11-20-2021, 02:25 PM
(11-20-2021, 08:05 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Usually when people say "the far left" I am one to jump in and counter that it is the centrist style ones being the asshats. This trial was very interesting for me, though. It should shock no one that I frequent several boards and subreddits devoted to left-leaning people who like to shoot things. We have to create out own places because of the hostility we face in the general firearms community. Anyway, I post in some where they wear the liberal label proudly (i.e. the more mainstream, centrist to center-left types) and I post in some places for, lets say, more radical lefties (lots of discussion of Marxism, revolution, and what not).
Now, usually, the liberal places are a lot less hardcore on the 2A rights than the lefty ones. Leftists have a tendency to go full on "repeal the NFA." Liberals, not so much. What I saw during this trial, though, was so many leftists throwing away their position on individual freedom to want Rittenhouse locked up. That was the prevailing position in these places. I don't know whether it was the majority opinion, others could have just been keeping quiet to not cause a ruckus, but that was what was at the forefront. Not the case for the liberals, where the overwhelming position from the start was that he should walk. It really highlighted to me why I don't tend to join these groups. So many of these leftists, who I agree with on many ideological things, were getting too tribal with their position on Rittenhouse.
Anyway, it was just a weird phenomenon I wanted to bring up.
Yeah, I'd generally agree with you, but as you say it rather fits in this instance. Tribalism is a natural instinct, but you really have to watch yourself to ensure it doesn't overwhelm your critical faculties. Some tried to turn this thread into a debate on self defense laws in general, and did so poorly I might add. It's certainly a topic worthy of discussion but for a trial happening in the here and now the focus should be the law as it exists, not as you personally would like it to be. But many people, of all stripes, will refuse to give any consideration to any view that challenges their preconceptions, in this case that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist agitator who provoked an encounter so he could kill people. The problem was there's not a shred of actual evidence that supports either position. Not only that, the actual hard evidence did noting but favor Rittenhouse. I can't think of a single thing that came up during the prosecutions case that I thought was damaging for Kyle and many, if not most, of their witnesses turned out to help the defense, in some cases tremendously so. But that will happen when the actual evidence favors one side so heavily.
As an aside, I once posted in the liberal gun owners subreddit. I asked, respectfully, and stated as such, how they could reconcile voting for people who want to take away a right they so clearly find important. I got negged into oblivion before being banned, not one honest attempt to square the circle. This phenomena is by no means confined to that subreddit, or the left, but it's a good example of the tribalism mentioned above.
