I did debate in high school and college. The one most important lesson I learned was that the bottom of the ballot said "The team that did the better debating was_____"
It didn't say "the team that was right" or "the team that I morally agreed with", it focused on how good you were at the act itself of persuasion in an opposed discussion.…
I did debate in high school and college. The one most important lesson I learned was that the bottom of the ballot said "The team that did the better debating was_____"
It didn't say "the team that was right" or "the team that I morally agreed with", it focused on how good you were at the act itself of persuasion in an opposed discussion. The left is convinced that simply because they are right, they have already won. The teams that take the other side are never honestly opposed to them. Its grating and off putting and creates enemies where people could be persuaded to stay neutral or or even friendly.
This lesson will be repeated as many times as it takes.
And to anyone who wants to add "the right does this too", great. Have fun with that. But it certainly seems like in the judgement of the public, one side does it way worse and way more, and as people weight the choices, they seem to be backing away from leftism as it is currently practiced in America. Maybe they still have the tendencies to be left, and would never find a happy place inside the Republican tent, but that doesnt mean they should be treated as barbarian scum.
On "the right does this too" and which side is worse, I think the distinction isn't in level of vitriol or even frequency, it's in who they're willing to do it to. In the Very Online Left, you win super huge social cred points if you can do it to someone who is already left of center, but just not far enough. Those are the most prized scalps. It's like this sado-masochistic thing where they purity test each other and whoever survives is the winner. (Not the election winner, of course, cos this makes you lose elections. But the comments section winner, for sure.)
I don't see this as much in the Very Online Right, with the exception of MAGA vs. Never Trump, which is just as vitrioloic as progressives vs. normie Dems. But if the topic isn't Trump, and it's just some regular right wing culture war thing, the hardcore folks will still be tolerant of the not-as-hardcore-but-somewhat-on-their-side folks.
I was going to make the same point, but I think it extends past the Very Online contingents. Right wingers tend to either invent an issue or blow it way out of proportion, but then the language they use is that they want to protect YOU from this threat. I will keep those bastards from hurting YOU, dear Normie. And the average person thinks the right wingers are a bunch of assholes, but they are an asshole on their side. Maybe we use this asshole thing to help me out and protect me from this Threat.
Left wingers don't act that way. They will find an issue that most people basically agree on (racism is bad, don't pollute, corporate fraud is dangerous, etc.) but then stake out the most extreme position on that issue. And then they will get mad at YOU, dear Normie, for not being sufficiently committed to the issue. And in fact, the reason this Threat happens is because of YOU not doing enough to stop it. And regular people generally don't like being attacked, and they also start to think there's nothing they can do to please the left winger.
The right winger is over there promising to protect us from things, and here this left winger is blaming me for things. Not too hard to figure out who has the more persuasive pitch, in the abstract.
That's a good take. I'd just add (and it doesn't sound like you disagree) that when the right wingers signal "I will keep those bastards from hurting YOU, dear Normie", they're including close to 50% of the country among "those bastards". It's not just Soros and AOC and Fauci and Rapinoe, it's everyone who votes Democrat.
To be fair, the hard left does this too: all Republicans might as well be fascists. But, as you point out, they add in the Normies, who are complicit with all those fascist Republicans because they... I dunno, still read the New York Times even after [insert outrage-inducing article here]. The hard right are more likely to see Normies as naive but basically decent, much as they were before they bravely gulped down their red pills.
I did debate in high school and college. The one most important lesson I learned was that the bottom of the ballot said "The team that did the better debating was_____"
It didn't say "the team that was right" or "the team that I morally agreed with", it focused on how good you were at the act itself of persuasion in an opposed discussion. The left is convinced that simply because they are right, they have already won. The teams that take the other side are never honestly opposed to them. Its grating and off putting and creates enemies where people could be persuaded to stay neutral or or even friendly.
This lesson will be repeated as many times as it takes.
And to anyone who wants to add "the right does this too", great. Have fun with that. But it certainly seems like in the judgement of the public, one side does it way worse and way more, and as people weight the choices, they seem to be backing away from leftism as it is currently practiced in America. Maybe they still have the tendencies to be left, and would never find a happy place inside the Republican tent, but that doesnt mean they should be treated as barbarian scum.
On "the right does this too" and which side is worse, I think the distinction isn't in level of vitriol or even frequency, it's in who they're willing to do it to. In the Very Online Left, you win super huge social cred points if you can do it to someone who is already left of center, but just not far enough. Those are the most prized scalps. It's like this sado-masochistic thing where they purity test each other and whoever survives is the winner. (Not the election winner, of course, cos this makes you lose elections. But the comments section winner, for sure.)
I don't see this as much in the Very Online Right, with the exception of MAGA vs. Never Trump, which is just as vitrioloic as progressives vs. normie Dems. But if the topic isn't Trump, and it's just some regular right wing culture war thing, the hardcore folks will still be tolerant of the not-as-hardcore-but-somewhat-on-their-side folks.
I was going to make the same point, but I think it extends past the Very Online contingents. Right wingers tend to either invent an issue or blow it way out of proportion, but then the language they use is that they want to protect YOU from this threat. I will keep those bastards from hurting YOU, dear Normie. And the average person thinks the right wingers are a bunch of assholes, but they are an asshole on their side. Maybe we use this asshole thing to help me out and protect me from this Threat.
Left wingers don't act that way. They will find an issue that most people basically agree on (racism is bad, don't pollute, corporate fraud is dangerous, etc.) but then stake out the most extreme position on that issue. And then they will get mad at YOU, dear Normie, for not being sufficiently committed to the issue. And in fact, the reason this Threat happens is because of YOU not doing enough to stop it. And regular people generally don't like being attacked, and they also start to think there's nothing they can do to please the left winger.
The right winger is over there promising to protect us from things, and here this left winger is blaming me for things. Not too hard to figure out who has the more persuasive pitch, in the abstract.
That's a good take. I'd just add (and it doesn't sound like you disagree) that when the right wingers signal "I will keep those bastards from hurting YOU, dear Normie", they're including close to 50% of the country among "those bastards". It's not just Soros and AOC and Fauci and Rapinoe, it's everyone who votes Democrat.
To be fair, the hard left does this too: all Republicans might as well be fascists. But, as you point out, they add in the Normies, who are complicit with all those fascist Republicans because they... I dunno, still read the New York Times even after [insert outrage-inducing article here]. The hard right are more likely to see Normies as naive but basically decent, much as they were before they bravely gulped down their red pills.