Sometimes you can convince people that your side is right through logical arguments. Sometimes you can convince people to meekly go along with what your side wants through violence and intimidation. I"m not saying that's good and right, just, let's be honest, it can work. But what I doubt ever works is trying to convince people to support your side by harassing or inconveniencing them. I mean, is there anyone who has ever said, "I disagreed with movement X, but then they blocked the highway and made me miss my flight to my daughter's wedding, and that's what made me decide to support them"? Or, "... but then they vandalized a great work of art, and that's when I realized the justice of their cause"? I can't imagine that these kind of tactics win you any support at all. If anything, they make people who are on the fence conclude that you are insane and annoying and decide not to support you.
I tend to think of myself as an Ayn Rand leaning moderate social democrat (if there is such a thing). Predominately watch MSNBC, listen to NPR, read the NYT regularly and the WP occasionally but also the WSJ. INC and Fast Company. I appreciate your rational approach and contributions to the dialog and have been forwarding your blog to some of my moderate Democratic friends. Thank you.
I'm fairly far-left, and I've recently realized how extreme I really am. I've left a lot of my morals for my political views, and I'm glad I came across this article. Thank you.
You might want to add "Don't point guns at people who happen to be passing your house on the way to elsewhere," since you photograph, 8, shows such a violation of common sense taking place.
Exactly. They are the ones screaming hard-done-by, and the man is apparently running for office on the generalized butt-hurt Trumpoid whine -- yet they are the ones pointing the guns at innocent passers-by.
Sometimes you can convince people that your side is right through logical arguments. Sometimes you can convince people to meekly go along with what your side wants through violence and intimidation. I"m not saying that's good and right, just, let's be honest, it can work. But what I doubt ever works is trying to convince people to support your side by harassing or inconveniencing them. I mean, is there anyone who has ever said, "I disagreed with movement X, but then they blocked the highway and made me miss my flight to my daughter's wedding, and that's what made me decide to support them"? Or, "... but then they vandalized a great work of art, and that's when I realized the justice of their cause"? I can't imagine that these kind of tactics win you any support at all. If anything, they make people who are on the fence conclude that you are insane and annoying and decide not to support you.
I tend to think of myself as an Ayn Rand leaning moderate social democrat (if there is such a thing). Predominately watch MSNBC, listen to NPR, read the NYT regularly and the WP occasionally but also the WSJ. INC and Fast Company. I appreciate your rational approach and contributions to the dialog and have been forwarding your blog to some of my moderate Democratic friends. Thank you.
I'm fairly far-left, and I've recently realized how extreme I really am. I've left a lot of my morals for my political views, and I'm glad I came across this article. Thank you.
All good rules.
You might want to add "Don't point guns at people who happen to be passing your house on the way to elsewhere," since you photograph, 8, shows such a violation of common sense taking place.
Nobody behind the fence had a gun pointed at them
Exactly. They are the ones screaming hard-done-by, and the man is apparently running for office on the generalized butt-hurt Trumpoid whine -- yet they are the ones pointing the guns at innocent passers-by.