It’s always going to be dangerous to point out the hypocrisy of a powerful ideology, but doing so puts you in the position of the underdog, the spunky inquisitor who puts himself in harm’s way by displeasing the powerful force.
If you point out the warts of less-powerful ideologies, you not only risk displeasing them but make yourself vulnerable to being viewed as bigoted or a bully. Unless the group is one which greater society has labeled as “Leper! Outcast! Unclean!”, that will also tend to draw the disapproval of others, and without the benefits of underdogging.
The safest route, for your reputation though not your honor, is to attack a group that society wishes you to attack for conformity’s sake. No one wishes to speak well of such a group, no matter how limitedly, for fear of being associated with them, and everyone wishes to demonstrate to the rest that they loathe the despised ones.
That means, of course, that when you die you’ll go to the special Hell. The one reserved for rhetoricians, and people who didn’t like Firefly.
It might also be useful to point out hypocrisy and incoherence in a range of political points of view., instead just choosing one.
General question: LW has been poking at the question of whether we can discuss politics rationally for at least a couple of years now. Have we made any progress in our ability to do so?
It’s always going to be dangerous to point out the hypocrisy of a powerful ideology, but doing so puts you in the position of the underdog, the spunky inquisitor who puts himself in harm’s way by displeasing the powerful force.
If you point out the warts of less-powerful ideologies, you not only risk displeasing them but make yourself vulnerable to being viewed as bigoted or a bully. Unless the group is one which greater society has labeled as “Leper! Outcast! Unclean!”, that will also tend to draw the disapproval of others, and without the benefits of underdogging.
The safest route, for your reputation though not your honor, is to attack a group that society wishes you to attack for conformity’s sake. No one wishes to speak well of such a group, no matter how limitedly, for fear of being associated with them, and everyone wishes to demonstrate to the rest that they loathe the despised ones.
That means, of course, that when you die you’ll go to the special Hell. The one reserved for rhetoricians, and people who didn’t like Firefly.
It might also be useful to point out hypocrisy and incoherence in a range of political points of view., instead just choosing one.
General question: LW has been poking at the question of whether we can discuss politics rationally for at least a couple of years now. Have we made any progress in our ability to do so?
I haven’t seen any evidence we have.