Just as the article says we need to stop assuming good faith arguments from the right, it may be time to stop assuming good faith from supposed allies who state positions informed by the right's talking points.
Does that go far enough?
Just as the article says we need to stop assuming good faith arguments from the right, it may be time to stop assuming good faith from supposed allies who state positions informed by the right's talking points. -- Drew |
|
|
Maybe not.
I've watched over the years how left-wing people try to believe the best of their far-right opponents. And then the far-right take advantage of that and the left don't really know how to respond. And the Overton Window moves rightward. Which is what the far-right wanted all long. The correct response by the left is to honour "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" and get *a lot quicker* to read ill-intent in the far-right. And then stop giving them quarter, instead play hard back at them. I think in US Federal politics a few people are starting to more visibly do that. Wade. |
|
|
We can but hope.
Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi |
|
|
This
-- Drew |
Far-right is using divide-and-conquer to get their horrid way
- (static)
- (4)
- Sept. 26, 2023, 11:37:15 PM EDT
Does that go far enough?
- (drook)
- (3)
- Sept. 28, 2023, 12:45:23 PM EDT
Maybe not.
- (static)
- (2)
- Sept. 29, 2023, 12:22:10 AM EDT
We can but hope.
-NT
- (CRConrad)
- Sept. 29, 2023, 03:53:24 AM EDT
This
-NT
- (drook)
- Sept. 29, 2023, 10:55:25 AM EDT