Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
Tom Perez B/K/M?
This poll is closed.
B 77 25.50%
K 160 52.98%
M 65 21.52%
Total: 229 votes
[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

 
  • Locked thread
UP AND ADAM
Jan 24, 2007

Ytlaya posted:

edit: Just in the interests of being as honest as possible, I'll admit I'm biased in the sense that I knew and was the sort of person with the intentions described, and so when I see posts like yours I can see myself making the exact same arguments in the past. I realize this is intrinsically pretty condescending. But I've never seen any reasonable alternative explanation for this stuff. The only thing close to an actual argument that I've seen is stuff along the lines of "the way leftists are attacking liberals is counterproductive", but those arguments never have any concrete evidence supporting them. While you could say the same about the opposite ("leftists attacking liberals is helpful"), but the difference is that leftists also have an ideological reason for what they're doing. (And you could obviously make a pretty plausible argument that stuff like the current shift to the left regarding healthcare policy would never have happened without the enthusiasm and anger from the left, though that's virtually impossible to prove or disprove.)


Well, I'm totally open to someone giving an actual reason for this behavior. Like, just say "nearly all my posts are contrarian towards leftists because of (insert presumably rational reason for doing this)." The key thing about this specific topic is that the people in question rarely if ever actually argue along ideological/policy lines. If a Republican comes into the chat, you can at least say "this person is saying X policy/ideology is wrong, and I disagree because Y", but like 99% of these liberal -> leftist arguments consist of vague insinuations. People do things for reasons, and there must be some reason why people feel so compelled to argue against leftists. The most likely are that they either genuinely disagree with leftists ideologists (in which case they should be explicit about it) or there's something else bothering them that they can't articulate. Maybe I'm wrong and some of these folks just had a bad experience being dumped by a leftist ex-boy/girlfriend or something, but the key point is that they never provide any reasonable explanation for their behavior and attitude. To be frank, the criticism of "well, a certain percent of people criticizing the Democratic candidate might not vote Democratic, therefore they shouldn't do so" is transparently stupid. So I'm left with no choice but to assume that someone making that argument is either really stupid or is making it because they either can't articulate or don't feel comfortable articulating their real reason.

To contrast it with what leftists post, the main difference is that someone can at least attack them on the basis of ideology. Like, it's also possible that a leftist has some dumb reason for disliking liberals and/or conservatives, but the difference is that they're at least still making arguments a person can disagree with. Like, maybe they're not being honest when they say they believe socialism is superior to the status quo, but at least there's something tangible there to argue against. Anti-leftist contrarian posts are almost always weird insinuations about how the person is either secretly racist or somehow made the Democrats lose the election; they're almost never about the ideas themselves.

Like, I'm someone who also votes strategically and if someone starts arguing about why they think voting third party or whatever is better I would argue against them. The difference is that you're repeatedly and seemingly deliberately confusing criticism with the assumption that the person making the criticism would never vote for the person they're criticizing. This is very dishonest. People who aren't disingenuous will selectively reply to the best arguments of a given side, rather than selectively pointing at the people who are bad at articulating an argument and using it to justify their own views (leftists are also sometimes guilty of this, though it's not universal in the same way it is with the contrarian anti-leftist posters).

i'm not sure what you're talking about regarding the centrist stuff. I agree that many people use that specific term far too much, but the problem is that it can be difficult to come up with a short concise term to refer to people whose actions generally act to benefit the status quo. If someone claims to hold leftist views but spends virtually all their time posting about how dumb leftists are, I think it's reasonable to assume that maybe they aren't being totally honest.


There are two problems here. The first is that there's a difference between accelerationism as an ideological stance (i.e. someone who takes actions because they actually think it's a good idea to make things worse in order to hypothetically make them better later) and people who take actions that might in effect be accelerationist but without that intention. Under the latter interpretation, you can call literally everyone who doesn't vote Democratic an "accelerationist." It's possible for people to want to vote third party for reasons that, while wrong, aren't accelerationist.

The second problem is that you're cherry picking individuals and using it to tar a bigger group of people, which is especially dishonest since the larger group in question usually do vote Democratic. It's fine to argue with a specific person over why you think voting third party (or whatever) is wrong, but it is obvious that you're attempting to attribute the worst elements of peoples' posts to everyone you disagree with.

A good post that reflects my experiences. Grappling with centrism's evil clutches would be a lot less frustrating if any of the rhetoric surrounding it had an honest and upfront delivery. I think cloaking it in patronizing and technocratic terms is the main way to proliferate it though.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

shrike82
Jun 11, 2005

Ytlaya posted:

I mean, fair enough I guess, but think of it this way: How would you feel if someone popped into a global warming thread and like 95% of their posts were just calling out the mistakes made by the pro-global warming* posters? It's only natural to assume someone is opposed to something if they put nearly all their time into being contrarian towards those who support it, and that analogy is actually fairly generous because it's assuming the contrarian stuff in question is actually always valid and true. Tone is also important; it's possible to disagree with people without being clearly insulting and while still indicating that you're broadly on the "same side." Also, some degree of biased/irrational energy is inevitable with any sort of passionate/emotional ideological movement, so I don't think there's really any point in nitpicking over such things unless they're actually things officially or predominantly supported by the movement as a whole.

As a side note, regarding the "same side" thing, I think it's important to distinguish between posters like Condiv and posters like, say, shrike82. Condiv is pretty terrible at arguing things and is often very credulous towards believing stuff that happens to be convenient, but his general goals seem to be good and his heart appears to be in the right place (he kinda reminds me of the stuff I might have posted if I was in my early 20s in the current political climate). I don't feel that people like him are actually causing any harm (and if anything their energy might be beneficial), because anyone who is put off from leftism just because they saw a random person make a irrational internet post never would have been an ally to begin with. This is contrasted with someone like shrike82 (and I think also NFS and a couple others), who is clearly motivated more by antipathy towards Democrats/liberals than any real desire to help people. Those people make me more concerned, because I feel like they don't really have any deep ideological commitment to leftism and more just use it as an avenue by which to vent their anger at a certain type of person. I could see them easily being flipped to believing and supporting some nasty stuff if they felt it would "stick it to Hillary Clinton/Cory Booker/whatever" (and we kinda literally see this with the people who voted Trump).

*in the sense of thinking it's a real thing

:agreed:

yronic heroism
Oct 31, 2008

Kilroy posted:

There are lots of threads in D&D with lots of bad posts in them, so good luck to you calling them all out.

Unless you're singling out this one for some reason (you are).

Also your bad post radar is not calibrated well and I fear you're missing a lot of bad posts you could be addressing. This should get you started: https://forums.somethingawful.com/query.php?action=posthistory&userid=142988

Hey, that's not the guy threatening to shoot other goons at all!

:dukedog:

Kilroy
Oct 1, 2000

yronic heroism posted:

Hey, that's not the guy threatening to shoot other goons at all!

:dukedog:
Sometimes I guess you have to consider the seriousness of the "threat" and the chance that it will ever actually be carried out. Like "ooh real leftists are pro-gun, motherfucker" vs "I, forums' poster yronic heroism, will continue to poo poo up every thread I gaze upon".

(Note that I never actually threatened anyone directly, either.)

Or you can continue using it as some weak-rear end shield from my legit and utterly scathing criticism of your terrible posts and the broke-dick brain responsible for them :shrug:

Jizz Festival
Oct 30, 2012
Lipstick Apathy

yronic heroism posted:

Nah, I'm calling out the bad posts in this thread.

Turn on your monitor. Heh :c00l:

yronic heroism
Oct 31, 2008

Ytlaya posted:

I mean, fair enough I guess, but think of it this way: How would you feel if someone popped into a global warming thread and like 95% of their posts were just calling out the mistakes made by the pro-global warming* posters? It's only natural to assume someone is opposed to something if they put nearly all their time into being contrarian towards those who support it, and that analogy is actually fairly generous because it's assuming the contrarian stuff in question is actually always valid and true. Tone is also important; it's possible to disagree with people without being clearly insulting and while still indicating that you're broadly on the "same side." Also, some degree of biased/irrational energy is inevitable with any sort of passionate/emotional ideological movement, so I don't think there's really any point in nitpicking over such things unless they're actually things officially or predominantly supported by the movement as a whole.

As a side note, regarding the "same side" thing, I think it's important to distinguish between posters like Condiv and posters like, say, shrike82. Condiv is pretty terrible at arguing things and is often very credulous towards believing stuff that happens to be convenient, but his general goals seem to be good and his heart appears to be in the right place (he kinda reminds me of the stuff I might have posted if I was in my early 20s in the current political climate). I don't feel that people like him are actually causing any harm (and if anything their energy might be beneficial), because anyone who is put off from leftism just because they saw a random person make a irrational internet post never would have been an ally to begin with. This is contrasted with someone like shrike82 (and I think also NFS and a couple others), who is clearly motivated more by antipathy towards Democrats/liberals than any real desire to help people. Those people make me more concerned, because I feel like they don't really have any deep ideological commitment to leftism and more just use it as an avenue by which to vent their anger at a certain type of person. I could see them easily being flipped to believing and supporting some nasty stuff if they felt it would "stick it to Hillary Clinton/Cory Booker/whatever" (and we kinda literally see this with the people who voted Trump).

*in the sense of thinking it's a real thing

Look, if we aren't on the same side then argument is inevitable and if we are on the same side then crappy posts should be called out in the spirit of goons everywhere. I'm here because I actually do have plenty of bones to pick with Party leadership. I've had plenty of arguments with the hillfolk as I guess they're now called. But guess what? People like me exist and will push back against being called centrist shills or whatever especially against those we perceive as not doing anything to oppose Trump. Your same reasoning could be used to ask why certain of the whiners here spend all their ire on Democrats with barely a word about the GOP horror show. But at the end of the day, people say what they say. IMO at some point trying to explain why someone on the internet does stuff is an elaborate exercise in fan fiction.

Sephyr
Aug 28, 2012

FlamingLiberal posted:

I think it's a good thing that Hillary is doubling down on and confirming our worst suspicions about her political positions.

That wing of the Democratic Party needs to die for good.

Eh. The thing is, we were going to get poo poo onto no matter what she did. If she had come out strong in favor of, say, voting rights, against gerrymandering or police violence, they were going to go "See! She's so nice and well-intentioned, and YOU kept her out of the White House, leftist!". Now that she's gone into not-my-fault rant mode, it incenses her more hardcore supporters into a further split and gives more fuel to the Jamie Kirchiks of the world.

I remember even making a post about it in the main thread a month or so before the election about how progressives were doomed (in the Democratic party) either way: If Hillary won, she would happily purge the party structure of anything (and anyone) resembling Bernie's politics and support. And if she lost, they would be the ones to carry the blame. But everyone was too busy hailing the inevitable coming of Dread Abuela.

yronic heroism
Oct 31, 2008

Kilroy posted:

(Note that I never actually threatened anyone directly, either.)

Actually you'll find I stopped short of committing an actual criminal act for the world to see while raging against my internet enemies... checkmate, centrists. :ironicat:

yronic heroism
Oct 31, 2008

Sephyr posted:

I remember even making a post about it in the main thread a month or so before the election about how progressives were doomed (in the Democratic party) either way: If Hillary won, she would happily purge the party structure of anything (and anyone) resembling Bernie's politics and support. And if she lost, they would be the ones to carry the blame. But everyone was too busy hailing the inevitable coming of Dread Abuela.

No one can purge the Democratic Party like that even if they wanted to.

I find the persecution complex in this thread amusing though. These dead comedy forums, with their huge failson contingent somehow still got taken over by abuela.

Kilroy
Oct 1, 2000
"See I just can't take leftists seriously because they're always talking about "eat the rich" and I'm not a cannibal." :colbert:

yronic heroism posted:

Your same reasoning could be used to ask why certain of the whiners here spend all their ire on Democrats with barely a word about the GOP horror show.
*looks at thread title* :thunk:

Maybe you're just too dumb to post good, yronic.

Condiv
May 7, 2008

Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod


Kilroy posted:

"See I just can't take leftists seriously because they're always talking about "eat the rich" and I'm not a cannibal." :colbert:

*looks at thread title* :thunk:

Maybe you're just too dumb to post good, yronic.

i mean, his title says as much

shrike82
Jun 11, 2005

LOL at Diamond Joe Biden preemptively coming out hard against a UBI
what a piece of poo poo

https://twitter.com/virgiltexas/status/909590685061394432

hangedman1984
Jul 25, 2012

shrike82 posted:

LOL at Diamond Joe Biden preemptively coming out hard against a UBI
what a piece of poo poo

https://twitter.com/virgiltexas/status/909590685061394432

OMG, its basic loving math. If you need income to survive, and all the jobs are automated away, then requiring a job(that doesn't exist) for income(and thus survival) is cruel and will lead to people dying in the streets.

call to action
Jun 10, 2016

by FactsAreUseless
If you're not willing to work with people who hate your enemies purely out of spite, give up now. This is America and you will have to acknowledge that group, on either side, if you want progress.

Also UBI is loving stupid and relies on this magical thinking that the people who control all the wealth will just keep us on welfare forever instead of coming to terms with the reality of class warfare like a job guarantee does.

Gynocentric Regime
Jun 9, 2010

by Cyrano4747

call to action posted:

If you're not willing to work with people who hate your enemies purely out of spite, give up now. This is America and you will have to acknowledge that group, on either side, if you want progress.

Also UBI is loving stupid and relies on this magical thinking that the people who control all the wealth will just keep us on welfare forever instead of coming to terms with the reality of class warfare like a job guarantee does.

No you don't? The HFC and Tea Party movement give nothing and win all the time.

call to action
Jun 10, 2016

by FactsAreUseless
"hmm I know, maybe if I cede all power and open my mouth like a baby bird, daddy Cuban will feed me and piss on me" lol

And that was my point. Spiteful people are useful allies on the left. We can work with people who hate Hillary more than they love Bernie.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Condiv
May 7, 2008

Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod


new thread!

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3834630

  • Locked thread