as community defense are my goals when posting.
Usually. Sometimes I'm just mad.
That being said, I'm not sure what you mean in this context by volent language, could you clarify?
This feels like a decent starting point. Deliberately inflammatory language. It goes much farther of course. That's a pretty low end example.
What about the person that's being racist and not realizing it? It was only a few years ago I realized how fucked up it is to say gyp. I assumed it was jip before. I try to be conscious of my faults but not everyone does. A lot of people would probably say "fuck you no I'm not" if you called them a racist for something like that.
As for that particular example, I see that it is 11 replies deep in a tree of replies, and that that user has made many posts in that line. It seems to me to be more of a frustration peak than it is a chosen demeanor.
Its frustrating to have the same argument over and over, and although it may not be the most polite, no one is required to be graceful.
Well, their feelings in the moment aren't really relevant imo. If someone has insulted me, it is not my job to inform them of this fact in a way that doesn't make them feel bad. That's something to keep in mind. When I was in highschool I was a fucking ghoul I was a nazi in all but name, so I get it. But redeeming hardcore liberals is not required
It's not required of course, but shouldn't it be a goal when possible? "Hearts and minds" and all that, right?
I certainly feel the point about frustration over making the same argument over and over.
It's not your job, you're right. But doesn't building a better society require effort? No one is obligated to help anyone improve or understand, but we'll get a lot farther if we do when we can. Only doing what we have to do doesn't get us very far.
The way I see it, you're 100% right if we were face to face. In class, in the office, in the friend group, whatever. Online the base assumption is hostile stranger, in person you're both real people, and its much easier to break through to someone. Online, if someone decides to think I'm an NPC, me and anyone who sounds like me can only be a NPC to them, because we're just text no a screen
So because we aren't face to face, I don't focus on that unless its abundantly clear that someone wants to engage in good faith and learn about a new perspective. Like now, I respect how you've engaged with me. That confusion we had about the You (liberals), you could have been an ass and said I was just lying after getting called out or any number of bad faith deflections, but you didn't, so I engaged earnestly.
However, this is not the average interaction. for one, this is taking a lot of time, in this same number of words and posts I could have obliterated a whole bunch of libs while leaving behind a trail of information and things to research for anyone who happened upon them. Sure, lower success rate perhaps than trying to save individual souls as it were, but far more chances to. Also, and I think this is a valid thing thats just down to taste, its a preference thing if you like the 1 on 1 or the crowd talking, its personal style and strengths
Sure, this talk has been valuable, but I bet you of all the people who come to look at this thread, less than 5% of them will actually read through this conversation of ours
And that's where we disagree. It's easy to spew whatever online. For all I know I see you every day of the week and neither of us knows we're the other here. There are no repercussions.
Except how a person thinks of that group in their head. Which in turn will affect their actions, maybe only slightly, in life. Going out of your way online to try and meet them on an honest level, where they may not be able to in life, can have a big impact.
Which is not to say that I must be right or you must be wrong. But I think it makes sense.
Its a far ways off from "speak to the audience not the person you're talking to" to "spewing whatever"
There are no repercussions.
Idk what you mean by that, its not about repercussions its about how the medium through which we interact shapes the ways we interact
Going out of your way online to try and meet them on an honest level, where they may not be able to in life, can have a big impact.
A very admirable thought, and one I share and have often written long posts about (doin it rn over on Hexbear, to the annoyance of some of my comrades lol)
But again, its about impact. For the effort it took to go through all this, just to end in "agree to disagree" as it seems like its headed towards, I could have made a lot more people think about a lot more things, you know?
Also, my apologies, I added a whole bunch to my previous comment in an edit and forgot to hit send in another tab until just now, I didn't change much but added 2 paragraphs, some of which I may have reiterated here lol my b
It very probably is headed there but I would argue that both of us, as well as an unknown number of observers, have been shaped by the interaction. Maybe only a little, but not none.
I know I've learned a few things from a few exchanges here. I think it's mostly been from the ones that have been open to discussion on both ends, which I think emphasizes the point I was trying to make, even if I didn't succeed at it.
But the other side of that is one of the others I've exchanged with today, who was more drawn in by the type of rhetoric that drives me away.
I think the lurking audience isn't to be discounted though. I've been among them before myself, but there's never a way to know their size or if they're even looking. Even so we can be influencing them in unexpected ways.
Either way I think I'm ending this a bit better than I started it. I hope I'm not the only one who feels that way.
No worries about the oversight. We're all prone to mistakes.
Fair enough and thanks for clarifying. There's still a point in there though. Does telling someone they're racist and genocidal get further than telling them they're supporting such things or than trying to help them understand how the things they're doing are supporting such things?
Violence begets violence. It remains true in violent language. It's a last option and since we're strangers on the internet we should be pretty far from a last option.
the person who is being racist and who I am saying "you are racist" to is not my concern. Myself and them in the interaction is a spectacle, it is a public communication, it is more than just one person talking to another, I don't fuck with nazis cause I think it will change their mind, I do it so they LEAVE.
Educating others who are reading, providing more context, or making it publicly clear bigotry is unacceptable as community defense are my goals when posting.
Usually. Sometimes I'm just mad.
That being said, I'm not sure what you mean in this context by volent language, could you clarify?
This feels like a decent starting point. Deliberately inflammatory language. It goes much farther of course. That's a pretty low end example.
What about the person that's being racist and not realizing it? It was only a few years ago I realized how fucked up it is to say gyp. I assumed it was jip before. I try to be conscious of my faults but not everyone does. A lot of people would probably say "fuck you no I'm not" if you called them a racist for something like that.
As for that particular example, I see that it is 11 replies deep in a tree of replies, and that that user has made many posts in that line. It seems to me to be more of a frustration peak than it is a chosen demeanor.
Its frustrating to have the same argument over and over, and although it may not be the most polite, no one is required to be graceful.
Well, their feelings in the moment aren't really relevant imo. If someone has insulted me, it is not my job to inform them of this fact in a way that doesn't make them feel bad. That's something to keep in mind. When I was in highschool I was a fucking ghoul I was a nazi in all but name, so I get it. But redeeming hardcore liberals is not required
It's not required of course, but shouldn't it be a goal when possible? "Hearts and minds" and all that, right?
I certainly feel the point about frustration over making the same argument over and over.
It's not your job, you're right. But doesn't building a better society require effort? No one is obligated to help anyone improve or understand, but we'll get a lot farther if we do when we can. Only doing what we have to do doesn't get us very far.
The way I see it, you're 100% right if we were face to face. In class, in the office, in the friend group, whatever. Online the base assumption is hostile stranger, in person you're both real people, and its much easier to break through to someone. Online, if someone decides to think I'm an NPC, me and anyone who sounds like me can only be a NPC to them, because we're just text no a screen
So because we aren't face to face, I don't focus on that unless its abundantly clear that someone wants to engage in good faith and learn about a new perspective. Like now, I respect how you've engaged with me. That confusion we had about the You (liberals), you could have been an ass and said I was just lying after getting called out or any number of bad faith deflections, but you didn't, so I engaged earnestly.
However, this is not the average interaction. for one, this is taking a lot of time, in this same number of words and posts I could have obliterated a whole bunch of libs while leaving behind a trail of information and things to research for anyone who happened upon them. Sure, lower success rate perhaps than trying to save individual souls as it were, but far more chances to. Also, and I think this is a valid thing thats just down to taste, its a preference thing if you like the 1 on 1 or the crowd talking, its personal style and strengths
Sure, this talk has been valuable, but I bet you of all the people who come to look at this thread, less than 5% of them will actually read through this conversation of ours
And that's where we disagree. It's easy to spew whatever online. For all I know I see you every day of the week and neither of us knows we're the other here. There are no repercussions.
Except how a person thinks of that group in their head. Which in turn will affect their actions, maybe only slightly, in life. Going out of your way online to try and meet them on an honest level, where they may not be able to in life, can have a big impact.
Which is not to say that I must be right or you must be wrong. But I think it makes sense.
Its a far ways off from "speak to the audience not the person you're talking to" to "spewing whatever"
Idk what you mean by that, its not about repercussions its about how the medium through which we interact shapes the ways we interact
A very admirable thought, and one I share and have often written long posts about (doin it rn over on Hexbear, to the annoyance of some of my comrades lol)
But again, its about impact. For the effort it took to go through all this, just to end in "agree to disagree" as it seems like its headed towards, I could have made a lot more people think about a lot more things, you know?
Also, my apologies, I added a whole bunch to my previous comment in an edit and forgot to hit send in another tab until just now, I didn't change much but added 2 paragraphs, some of which I may have reiterated here lol my b
It very probably is headed there but I would argue that both of us, as well as an unknown number of observers, have been shaped by the interaction. Maybe only a little, but not none.
I know I've learned a few things from a few exchanges here. I think it's mostly been from the ones that have been open to discussion on both ends, which I think emphasizes the point I was trying to make, even if I didn't succeed at it.
But the other side of that is one of the others I've exchanged with today, who was more drawn in by the type of rhetoric that drives me away.
I think the lurking audience isn't to be discounted though. I've been among them before myself, but there's never a way to know their size or if they're even looking. Even so we can be influencing them in unexpected ways.
Either way I think I'm ending this a bit better than I started it. I hope I'm not the only one who feels that way.
No worries about the oversight. We're all prone to mistakes.