America First=Seccession

[Dill]

(02-21-2023, 12:57 PM)hollodero Wrote: As I state frequently - there are several issues where I would say one side behaves worse then the other, and there are other aspects where I feel it's more equal. When it comes to communicating badly with each other, there's not that much difference imho. Behaving deliberately destructive in any given conversation is one of those things that indeed both sides do. In different ways, sure, not necessarily on an equally bad level, but close enough for me.

I don't necessarily mean you personally.

Hollo, your criticism of U.S. politicians has, in theory, been aimed at "both sides," but in practice has come down most heavily (and effectively!) on Trump and some Trumpists. That is not because of "bias" or "hate," but because Trump/Trumpists exhibit qualitatively and quantitatively worse behavior.  In this case, you aren't assuming the bad behavior MUST somehow be distributed equally. You are just describing what is, and Hillary whatabouts cannot suck you into false equivalence. No real distance between us there.

But when we are focused on the level of rhetoric, I wonder if you are asserting an (partial?) equivalence that also isn't there. You don't seem so ready with examples as you are with Trump's bad behavior.  I'm willing to grant that some Dem leaders and their supporters do stupid things, like a certain comedian photographing herself with Trump's severed head or college students "canceling" some celebrity or accusing you of "racism" if you ask someone to define "white privilege." 

I'm thinking maybe our difference here has to do with how we define and source "deliberately destructive" communication behavior and evaluate its effects. Gingrich's creation of a memo explaining how to always refer to Dems with degrading and villifying adjectives, regardless of the issue, and the viral spread of such behavior throughout the GOP ranks over the next decade. What is "close enough" to that on the Dem side? The Dem equivalent of Trump calling Hillary a "nasty woman" during a presidential debate?  Some Dems see the success of such tactics and try to emulate them. Doesn't work for Dem voters though, but the result is some matter for asserted "equivalence" then, as people compare both sides. 

Also, remember my argument is that our parties and media outlets, when divided "left" and "right," are not simply mirror images in terms of argument style and behavior. They are asymmetical, operating with different standards of civility and rationality, a different vision of republican (small r) government, and so different communication goals. Disinformation simply cannot circulate unchecked in the "liberal" media the way it can in the Fox/Newmax/OANN environment. Though Dems may indeed attempt disinformation, there are far more checks on them than on Repubs. That's also a check on "deliberately destructive" communication.  So I'm arguing that we need to focus on institutions, to try understand how they are working and create the conditions for bad behavior. We can't do that very well if we simply see aggregates of people who are morally good or bad as individuals, on "both sides." 

Hard to say much more without knowing what you are counting as examples of destructive Dem behavior and their context. I know you don't like the topic much. I'm interested in your response but happy to wait till another thread where such examples arise organically from the topic. No rush.