When I first came to Reader Rant the balance of participants was decidedly mixed, but leaning right. Over the years, most of those participants have left, or could not abide civility strictures. On other fora, there is little overlap of political/social views, and little tolerance of opposite views, so that is one of the things I treasured here. We had lively, but civil, debates.
Ás political divisions in Congress have become more disparate, it seems political views in public have too. That seems true here as well. Not only do I have fewer friends here with contrary views, I have fewer in the real world as well. I have always enjoyed the mix, and seriously miss the give and take. I seek out those with different views, but they are becoming harder to find. We are becoming enclaved.
Are o there finding this true in their personal lives as well? Do you miss the banter? Are we more afraid to express views? Can we counter this trend?
I am on a few(very few) sites besides this one, that have civl discussions amongst many political leanings. But there are more and more where discussion becomes more of taunting and name calling. The anonymity of the internet and not having to face other participants face to face is a large contributor to this, even though it can also bring people from different places together. It is very sad.
I'm of the opinion that Republicans have gone off the deep end. They are no longer able to converse civilly on the issues of the day and no longer base their arguments on evidence and fact. They would of couse say the same thing of Liberals but the Democratic party has consistently moved to the right in self defense while the Republicans have raced madly in that direction taking evermore radical and fanatic stances on each and every issue. I miss the banter we were once able to have but also I am fully aware that we will not ever be able to speak civilly again. There is simply no common ground anymore.
For the most part the moderate conservatives had their heads handed to them by their own party over a decade ago. That led to a redefinition and reinvention of conservatism, which has become much more a cult of personality and a fundamentalist faction used as a bludgeon by large and wealthy corporate concerns.
With that achieved it then became a simple matter of using the old familiar weapon, fear, to propagate hostility toward outsiders, and civil discussion soon started to resemble the Orwellian Two Minutes Hate.
Now as "men without a party", the lure of comfortable suburban anarchy in the form of libertarianism loomed large, and the newly coined "independents" found it comfortable to smoke their bongs and chime in about tiny government. After all, Ron Paul thought weed was okay and Ayn Rand said it's hip to be selfish and greedy.
Where did all the reasonable conservatives go? It's more a question of "who sent them packing" and what do these new true believers really represent? That question is easily answered because the new folks aren't shy about sharing. And all those "satire" news sites on the internet are scrambling to stay ahead as reality surpasses sarcasm at neck breaking speed.
RIck's buddies from gretawire, Daddyo and Jess Fuchinwicha, share Greger's assessment of Righties, with the addition that they are angry and militant to boot. Perhaps not far from ISIS in general attitude. Jess and Daddyo had the shocking revelation that such people are the makings of another Civil War. Trying to interact with them, civilly or rudely in-kind, actually seems to feed them, justifying them to themselves. My friend morning cigar saw the same thing on Where Liberty Dwells.
I had forgotten, specifically, about the Two Minutes Hate. When I re-read that, however, I had a sudden sensation of watching FOX. Ailes is the master of it. I think he used Nineteen Eight-Four as his mantra, and modeled FOX on the Ministry of Truth.
That's the theory I'm going with....mad beyond redemption. Locked into extremist propaganda winding out of control. Conservatives are anything but conservative these days, or perhaps the same sort of conservatism that rules ISIS.
We should keep in mind that there are lots of people who are getting paid to comment on the public fora. Their comments may have little connection with their actual beliefs. They just need to follow the "script" to get a paycheck.
We should keep in mind that there are lots of people who are getting paid to comment on the public fora. Their comments may have little connection with their actual beliefs. They just need to follow the "script" to get a paycheck.
That's an urban myth. Although at Greta's I tell that I am paid blogger making $18.50/hr and George Soros is my boss.
I don't want to drive off the "middle righter" of the old school, though. There are (or were) people capable of reasoned argument who happen to be conservative in their approach. I just don't see as much evidence of it lately. We've had them here. That's what I miss.
That would be the Eisenhower conservatives? Moderate Republicans, or RINO's are held in such contempt by todays "conservatives" that mostly they daren't show their faces.
13.5% assumes that Republicans represent 50% the voters, which they do not. I read something lately (no citation - as a gretawire moron would say, "I ain't doing your homework for you!!) that I remember as Rs being maybe 30%. That means righty Rs might make 7.5% of all voters.
Speaking of them dying off, watch this video - I think I might be a Millenial!
That would be the Eisenhowers of old, the Rockerfellers, those that could see forests and trees; who understood that Democrats weren't out destroy the country, but are patriots who love their country and fellow citizens, and that Social Security and infrastructure spending weren't bad things, but necessary expenditures in a free and effective democracy; those that believed that cooperation was how things were done and that compromises on details were not failures. The ACA was a compromise, a HUGE, compromise by the Democrats, yet the GOP derides it in terms that defy reality, or any sense of proportion. About 10% of the most rabid of the rabid are holding 90% of the country hostage. It has to stop. One way to end it is for there to be a coalition of the middle. No Labels is one such effort, although, frankly, they are too conservative for me. Doug tried to start a similar project. The Majority is far too silent. But, too many are too thin-skinned, too.
Scott Peters of San Diego began his congressional careet with No Labels, and is now runnin as a progressive. His voting record tends to be center to center right. I think he is an opportunist.
The reason that this site is civil discourse is because it has realistic rules of conduct that are moderated fairly, honestly, and maturely. It has nothing to do with the political leanings of this site.
The reason that this site is civil discourse is because it has realistic rules of conduct that are moderated fairly, honestly, and maturely. It has nothing to do with the political leanings of this site.
The reason that this site is has civil discourse is because it has realistic rules of conduct that are moderated fairly, honestly, and maturely. It has nothing to do with the political leanings of this site.
When George Bush was in office, I was incensed much of the time, but I tried not to let that bleed into my interactions. I still have the capacity to be shocked by the level of personal invective that can be thrown about. It doesn't help when you have Supreme Court Justices who love ad hominem attacks and see it as sport. If the most tradition-bound institution engages in that kind of behavior, and Congress does as well, how is civil discourse ever possible? I happened to agree with the President's sentiment that "people of good intentions" inhabit both sides. I want to find more of them.
I was okay with George Bush up until the Iraq war. I have even since forgiven him for most of what happened during his presidency. Many don't understand this but I believe that without Richard Cheney controlling him and directing his every move things would have been much different. At the end Cheney wanted war with Iran, more profit of course for Halliburton, Bush refused to go along. The two never spoke much after that. I believe now that President Bush actually had good intentions, but you know what the road to Hell is paved with....
There is one bit of comfort that I take from the last dozen years or so, and that is that the conservative base continues to shrink. Maybe those friends will come back when they are not so conservative.
