House Democrats wrote a letter to U.S. President Joe Biden urging them to halt the the transfer of weapons until a full investigation into the airstrike was completed.
So take a look at something like this – this person is saying Biden supports genocide and that’s bad, and only that, and they’re getting almost unanimous upvotes and only one comment, which is agreement.
In contrast, your comments which say Biden supports genocide and also saying some additional statements in addition, don’t get the same reception.
What do you think is the difference? Why did people like this person’s post so much, if being against genocide in your world is this wildly unpopular maverick stance to take within Lemmy politics?
What additional statements did I lead with there? Oh yeah, I must be making shit up because you don’t want to accept that saying that Biden should not support genocide - by itself without anything additional - brings out hostility right here on lemmy.
Interesting. What do you think causes the difference in reception between your simple statement and @fiend_unpleasant@lemmy.world’s? I have my theory but I’m curious what you think.
I wonder what the reply to that user said before it was removed.
I think centrists’ opinion regarding Netanyahu’s genocide has shifted since the deliberate targeting of aid trucks from World Central Kitchen. Tens of thousands of Gazans are dead, and this isn’t the first aid convoy Israel has destroyed during this genocide, but it’s the first one operated by a celebrity chef.
fiend_unpleasant: I mean materially supporting genocide is pretty fucking bad
abcdqfr: It’s almost like this two party system was always a bad idea advised against from the start by George Washington at the inception of this removed.
fiend_unpleasant: OMG 10000 times this. I have spent so many nights screaming into the dark over this point
I think centrists’ opinion regarding Netanyahu’s genocide has shifted
So… now they don’t support genocide anymore, now that the food trucks were destroyed?
What’s the reason then why they were so hostile to your comment in this thread (which came after the food trucks were destroyed) in a way they weren’t hostile to fiend_unpleasant’s?
So… now they don’t support genocide anymore, now that the food trucks were destroyed?
No, they still support genocide. They’re just questioning that support now that the dead include the celebrity-adjacent.
What’s the reason then why they were so hostile to your comment
Well, one of them was Cryophilia. Search his username in the modlog to see what he’s all about. I’m pretty sure you already know, though.
Another is you, and we’ve butted heads before.
I can only speculate about downvotes that were unaccompanied by comments. I already said I thought that they were personally offended. In any event, I was referring to a pattern of behavior I had noticed and that you’re pretending isn’t a thing.
I do understand what you’re claiming is happening; you don’t need to keep repeating it. I’m pointing out that it doesn’t make a lot of sense. When you’re not around throwing bad-faith arguments into the mix that people feel the need to disagree with, we’re all very coherently and sensibly on the anti genocide team. So like by way of direct example here’s me comparing the Biden state department to Nazi-era German businessmen doing business with the Nazis. 17 upvotes no downvotes for the anti genocide anti Biden-doing-bad-things view, from before the world kitchen killings. I could cite some other examples… but what’s the point.
I have no idea if your absolute repetitious insistence that we’re all maniacs with cartoonishly evil and wrong opinions is because you’re on the clock and it may not be plausible but it’s the best you can come up with, or that’s genuinely what you think, but it seems like leading you up to the point by trying to illustrate by example and ask questions to lead you to the point isn’t working.
Oh well. I tried. Best of luck with it; feel free to keep thinking whatever you like thinking.
I don’t buy your arguments. You interpret this as me not understanding them.
Your comment drips with condescension, gaslighting, and abuse. You call me a shill and an idiot.
We’re talking about genocide. Genocide is both evil and wrong. Support for genocide is both evil and wrong. There is no moral ambiguity here. Your patronizing attempt to abuse the Socratic Method to get me to accept the notion that I should treat centrists like they haven’t spent the past 6 months abusing people who don’t like Biden’s support for genocide has not worked because you’re trying to get me to accept something contrary to my lived experience and contrary to what that experience has taught me to be a fundamental truth: centrists do not have misgivings about supporting genocide, and are hostile to those that draw attention to this.
I don’t buy your arguments. You interpret this as me not understanding them.
My dude - The thing we are disagreeing about is what I believe. You don’t get to have a difference of opinion about what I believe and lecture me about what my viewpoint is when I’m telling you and directly showing you with evidence that it’s not what I believe.
I realize you’ve built this whole thing in your mind, apparently, where I and everyone else who’s downvoting you just loves the fuck out of genocide and you’re one of this rare minority who realizes that killing Palestinians is wrong, and we’re all just lying evil people that you have to take this heroic stand against. I don’t know what to tell you about it, honestly. But it’s not like we’re having a debate about what happened in 1832 in Prague – I’m telling you my view, and you’re angrily assigning me a new one instead, because the one you’re assigning me is easier for you to argue against. I don’t know, man, I don’t know any way to show you that that’s wrong other than try a few different ways to walk you up to the point. You can “not buy” it if you want, but it’s just gonna be a big waste of time for all concerned.
Your comment drips with condescension
Tru dat
, gaslighting
Absolutely not. You gaslit yourself into believing nonsense about your interlocutors in a way that will make it impossible for you to understand what they’re saying (or, for that matter, to make any progress in convincing them of your point of view, because you have no idea what they actually think other than what you imagined in your mind for them.)
, and abuse.
Not really
We’re talking about genocide.
Agree
Genocide is both evil and wrong.
Agree
Support for genocide is both evil and wrong.
Agree
There is no moral ambiguity here.
Agree
Your patronizing
Yeah probably
attempt to abuse the Socratic Method
Honestly, refusing to answer questions about your own claims because someone’s trying to “abuse the Socratic method” if they ask you questions isn’t a great way to expand your understanding, or to demonstrate to them or yourself that your position is solid and truthful to objective reality
I should treat centrists like they haven’t spent the past 6 months abusing people who don’t like Biden’s support for genocide has not worked because you’re trying to get me to accept something contrary to my lived experience
I’m not saying you didn’t live a certain experience inside your own brain. I’m saying that that experience and judgements you lived and formed didn’t correspond to what people actually said and what they believe.
It’s not gaslighting if I’m literally sending you quotes and messages demonstrating that the objective reality doesn’t match the picture you already formed in your mind.
experience has taught me to be a fundamental truth: centrists do not have misgivings about supporting genocide, and are hostile to those that draw attention to this.
Again: This is you telling me what “experience has taught you” inside your mind, and clinging to it in the face of objective reality being shown to you from outside.
You can assign me whatever views you want, and use them as a reason to discount whatever I say about whatever I’m talking about, if you want. You’re still dead wrong about what I believe, and saying “fundamental truth” as a reason to keep assigning me these beliefs is an exercise in faith-based self deception which is leading you to be dead wrong about this.
Yes I am condescending about it. Sorry. I exhausted my patience to try to be polite about it after a while.
Okay let’s try a little different approach
So take a look at something like this – this person is saying Biden supports genocide and that’s bad, and only that, and they’re getting almost unanimous upvotes and only one comment, which is agreement.
In contrast, your comments which say Biden supports genocide and also saying some additional statements in addition, don’t get the same reception.
What do you think is the difference? Why did people like this person’s post so much, if being against genocide in your world is this wildly unpopular maverick stance to take within Lemmy politics?
(Edit: Made more polite)
https://lemmy.world/comment/8972976
What additional statements did I lead with there? Oh yeah, I must be making shit up because you don’t want to accept that saying that Biden should not support genocide - by itself without anything additional - brings out hostility right here on lemmy.
Interesting. What do you think causes the difference in reception between your simple statement and @fiend_unpleasant@lemmy.world’s? I have my theory but I’m curious what you think.
I wonder what the reply to that user said before it was removed.
I think centrists’ opinion regarding Netanyahu’s genocide has shifted since the deliberate targeting of aid trucks from World Central Kitchen. Tens of thousands of Gazans are dead, and this isn’t the first aid convoy Israel has destroyed during this genocide, but it’s the first one operated by a celebrity chef.
The exchange was:
fiend_unpleasant: I mean materially supporting genocide is pretty fucking bad
abcdqfr: It’s almost like this two party system was always a bad idea advised against from the start by George Washington at the inception of this removed.
fiend_unpleasant: OMG 10000 times this. I have spent so many nights screaming into the dark over this point
So… now they don’t support genocide anymore, now that the food trucks were destroyed?
What’s the reason then why they were so hostile to your comment in this thread (which came after the food trucks were destroyed) in a way they weren’t hostile to fiend_unpleasant’s?
No, they still support genocide. They’re just questioning that support now that the dead include the celebrity-adjacent.
Well, one of them was Cryophilia. Search his username in the modlog to see what he’s all about. I’m pretty sure you already know, though.
Another is you, and we’ve butted heads before.
I can only speculate about downvotes that were unaccompanied by comments. I already said I thought that they were personally offended. In any event, I was referring to a pattern of behavior I had noticed and that you’re pretending isn’t a thing.
You’re not getting the point that I’m making.
I do understand what you’re claiming is happening; you don’t need to keep repeating it. I’m pointing out that it doesn’t make a lot of sense. When you’re not around throwing bad-faith arguments into the mix that people feel the need to disagree with, we’re all very coherently and sensibly on the anti genocide team. So like by way of direct example here’s me comparing the Biden state department to Nazi-era German businessmen doing business with the Nazis. 17 upvotes no downvotes for the anti genocide anti Biden-doing-bad-things view, from before the world kitchen killings. I could cite some other examples… but what’s the point.
I have no idea if your absolute repetitious insistence that we’re all maniacs with cartoonishly evil and wrong opinions is because you’re on the clock and it may not be plausible but it’s the best you can come up with, or that’s genuinely what you think, but it seems like leading you up to the point by trying to illustrate by example and ask questions to lead you to the point isn’t working.
Oh well. I tried. Best of luck with it; feel free to keep thinking whatever you like thinking.
I don’t buy your arguments. You interpret this as me not understanding them.
Your comment drips with condescension, gaslighting, and abuse. You call me a shill and an idiot.
We’re talking about genocide. Genocide is both evil and wrong. Support for genocide is both evil and wrong. There is no moral ambiguity here. Your patronizing attempt to abuse the Socratic Method to get me to accept the notion that I should treat centrists like they haven’t spent the past 6 months abusing people who don’t like Biden’s support for genocide has not worked because you’re trying to get me to accept something contrary to my lived experience and contrary to what that experience has taught me to be a fundamental truth: centrists do not have misgivings about supporting genocide, and are hostile to those that draw attention to this.
My dude - The thing we are disagreeing about is what I believe. You don’t get to have a difference of opinion about what I believe and lecture me about what my viewpoint is when I’m telling you and directly showing you with evidence that it’s not what I believe.
I realize you’ve built this whole thing in your mind, apparently, where I and everyone else who’s downvoting you just loves the fuck out of genocide and you’re one of this rare minority who realizes that killing Palestinians is wrong, and we’re all just lying evil people that you have to take this heroic stand against. I don’t know what to tell you about it, honestly. But it’s not like we’re having a debate about what happened in 1832 in Prague – I’m telling you my view, and you’re angrily assigning me a new one instead, because the one you’re assigning me is easier for you to argue against. I don’t know, man, I don’t know any way to show you that that’s wrong other than try a few different ways to walk you up to the point. You can “not buy” it if you want, but it’s just gonna be a big waste of time for all concerned.
Tru dat
Absolutely not. You gaslit yourself into believing nonsense about your interlocutors in a way that will make it impossible for you to understand what they’re saying (or, for that matter, to make any progress in convincing them of your point of view, because you have no idea what they actually think other than what you imagined in your mind for them.)
Not really
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Yeah probably
Honestly, refusing to answer questions about your own claims because someone’s trying to “abuse the Socratic method” if they ask you questions isn’t a great way to expand your understanding, or to demonstrate to them or yourself that your position is solid and truthful to objective reality
I’m not saying you didn’t live a certain experience inside your own brain. I’m saying that that experience and judgements you lived and formed didn’t correspond to what people actually said and what they believe.
It’s not gaslighting if I’m literally sending you quotes and messages demonstrating that the objective reality doesn’t match the picture you already formed in your mind.
Again: This is you telling me what “experience has taught you” inside your mind, and clinging to it in the face of objective reality being shown to you from outside.
You can assign me whatever views you want, and use them as a reason to discount whatever I say about whatever I’m talking about, if you want. You’re still dead wrong about what I believe, and saying “fundamental truth” as a reason to keep assigning me these beliefs is an exercise in faith-based self deception which is leading you to be dead wrong about this.
Yes I am condescending about it. Sorry. I exhausted my patience to try to be polite about it after a while.