By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I've missed these DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT SAY IT discussions over the last little while. Perhaps this is another sign that the world is getting back to normal.
8
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:58 - Nov 8 with 1310 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:54 - Nov 8 by gordon
I've missed these DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT SAY IT discussions over the last little while. Perhaps this is another sign that the world is getting back to normal.
Yeah, it's like a really sh1t episode of Cracker.
Dear old footers KC - Private Counsel to Big Farmer - Liberator of Vichy TWTD
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:54 - Nov 8 by gordon
I've missed these DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT SAY IT discussions over the last little while. Perhaps this is another sign that the world is getting back to normal.
The saddest thing is context of why it was said is always removed.
It’s been a classic move of the alt right the last decade and look where it got us?
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:50 - Nov 8 by SpruceMoose
Getting back to OP. I completely agree that on matters of policy debate should be polite, considerate and thoughtful.
Where I draw the line at this is when we encounter what we have endured over the last four years. These aren't policy disagreements, these are fundamental moral and ethical fights for survival. Some of things that have been displayed over the last four years such as racist rhetoric, homophobia, Islamophobia, callous environmental destruction are so threatening that they aren't even positions of good faith from which to start debate and treating them as such only serves to normalise them. It's truth vs lies, science vs fiction, love vs hate and people have died by embracing the negative sides of those options.
Maybe I have a harsh view on this currently having just lived through a period where the people in power and their supporters have sought to extinguish anything kind, decent, thoughtful and loving in life.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 13:53]
Indeed. I'm not sure High-Minded Centrism is really such an effective bulwark against such extremist people and ideas. We've lurched so far right that we're now at the level of playing polite to racists.
Dear old footers KC - Private Counsel to Big Farmer - Liberator of Vichy TWTD
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:50 - Nov 8 by SpruceMoose
Getting back to OP. I completely agree that on matters of policy debate should be polite, considerate and thoughtful.
Where I draw the line at this is when we encounter what we have endured over the last four years. These aren't policy disagreements, these are fundamental moral and ethical fights for survival. Some of things that have been displayed over the last four years such as racist rhetoric, homophobia, Islamophobia, callous environmental destruction are so threatening that they aren't even positions of good faith from which to start debate and treating them as such only serves to normalise them. It's truth vs lies, science vs fiction, love vs hate and people have died by embracing the negative sides of those options.
Maybe I have a harsh view on this currently having just lived through a period where the people in power and their supporters have sought to extinguish anything kind, decent, thoughtful and loving in life.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 13:53]
Speaking only about this forum, one problem is that it's so often purely tribal, and in that sense it's v. like Laour v. Tories, even when it's not actually a political thread.
Few people on here are prepared to "cross the aisle" and admit when their age old adverseries make a good point, or hold back fom supporting their age old mates when those get something wrong.
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:50 - Nov 8 by SpruceMoose
Getting back to OP. I completely agree that on matters of policy debate should be polite, considerate and thoughtful.
Where I draw the line at this is when we encounter what we have endured over the last four years. These aren't policy disagreements, these are fundamental moral and ethical fights for survival. Some of things that have been displayed over the last four years such as racist rhetoric, homophobia, Islamophobia, callous environmental destruction are so threatening that they aren't even positions of good faith from which to start debate and treating them as such only serves to normalise them. It's truth vs lies, science vs fiction, love vs hate and people have died by embracing the negative sides of those options.
Maybe I have a harsh view on this currently having just lived through a period where the people in power and their supporters have sought to extinguish anything kind, decent, thoughtful and loving in life.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 13:53]
I pretty much agree with all that and dealing with these people can be frustrating to say the very least!
HOWEVER...70 million Americans voted for the closest thing I've seen to fascism in my lifetime. That's a hell of a lot of people who somehow need to be tempted back towards something more sane. Many of these people are perfectly reasonable, even genuinely nice people, in every day life. They've just somehow got caught up in believing the stuff they read on Facebook, or see on fox, or hear Rush Limbaugh or Alex Jones say.
I've no idea what the solution is, but the numbers are just too big to just say "screw them". Somehow they've got to be engaged with and brought back round to decency. God knows how though.
1
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:21 - Nov 8 with 1258 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:50 - Nov 8 by SpruceMoose
Getting back to OP. I completely agree that on matters of policy debate should be polite, considerate and thoughtful.
Where I draw the line at this is when we encounter what we have endured over the last four years. These aren't policy disagreements, these are fundamental moral and ethical fights for survival. Some of things that have been displayed over the last four years such as racist rhetoric, homophobia, Islamophobia, callous environmental destruction are so threatening that they aren't even positions of good faith from which to start debate and treating them as such only serves to normalise them. It's truth vs lies, science vs fiction, love vs hate and people have died by embracing the negative sides of those options.
Maybe I have a harsh view on this currently having just lived through a period where the people in power and their supporters have sought to extinguish anything kind, decent, thoughtful and loving in life.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 13:53]
All opinions and all beliefs are not equally valid. They shouldn’t be treated equally.
The poem, “First they came for...” is of course poignant.
But it isn’t very helpful in describing how best to oppose the people doing the taking.
Speaking out, and waiting for the next chance to vote, may not be sufficient.
George Floyd died in the presence of witnesses speaking out for him.
6
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:22 - Nov 8 with 1258 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:50 - Nov 8 by SpruceMoose
Getting back to OP. I completely agree that on matters of policy debate should be polite, considerate and thoughtful.
Where I draw the line at this is when we encounter what we have endured over the last four years. These aren't policy disagreements, these are fundamental moral and ethical fights for survival. Some of things that have been displayed over the last four years such as racist rhetoric, homophobia, Islamophobia, callous environmental destruction are so threatening that they aren't even positions of good faith from which to start debate and treating them as such only serves to normalise them. It's truth vs lies, science vs fiction, love vs hate and people have died by embracing the negative sides of those options.
Maybe I have a harsh view on this currently having just lived through a period where the people in power and their supporters have sought to extinguish anything kind, decent, thoughtful and loving in life.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 13:53]
You are right and these are the very issues (or at least one of them is) that MLK was fighting. Disagree, yes. But do so in a manner which doesn't descend into simply exchanging personal abuse.
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:46 - Nov 8 by GlasgowBlue
I made the point that a lot of the violence taking place was being caused by middle class white boys and that the community who would suffer most for their actions were the black community. I was 100% behind the black community and fully supported whatever action they felt was appropriate in response to the murder of George Floyd.
Joe made a similar point at the time. I don’t see him getting the same thrown at him whenever he posts. Another poster, it may have been J2 and I apologise to him if it wasn’t, said that he hoped antifa got a good kicking for the trouble they were causing. I don’t see you following him wrong like a lost puppy throwing his words back at him.
Why are we doing this again! I stand by my position and I don’t really think you constantly dragging it up is particularly productive. I could drag up your constant defence of Corbyn over antisemitism but it’s done and we’ve moved on. I suggest you do the same.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 13:53]
'Why are we doing this again! I stand by my position and I don’t really think you constantly dragging it up is particularly productive."
Isn't you who attacked Callis here?
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
2
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:42 - Nov 8 with 1224 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 12:29 - Nov 8 by lowhouseblue
and i'm sure they've done the same and come to a similar conclusion about you. if that helps.
I'm history's worst monster for spending ages trying to suggest that facts, ACTUALLY Doing Your Research rather than look at a Youtube video and basic decency are better than lies, ignorance and bigotry in some people's eyes, it's true.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 14:43]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:23 - Nov 8 by GlasgowBlue
Hey I’m waiting to apologise to you here callis. Do you advocate or have you advocated direct violet action against governments you disagree with, both at home and abroad?
You need to look closer to home for the instigators of violence but I know that can be somewhat uncomfortable....
".....violence is caused by governments, armies, police force...."
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 15:05]
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 13:28 - Nov 8 by GlasgowBlue
Are you actually going to say that you didn’t advocate or have never advocated direct violet action against governments you disagree with, both at home and abroad?
Ooh looks like the archivist is on furlough!
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:05 - Nov 8 by Ryorry
Speaking only about this forum, one problem is that it's so often purely tribal, and in that sense it's v. like Laour v. Tories, even when it's not actually a political thread.
Few people on here are prepared to "cross the aisle" and admit when their age old adverseries make a good point, or hold back fom supporting their age old mates when those get something wrong.
Agreed ..... this forum defo needs more lefty Brexit voters!
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:32 - Nov 8 by The_Flashing_Smile
Your ballot box voting gave us the worst Tory government in living memory and Brexit, both of which you've now distanced yourself from!
and Trump too, albeit they've rectified that now.
Not sure what the alternative is though! Its not like we're going to overthrow the government and implement an everybody-be-nice-to-each-other dictatorship, so getting better at bringing people round to your way of thinking and thus getting better at the ballot box, seems like the only option
0
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 15:11 - Nov 8 with 1162 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:32 - Nov 8 by The_Flashing_Smile
Your ballot box voting gave us the worst Tory government in living memory and Brexit, both of which you've now distanced yourself from!
Let’s not forget racist too, this government outright deny systematic racism exists.
Planet is already past the point of risk and mitigation of damage is against the clock. The gap in wealth and systematic racism all plays a part in this. We choose governments who not only turn a blind eye to this but are now criminally taking part.
My daughter’s future is at stake. Mine is at stake. All is at stake. F*ck agreeing to disagree with short sighted morons who can’t process science.
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 14:24 - Nov 8 by Nthsuffolkblue
Yes, we need action. MLK was a man of action. Bonhoffer is as much a hero in my eyes as MLK is.
It is how that action is taken that matters.
Thanks for that. I'd not heard of Bonhoffer before (my history knowledge doesn't go much beyond year 9 and American movie level!), but the wiki page was a really interesting read.
0
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 15:34 - Nov 8 with 1141 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 15:11 - Nov 8 by monytowbray
Let’s not forget racist too, this government outright deny systematic racism exists.
Planet is already past the point of risk and mitigation of damage is against the clock. The gap in wealth and systematic racism all plays a part in this. We choose governments who not only turn a blind eye to this but are now criminally taking part.
My daughter’s future is at stake. Mine is at stake. All is at stake. F*ck agreeing to disagree with short sighted morons who can’t process science.
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 15:14]
Its not about agreeing to disagree, its about disagreeing with them in a way that has a (small) chance to bring them onside.
Being angry with these people is entirely understandable but its also counter-productive - it just puts up barriers. Yea, plenty of them are a-holes and it sucks to have to be nice to them and to try to appeal to their better nature, but the alternative is that we all go down in flames.
As you said, all is at stake, so if biting your tongue and playing nice has a better chance of success then that's what needs doing - "they" already have the votes. "we" need to bring them back. That's not the same as agree to disagree, far from it. It just means disagreeing in a way that engages, rather than just being angry with them which, while cathartic, doesn't actually do any good
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 15:37]
1
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 16:01 - Nov 8 with 1112 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 15:08 - Nov 8 by CrayonKing
and Trump too, albeit they've rectified that now.
Not sure what the alternative is though! Its not like we're going to overthrow the government and implement an everybody-be-nice-to-each-other dictatorship, so getting better at bringing people round to your way of thinking and thus getting better at the ballot box, seems like the only option
I don't think we can quite blame Glassers for Trump!
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
1
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 16:03 - Nov 8 with 1112 views
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 15:34 - Nov 8 by CrayonKing
Its not about agreeing to disagree, its about disagreeing with them in a way that has a (small) chance to bring them onside.
Being angry with these people is entirely understandable but its also counter-productive - it just puts up barriers. Yea, plenty of them are a-holes and it sucks to have to be nice to them and to try to appeal to their better nature, but the alternative is that we all go down in flames.
As you said, all is at stake, so if biting your tongue and playing nice has a better chance of success then that's what needs doing - "they" already have the votes. "we" need to bring them back. That's not the same as agree to disagree, far from it. It just means disagreeing in a way that engages, rather than just being angry with them which, while cathartic, doesn't actually do any good
[Post edited 8 Nov 2020 15:37]
The biggest problem for us is we cling onto the idea our democracy could never go wrong.
We have to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable on 16:10 - Nov 8 by monytowbray
The biggest problem for us is we cling onto the idea our democracy could never go wrong.
May 2020 be the wake up call we needed.
Here's hoping!
Whilst Biden certainly isn't the long-term solution, yesterday feels like the scrappy 1-0 win that's stopped the rot. Hopefully we can go on a run of form now and maybe save ourselves
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
