Monday, 3 December 2007

Unwillingness to Agree to Disagree

This is such a non-issue. (*Warning, lots of reading and back-tracking to figure out what's it all about.)

Rightish Blogger Raphael Alexander is aghast at the treatment of US troops by the republican administration. Left-wing bloggers agree with this assessment. But he dares assert that "there haven't been many bloggers who have reported on this".

Well, you'd think he'd stated the earth was flat, judging by the pile-on from the left. OK, he was wrong, and has since retracted the statement. But that wasn't good enough....

This is one aspect of blogging (or opinion sharing) that I loathe. The complete willingness to abandon civility to make ones point and to demean the other side. CC, Red Tory, and Dave all pile on with a vindictiveness that shames me as a "left-ist". (*Note, update in comments)

Fine, he made a mistake, and he ignored the plethora of posts on this topic by liberal bloggers. He was even defensive (understandably) at first. But he stayed calm and rational and defended himself civilly throughout. So how does hounding him and calling him names solve anything?

Q) Will it make him more willing to accommodate views from the "left"?
A) No. If anything, it will make him less likely to read opposing viewpoints to his own.

Q) Will it make him less likely to vote conservative?
A) No. He's more likely to toe the party line than ever before.

Q) Will it make him hate all liberals and broadly paint us all with the same brush, as what happened to him and his fellow "Blogging Tories?"
A) Undoubtedly.

Q) Did it make the liberal bloggers involved look foolish and childish?
A) Absolutely. Made them look worse then the subject of their attacks.

Way to go guys, you've just made another enemy. Isn't "Give peace a chance?" supposed to be the mantra of the civilized world?

5 comments:

Dave said...

I think if you look closely you'll see that I made one comment to Raphael after my post. One. In any comment thread anywhere. In that comment I pointed out exactly what precipitated my original post. Nothing more or less.

My other comments were directed to Junker who came barging in with heaps of nothing but pro-Harper garbage and his usual "kill 'em all" mentality.

I have no reason to be civil with Junker. He's full of himself and very poorly informed.

As for the reason for the original post, while I am not possessed to justify it, it came with good reason and most of the right-wingers out there know what it is.

Catelli said...

Dave:

Fair enough. If I mis characterized you, I sincerely apologize. I will leave my post as stand, so my readers (few as they are) can judge for themselves. If you wish me to remove the link to your page, just request it, and I will do so.

My mistake was in not taking notes while compiling my link list. As such, I concede I may have been too hasty in my judgment of your post.

Dave said...

Not at all. Leave everything as is. I appreciate that you took a stand and the comments can correct any errors if they in fact exist.

Hey, I'm far from perfect and at the very least your very good post keeps me in place.

I will be asking you a few questions from your previous post however. I have some questions and, after having discovered you, find that you may have some answers.

I run XP and need a new laptop. All come with Vista. Scary.

Catelli said...

Ask Away!

cdnclosetliberal (a) yahoo dot ca

James Bow said...

Yeah, Catelli, I think you called this one right. I was even going to post a lengthy rant about the short-sightedness of it all, but now all I have to do is point to you. Thanks for saying what was on my mind.