Ultraconservatives can't take what they dish out

Post Reply New Topic

I cam to PPR with a civil, reasonable attitude towards debating. I'd substantiate any generalization I made and focus on the institutional logic of political events rather then the personal actors. Trying this as I did, I noticed so much rightwing garbage that was spouted without proper refutation. I went about the process of debunking such nonsense and got accused of "right-baiting". In the meantime, a fair share of outright racists or people who like to deny started shouted over me on this forum. Tha amount of vile racism and conspiracy nonsense hit a new low. It seemed that the right was under attack all the time - a perpetual persecution complex. Furthermore, they went on the offensive against any reasonable poster.

Yet the ultra-right cannot take what it dishes out. As I went on the offensive I noticed the hysterical fits the ultraconservatives - who were parnaoid of political correctness "bringing them down" all the time - went into. It seems that ultraconservatives like a bombastic debate only when THEY GET TO BE BOMBASTIC.

Well, I for one am not going into the rhetorical "cage match" known as PPR with one fist tied behind my back. Freedom to speek bombastically goes both ways, you know.

Is that why liberals quietly had Hanoteaux banned? Were the liberals afraid to debate him?

I dish it and take it
Hanoteaux dished it and took it
Dox47 dishes it and takes it
Iamnotaparakeet dishes it and takes it

Those are just the people I can think of off the top of my head. Conservatives are game for ant debate the liberals are up to, so quit being so self-righteous.

well tbf MP, you haven't always been civil with me. You apologized for that and I tried to explain the context of the statements you took issue with me so I think we've come to a little of an understanding, maybe you still feel differently.

I haven't really kept up with all the "debates" going around here lately but I can see a lot of people are getting pretty mad at each other. I think in the end, people just need to realize we're just discussing politics, philosophy, and religion on internet Asperger's forum not some serious intellectual pursuit. No use getting worked up over it. If you disagree with someone and actually want to have your view heard just remember the saying you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. That's right, kill em with kindness because if you attack someone personally, they're going to listen to what you have to say.

Last edited by Jacoby on 17 Oct 2010, 11:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Has Hanotaux actually been banned? I wouldn't be surprised, since he was breaking pretty explicit forum rules, but still, racists have not historically been booted out of PPR. I don't think anyone was "afraid" to debate him, but after a brief time we all realized the futility of trying to have an adult conversation with a crazy person.


Yeah, I actually will only agree to your description for Dox47, whose political views are idiosyncratic enough that I wouldn't lump him in with "conservatives" anyways. Yourself, keet, and Hanotaux have all been very quick in crying foul at the slightest transgression. I would say the three of you do (roughly) fit MP's criticisms in that you are happy to dish it out, but can't take it yourselves.

Yeah, I actually will only agree to your description for Dox47, whose political views are idiosyncratic enough that I wouldn't lump him in with "conservatives" anyways. Yourself, keet, and Hanotaux have all been very quick in crying foul at the slightest transgression. I would say the three of you do (roughly) fit MP's criticisms in that you are happy to dish it out, but can't take it yourselves.[/quote]
Dox47 is a conservative libertarian rather than an ultraconservative. As for crying foul, that's something the liberals go and do to the moderators. I don't go to the moderators for anything on PPR, Hanoteaux sure didn't go to the moderators for anything, I'm not sure about parakeet, and Dox47 only went to the moderator tro try and keep Hanoteaux from getting banned and to clarify the ground rules for debate in the PPR. Basically, Dox47 can hold his own and went to the mods to keep the debate free rather than to go to them crying "racist" like several liberals have done because they couldn't hold their own in a debate.

How do you know it was a "liberal" who went to the moderators?

Because the conservatives haven't been getting butthurt over heated arguments. Sadly, the same cannot be said for the liberals.

I've never gone to the mods about anything, including Hanotaux. And I wasn't referring exclusively to crying to the mods; right-wingers here and elsewhere have a rather elaborate persecution complex.

And again about holding one's own in a debate: the only people I have referred to as racists were actually blatantly racist, and you cannot deny that fact. It's not a matter of being unable to debate them, it's a matter of recognizing the futility of arguing with a committed racist. Any conceivable argument one could employ will just prompt more hateful screeds from them.

Just one more time to dispel this laughable notion you seem to have: "racist" is not a generic pejorative that liberals constantly apply to their conservative opponents. I can (and do) debate and disagree with conservatives without accusing them of racism. Charges of racism only come up when someone actually starts making racist comments, eg "arboreal africans" or referring to other races as "primordial" or "unevolved."

What you mean is "the conservatives are not offended by racist remarks, largely because a sizable subset of the conservatives on WP sympathize with the racist views being expressed."

So the whole thing is a game to you? In your mind you "win" a debate by offending as many people as possible and wearing your insensitivity like a badge of honor?

Conservatives don't debate, they bellow and throw hissy fits if no one listens to their insane pedantic psychobabble, unfortunately most conservatives in PPR are just to fracking stupid to know when to quit. Oh I highly doubt any liberal or true conservative was afraid of debating some tool like your banned friend, most knew him for what he was, a raciest lunatic, they just gave him enough rope and the rest was inevitable.

This kind of broad generalization is kosher why? I'm not working some sort of persecution angle here or anything, I'm just curious.



The part in bold should be engraved on the doors of PPR as the official response to unhinged posters in general, though sometimes I also like to hand them a shovel, for digging their own grave you know.

I actually don't think Hanotaux was unhinged, I didn't agree with him and thought many of his beliefs were unfortunate if not outright awful, but I could see some intelligence in there underneath all the swagger. When I encounter someone like him, I think of police officers and profiling; they (mostly) didn't take the job in order to hassle minorities, but the environment they work in forms a prism that distorts their view of the world until they themselves are warped in ways that would horrify their young idealistic self taking the job. Hanotaux was military, I've never been in myself and so can't comment on what goes on in there, but I've known an awful lot of vets that don't much care for minorities and so suspect a similar dynamic might be occurring there.

Whatever though, he was still an Aspie, so I at least tried to see past his views. I'm sure I'll get slammed next weekend for not condemning him harshly enough, or trying to engage with him rather than running him off; just the price I pay I guess.

Whats intelligence got to do with it? I cant think of anyone here at PPR that is less than above average in intelligence. Its behavior that counts. Human decency.

Dox, Browning, and Keet are all productive members of the forum. I also enjoy the presence of leejosepho and AngelRho. On many things I disagree with these people, but they seem to be good hearted.

But hanotaux - if hes indeed banned - is a different beast altogether. He was pretty blatant about stirring up trouble and enjoying the fruits of it. We all like a good argument - or we wouldnt be here - but he pretty much indicated that he was contrary not out of passion, but from a desire for attention, strife and ego inflation.

Didn't you just get done telling us that you never called anyone racist unless they blatantly were one? Why are you now implying that conservatives, by virtue of being conservative, are likely racist, or at least have sympathy with racists?

I'm getting really sick of this tendency among liberals here to blame conservatives in general for 'sympathizing' with racists.

If you want to judge me, do it based on what *I* say, not whether or not you happen to think I was vocal enough in opposition to a racist.

Which is why there should be a term limit on how long cops can serve in certain areas or on the street at all. Or maybe simply preventative measures to try and protect against this effect because it only serves to hurt the larger community in the end.

@ bolded: Interesting. A lot of the ex military personnel I know tend towards the right wing, displaying a great deal of dubious neo-nazi rhetoric and joining neo-nazi organisations, voting for the right-wing parties and delighting in off-colour racist jokes. What is it about travelling to different foreign climes, engaging with the local populace, shooting at and being shot at by them that polarizes their views so drastically?