On the loss of civil discourse.

[PredFan]

Yeasterday someone started a thread in which they lamented the absense of civil discourse. While I remember feeling the same way as that person does I no longer do.

I came here from Hannity.com, before that I argued politics on a forum that my local newspaper ran on their website. Prior to that it was on Yahoo.com. Even before that, back in the dark ages of the internet, I argued politics on what was called "Newsgroups".

Some of them were moderated, some weren't. Many attempted to promote serious discussion and civil discourse and some were able to do that.

The point of this is that it's been my experience that even whn you do have a civil discussion, nothing changes, and no one on either side is converted.

So then I ask, what is the point of searching for a civil discussion? If you are doing it for the mental exercise or the intellectual stimulation, well, even if you are wallowing around at the bottom of the civility barrel, calling people names etc., mostly you still want to beat your opponent. And to do that often times you need to use your head. You need to find ways to pwn the guy so that when you call him an idiot, it has some bite to it.

If your point is to convert your opponent to your way of thinking well, while that is a more noble cause than defeating him, it just isn't going to happen. Who knows why we are so rigidly divided? We can see that clearly, outside of this message board in real life. I see it in the news, on the radio, on FaceBook....it's everywhere. It's rare for anyone to change their opinion. Even when you show someone proof of what you say in black and whte in one thread, they will come back in another thread or at another time, and say the exact same thing that you proved wrong last time.

It's no secret that I have used words like "stupid", "retard", "moron", have made jokes, been sarcastic, and waxed hyperbolic many times. But I come here for the mental exercise, the cure for boredom, and the venting of frustrations at the current state of government and politics. I also have learned things from many of these people. I have no delusions that I will change any of the minds of my political opponents.

If you dislike the nastiness that often occurs, then you do have a problem because aside from this one forum topic where that is forbidden, you really have no place to go. But really, why not join in anyway? You'll have as much success in accomplishing something in any thread here as you would in another site that is more restrictive. That is to say....none at all.

 

[Katzndogz]

When liberals are backed into a corner they launch into a personal attack in order to force the discussion from the way they are losing it, to nothing but petty insults.

In all other ways, civil discourse has been abandoned in favor of coarseness. As a people we are abandoning civility in favor of outright cruelty. The veneer of civilization is being peeled away layer by layer.

 

[Pogo]

When liberals are backed into a corner they launch into a personal attack in order to force the discussion from the way they are losing it, to nothing but petty insults.

In all other ways, civil discourse has been abandoned in favor of coarseness. As a people we are abandoning civility in favor of outright cruelty. The veneer of civilization is being peeled away layer by layer.

Well it only took until the first post for someone to demonstrate exactly what you're talking about. Took her a grand total of two words. ^^

The basis of this morass may be (I would say is) this starting point of the slavish insistence on painting everything into a good-evil us-them dichotomy. As long as a poster insists on framing it that way, the die is cast and debate is lost.

Where that slavish dichotomy-speak comes from is a worthy question.

 

[Jackson]

Perhaps it just may be that few posters are honest or objective enough to give in on points of contention when warranted.

 

[PredFan]

Perhaps it just may be that few posters are honest or objective enough to give in on points of contention when warranted.

But I've been on boards that regulated against personal attacks and people who weren't honest or objective were shunned.

Still, nothing was ever accomplished. Granted, that might have been because a site where one could only discuss civilly wasn't very popular, but I believe that people don't come to these sites to get the "whole" story. They come to gather with like-minded people and gang up on the opposition. I might be guilty of that myself from time to time.

 

[PredFan]

Where that slavish dichotomy-speak comes from is a worthy question.

I've thought about this question for quite some time and had the discussion on other sites as well. IMO, it either has something to do with sports, or our attitude towards sports comes from the same "disease" for lack of a better word.

The hyperpartisanship often reminds me of the way we are rabid fans of sports teams. The other team "sucks", our team is number 1, despite the fact that very often, neither is true. But rabid fans don't let that silly little bit of reality get in the way.

That said, I'm long past the point of caring about the lack of civil discourse on internet discussion forums. It's not like we'd ever be consulted by the powers that be if we all sat down and actually came to a bi-partisan solution to anything. I say, jump in and have fun.

 

[Pogo]

Where that slavish dichotomy-speak comes from is a worthy question.

I've thought about this question for quite some time and had the discussion on other sites as well. IMO, it either has something to do with sports, or our attitude towards sports comes from the same "disease" for lack of a better word.

The hyperpartisanship often reminds me of the way we are rabid fans of sports teams. The other team "sucks", our team is number 1, despite the fact that very often, neither is true. But rabid fans don't let that silly little bit of reality get in the way.

That said, I'm long past the point of caring about the lack of civil discourse on internet discussion forums. It's not like we'd ever be consulted by the powers that be if we all sat down and actually came to a bi-partisan solution to anything. I say, jump in and have fun.

The parallel to sports is prolly appropriate; it's some of the same Kool Aid. When our pitcher's out there that last pitch was a strike; when it's theirs, the same pitch is a ball. But sports are just for fun and if their team beats ours we may not like it, but we stop short of concluding that they're the face of evil determined to destroy the world. Doesn't stop us in politics though.

There's something in the underlying culture. Perhaps a religion that dichotomizes good and evil; perhaps the plethora of bloggers and bloviators that deliberately frame it that way in search of ratings; perhaps both. I think the latter group use the sports mentality, rather than an intelligent debate approach, to make their case, and it's downhill from there.

 

[PredFan]

Where that slavish dichotomy-speak comes from is a worthy question.

I've thought about this question for quite some time and had the discussion on other sites as well. IMO, it either has something to do with sports, or our attitude towards sports comes from the same "disease" for lack of a better word.

The hyperpartisanship often reminds me of the way we are rabid fans of sports teams. The other team "sucks", our team is number 1, despite the fact that very often, neither is true. But rabid fans don't let that silly little bit of reality get in the way.

That said, I'm long past the point of caring about the lack of civil discourse on internet discussion forums. It's not like we'd ever be consulted by the powers that be if we all sat down and actually came to a bi-partisan solution to anything. I say, jump in and have fun.

The parallel to sports is prolly appropriate; it's some of the same Kool Aid. When our pitcher's out there that last pitch was a strike; when it's theirs, the same pitch is a ball. But sports are just for fun and if their team beats ours we may not like it, but we stop short of concluding that they're the face of evil determined to destroy the world. Doesn't stop us in politics though.

Now I have to disagree with you here. I have personally experienced many times, the projection of a athlete or a coach or a school/city/team as the face of evil. I have seen people so wrapped up in the ultra fandom that each defeat is crushing and each victory is a personal achievement.

There's something in the underlying culture. Perhaps a religion that dichotomizes good and evil; perhaps the plethora of bloggers and bloviators that deliberately frame it that way in search of ratings; perhaps both. I think the latter group use the sports mentality, rather than an intelligent debate approach, to make their case, and it's downhill from there.

So you believe that the situation in sports "ultra fandom" as I call it, and the situation of ultra partisanship are symptoms of something else? I tend to agree. Is it our nature to be so competitive, or is it in our culture? :think:

 

[Pogo]

I've thought about this question for quite some time and had the discussion on other sites as well. IMO, it either has something to do with sports, or our attitude towards sports comes from the same "disease" for lack of a better word.

The hyperpartisanship often reminds me of the way we are rabid fans of sports teams. The other team "sucks", our team is number 1, despite the fact that very often, neither is true. But rabid fans don't let that silly little bit of reality get in the way.

That said, I'm long past the point of caring about the lack of civil discourse on internet discussion forums. It's not like we'd ever be consulted by the powers that be if we all sat down and actually came to a bi-partisan solution to anything. I say, jump in and have fun.

The parallel to sports is prolly appropriate; it's some of the same Kool Aid. When our pitcher's out there that last pitch was a strike; when it's theirs, the same pitch is a ball. But sports are just for fun and if their team beats ours we may not like it, but we stop short of concluding that they're the face of evil determined to destroy the world. Doesn't stop us in politics though.

Now I have to disagree with you here. I have personally experienced many times, the projection of a athlete or a coach or a school/city/team as the face of evil. I have seen people so wrapped up in the ultra fandom that each defeat is crushing and each victory is a personal achievement.

Well-- yes and no. I'll be the first to claim the New York Wankees or the Dullass Cowgirls should be just shot into space and blown up for the good of mankind. But if pressed I would have to admit I don't mean that literally. Who would my teams then beat up on or use as a demon? It's a codependent relationship.

In contrast I sense the political wags here do mean it in the literal eliminationist way. At least they would have the reader believe that.

 

[oldfart]

I've thought about this question for quite some time and had the discussion on other sites as well. IMO, it either has something to do with sports, or our attitude towards sports comes from the same "disease" for lack of a better word.

While I agree to what you say about most political discussion sites and especially this one, I also post on a a few sites that are mainly frequented by various types of nerds. There is political diversity and civility, but the conversation is often heavily weighted to one side (a reflection of the reality that in some economic discussions one side has very little theory or evidence to recommend it, but is paid well to defend it!).

The definition of "winning" is different there. Scoring good points in a losing cause and having interesting insights counts as a win. Stupid comments are always a negative, even among people who agree with you. The sites basically survive because most political types don't know they are there, and when they run across them, find the discussion just so much gobbledy-gook.

The hyperpartisanship often reminds me of the way we are rabid fans of sports teams. The other team "sucks", our team is number 1, despite the fact that very often, neither is true. But rabid fans don't let that silly little bit of reality get in the way.

A corollary to the above is that a gracious concession in the face of an unsupportable condition is treated like a punt inside the one-yard line.

That said, I'm long past the point of caring about the lack of civil discourse on internet discussion forums. It's not like we'd ever be consulted by the powers that be if we all sat down and actually came to a bi-partisan solution to anything. I say, jump in and have fun.

Personally, I am on this board because it is still fun to me and there are a few posters who understand the real arguments. As near as I can tell, most of those are more polite than I am, and I play by a modified set of rules based on the other boards. The biggest one is "No first strike". As long as a poster plays nice, I try to be collegial.

I enjoy a good rant, even if I don't agree with it. Good writing is a rare joy, not often encountered on the internet. If you are going to jump the shark, load up on real literary references, mix your metaphors badly, and consult your thesaurus!

Jamie

 

[PredFan]

The parallel to sports is prolly appropriate; it's some of the same Kool Aid. When our pitcher's out there that last pitch was a strike; when it's theirs, the same pitch is a ball. But sports are just for fun and if their team beats ours we may not like it, but we stop short of concluding that they're the face of evil determined to destroy the world. Doesn't stop us in politics though.

Now I have to disagree with you here. I have personally experienced many times, the projection of a athlete or a coach or a school/city/team as the face of evil. I have seen people so wrapped up in the ultra fandom that each defeat is crushing and each victory is a personal achievement.

Well-- yes and no. I'll be the first to claim the New York Wankees or the Dullass Cowgirls should be just shot into space and blown up for the good of mankind. But if pressed I would have to admit I don't mean that literally. Who would my teams then beat up on or use as a demon? It's a codependent relationship.

In contrast I sense the political wags here do mean it in the literal eliminationist way. At least they would have the reader believe that.

Hah! YOU should meet some of the Gator and Seminole fans here.

 

[PredFan]

Wait! Have you guys just tricked me onto having a civil discussion, and thus disproving a good portion of my OP?!?!

Sneaky.

 

[noose4]

When liberals are backed into a corner they launch into a personal attack in order to force the discussion from the way they are losing it, to nothing but petty insults.

In all other ways, civil discourse has been abandoned in favor of coarseness. As a people we are abandoning civility in favor of outright cruelty. The veneer of civilization is being peeled away layer by layer.

Funny but I have the same opinion regarding conservatives.