The Electric Speakeasy

Eric Renderking Fisk wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:32 pm

Why would I want to shut them up?

This is the single biggest problem with discussing anything remotely controversial. People want the other side to either agree with them or shut up. How can you say you 'prize free speech' while advocating for someone else to loose theirs? I really hope we have people come on here that disagree with me and can do so while maintaining a civil discussion. That is what free speech is all about; you tell me your dangerous ideas and I tell you mine and if we disagree, we disagree without hating each other.

Although it can happen in a forum discussion, I find a good a good amount of FB posts are not well thought out. Most people who write forum comments at least think out what they say and read over what they say before they submit. Meaningful debate is more likely in the forum setting I guess is my point.

I have noticed that on Facebook a lot of the posts that lead to debate are emotion fueled and have very little in the way of cogent points behind them. Long of feels and short on facts. On the other hand in a debate with an ANTIFA member I was threatened with being "Dragged from my house and guillotined'. So, I've got that going for me.

I suspect "Like" and "Share" have done more to kill rational discourse and sow division in this country than any foreign actor could ever dream.

Look at it this way - in facebook political debates Like and Share are, at the root, endorsements. Internet shorthand that says "This is a tolerably accurate representation of what I believe." It's the laziest possible means of participation and requires the least possible interaction. It also breaks complex and difficult subject matter into a simple binary equation. Do you like this? Click yes for Camp A, ignore for Camp B.

Which is why it's entirely possible to know somebody out here in the real world and be incapable of following them on facebook. The real-world individual is (generally) a complex, three-dimensional organism with a subtly layered system of political beliefs informed by a lifetime of experience and social interaction.

The transition from flesh and blood to digital tends to erase the finer details somewhat. Like this, you're literally Hitler. Share this, you're a socialist America-hating scumbag.

That, and telling people to their face that you want to burn their houses, salt their fields, and steal their women takes considerable more resolve than screaming it over the internet.

AeroDillo wrote:
That, and telling people to their face that you want to burn their houses, salt their fields, and steal their women takes considerable more resolve than screaming it over the internet.

I have long been a fan of Dillo's direct debating style.

Someone asked me if I heard of "MeWe" - I have. And it's not a solution to "The Facebook Problem."

https://thefedorachronicles.com/rants/2 ... keasy.html

n11pilot wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 17, 2018 1:19 pm

I have long been a fan of Dillo's direct debating style.

Thanks. I learned it from Curtis LeMay.

Ah yes, GEN LeMay. A past master of the subtle carpet nuance if ever there was one.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/08/21/techno ... index.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/21/faceboo ... ussia.html