- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 2496 Hour
- Reading permission
TheHermit Post time: 2014-9-16 11:18
I have always been suspicious of the arguments he has with JFenix... because IMHO they are two of ...
It is a lot like the way two major political parties divide up the issues among themselves so that the voter is left feeling confused or helpless in the USA, UK, Australia, Canada etc. - if you want to vote for someone you think is financially conservative (never mind that it is not really true), you will have to vote for someone who is openly racist, will not support women's right to abortion and against government involvement in helping keep medical costs low. If you vote for someone who claims to champion workers rights (never mind that it too is not really true) and a woman's right to choose, you will be led to believe you are voting for someone who will tax the businesses to death...Occasionally, both sides try and outdo each other on being tough on immigration and immigrants!
That way, you will always have the illusion of voting for a change and getting back to what you voted out, again for a change. Since a third viable alternative is always kept well out of reach, we will always get a mixed bag. There is no theoretical reason why one cannot have a party representing the best of what most people support.
This is the type of staged arguments or disagreements people on the same side put out. They will sometimes take personal potshots to lend more flavour or credibility. The key is to simply note their position on the most basic and important values and issues, and who they both really villify, while still appearing to disagree - The Arabs or muslims or other victims of colonisation. This is very common in western media - the have this imaginary line going from left to right and when an extreme right winger mildly disagrees with a right winger - it is presented as a choice between 'The 'Left' and 'The Right'.. No wonder, when someone questions this, the question is labelled 'extreme beyond the fringe' and promptly cut-off.
Have you noticed, often that many posters here really do not care if their reasoning was not convincing or if they 'lost' the rational argument? They will leave trail markers for others, characterising their opponents, as if summarizing the debate. What frustrates Seneca and others now, is that there are others who do the same to them!! And they already have a reputation! Suddenly, there is great whinging and whining...
The wise ones withdraw quickly and duck for cover till the storm passes. Seneca however likes ANY kind of attentions and revels in it!
Propaganda preys on the vulnerable, ill-informed, emotional and inattentive, but also there needs to be some perspective. Giving too much attention to those plainly engaging in trolling, is not good either.