This essay makes me uncomfortable, because it so often leads to a "shut up, just go along to get along" response. As in the Patrick Swayze example, there is a time to put those kind sentiments away. Where are we at in our dialogue with progressives? Do they respectfully argue, or just immediately name call? You're right, if there's no call to be nasty, don't do it, and you're also correct that if you enjoy that kind of thing you might be a bully or keyboard warrior. But everyone from POTUS on down is happy to call me a fascist and a right-wing extremist, the biggest threat in the world to the United States, (as Biden said last March), so the gloves are already off, at least on their side, so what are the ROE's then? For example, if you object to mask mandates, it's because you don't care about your neighbors, and also that you're anti-science. I hope we do better with this gas price spike and rolling back the stupidity of blocking the Keystone pipeline, but will we get a factual debate, or will we get "stop melting the earth, Mr. planet killer?" Thanks, John
I was talking about the weak, ""shut up, just go along to get along" fake nice, bs we've often seen from too many Republicans in DC earlier in the piece with the thinking politeness is a weakness part. But, their flaws have anything to do with politeness, it has to do with their weakness....and it's bad. Of course, the complete opposite is bad, too. I think the "gloves are off" for both sides, all the time and that's super unhealthy. Not just for the country, but for everyone involved, because of how it impacts them personally.
It's sort of akin to how the "whataboutism" argument now plays out. It used to be used to justify what one side believed was GOOD behavior, in sort, "How can you say this is bad when you did it?" Now, it's used to justify indefensible behavior, "You did that! We said it was bad! Now, we're doing the wrong thing, too, and you can't complain because you're just as bad as us."
At some point, if you want to be better than the other side or other people, you have to behave differently than they do.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, again you make some valid points. When I read Derek Hunter or Kurt Schlichter on Townhall, they each claim we're past the point of respectful dialogue, because they hate us so much they are already doing everything they can to destroy us. They've given so many good examples that it's hard to argue with their thesis too, which is; "tell them to pound sand." Like one of your early pieces said, it's hard to have a constructive dialogue when one side keeps changing definitions of words and/or inventing social constructs that have no basis in fact or logic. God bless you for your efforts.
I like both of them and I'm particularly a fan of Kurt. I love his Kelly Turnbull series and I've had dinner with him and his wife in California before. They're fantastic people and I get what they're saying and agree with it in a number ways. I do also think it's important not to lose what makes us good and exceptional in fighting with people who aren't necessarily all that good or exceptional. If we decide we have to become monsters to fight monsters, then people are left choosing between two sets of monsters.
This essay makes me uncomfortable, because it so often leads to a "shut up, just go along to get along" response. As in the Patrick Swayze example, there is a time to put those kind sentiments away. Where are we at in our dialogue with progressives? Do they respectfully argue, or just immediately name call? You're right, if there's no call to be nasty, don't do it, and you're also correct that if you enjoy that kind of thing you might be a bully or keyboard warrior. But everyone from POTUS on down is happy to call me a fascist and a right-wing extremist, the biggest threat in the world to the United States, (as Biden said last March), so the gloves are already off, at least on their side, so what are the ROE's then? For example, if you object to mask mandates, it's because you don't care about your neighbors, and also that you're anti-science. I hope we do better with this gas price spike and rolling back the stupidity of blocking the Keystone pipeline, but will we get a factual debate, or will we get "stop melting the earth, Mr. planet killer?" Thanks, John
I was talking about the weak, ""shut up, just go along to get along" fake nice, bs we've often seen from too many Republicans in DC earlier in the piece with the thinking politeness is a weakness part. But, their flaws have anything to do with politeness, it has to do with their weakness....and it's bad. Of course, the complete opposite is bad, too. I think the "gloves are off" for both sides, all the time and that's super unhealthy. Not just for the country, but for everyone involved, because of how it impacts them personally.
It's sort of akin to how the "whataboutism" argument now plays out. It used to be used to justify what one side believed was GOOD behavior, in sort, "How can you say this is bad when you did it?" Now, it's used to justify indefensible behavior, "You did that! We said it was bad! Now, we're doing the wrong thing, too, and you can't complain because you're just as bad as us."
At some point, if you want to be better than the other side or other people, you have to behave differently than they do.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, again you make some valid points. When I read Derek Hunter or Kurt Schlichter on Townhall, they each claim we're past the point of respectful dialogue, because they hate us so much they are already doing everything they can to destroy us. They've given so many good examples that it's hard to argue with their thesis too, which is; "tell them to pound sand." Like one of your early pieces said, it's hard to have a constructive dialogue when one side keeps changing definitions of words and/or inventing social constructs that have no basis in fact or logic. God bless you for your efforts.
I like both of them and I'm particularly a fan of Kurt. I love his Kelly Turnbull series and I've had dinner with him and his wife in California before. They're fantastic people and I get what they're saying and agree with it in a number ways. I do also think it's important not to lose what makes us good and exceptional in fighting with people who aren't necessarily all that good or exceptional. If we decide we have to become monsters to fight monsters, then people are left choosing between two sets of monsters.