clocker bob wrote:danmohr wrote: The main thing I find depressing about "debates" like this is that the internet is pretty much only appropriate for stereotypical, reductionist arguments and not so much for actually expressing subtle differences in personal morals, ethics or experience (which can be exhibited in somewhat less subtle differences in ideology).
I think if you looked a little harder you'd find more examples of nuanced positions in these debates, at least among the left. The problem is, the roster of conservatives infrequently stretches beyond matthew, and matthew won't stand and defend his illogical and history-deficient positions, instead choosing to abandon them when he's been checkmated, taking flight to new rote illogical positions ( as most trolls, witting or unwitting, tend to do ).
Whenever I read a comment from the audience ( and I guess you are part of that, since you're not offering your position on the two debates ongoing, gun control and minimum wage ) that begins with 'debates like this ( and especially with "debates" in quotes, like you can barely bring yourself to call it that ), I know that I'm about to get a review of the debate that falls back on banal and threadbare complaints about the entire genre, with a subtext that boils down to "I'm too smart for your debate". Your blanket description of what you find- "stereotypical, reductionist arguments"- is the voice of someone who has decided that his positions will not get a fair hearing here, before he has found that out. So, rather than jump in the pool, you say that you don't like the looks of the water. What's funny is that people who take this position never seem able to turn away from the pool without lobbing in a patronizing sneer first.
I understand that these things (steve vs. matthew or whatever) are not necessarily fair fights as the overwhelming majority of folks on this board would characterize themselves as "liberal" or "very liberal". To be honest, I would not characterize myself this way though I agree with a number of "liberal" viewpoints. I would also not characterize myself as "conservative" though I agree with a number of "conservative" viewpoints. I am not being patronizing when I say that I find these threads depressing - I am being honest. I would like to particpate in some of these debates (and endless hours are spent with my friends discussing these issues) but the web forum environment is not exactly awesome for this application. If I say "I like the idea of a flattened tax system (one bracket) because it seems intrinsically, mathematically proportionate" I will be told "fuck you, fuck you hard - you're only saying that because you value your plasma TV over the well-being of the poor". Then, someone will jump in to point me to an article in The Nation that discusses how a flat tax system is unfair because...well, I can't even think of what that reason would be but I have faith that one of you will point me to such an article. I don't think my positions won't get a fair hearing - I know they won't at least not on any issue that goes against the prevailing wisdom of the board. I don't really lose sleep over this - I don't have a lot tied up in the internet being the deciding forum for the pressing issues of our day. Only for which bands rock, which rot and which rule.
Dan
PS - To take your bait, I don't understand a lot of the fascination or passion around people's desire to own guns (and in great numbers) but I don't think gun control is realistic nor effective. I think minimum wage should probably be around $9-$10 an hour. I think there needs to be a minimum amount of health coverage for everyone. I think that the combination of illegal immigration, a general outsourcing of manufacturing and the continuing devolution of our citizens into service economy drones will, left unchecked, eventually completely erode our position as the dominant nation on the planet leaving the spot open to the next country who wants to make the same mistakes we did. So, fuck me - fuck me hard.
