« out for our kids | Main | a kind of milestone »

Saturday, November 25, 2006


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

What saddens me and I guess on some level horrifies me in reading the comments from rightwingers on a post about Vietnam and Iraq is how callous most of them are. They have the chess board mentality - no sense that human suffering is at stake, it's all about making tactical moves.
A thoughtful and reflective post which resonates with my own sentiments.

I am new to blogging, but no stranger to politics and the art of winning arguments. Even so, I am often astounded by the arrogance, narcissism, and brutality of some commenters.

I find I'm happiest blogging after mulling over events for a while and attempting to say something I think is worth saying in a peaceable manner.

The cut and thrust of reactive blogging certainly has the adrenalin of a tennis match, but I try to restrict my indulgence lest I say something I might regret later.

Good post susoz, both here and at LP.

Having blogged for some time, I have learnt that most people hold different views to mine, although there are some with similar left leanings. I don't enter into arguments with Right wing, yes, mostly male, commenters if and where I can help it. They are, in my experience, vicious and generally cowardly. I think it a truism, however dimly viewed, that winning arguements is about point-scoring. Converting people to one's point of view is a different skill to coming out 'on top' in an out and out clash wherein one is seeking to make the opponent realise intellectually, the invalidity of his position.

I agree with you entirely however, that "what matters more than any opinion I could hold is what's actually happening in the world." Of course this makes good and perfect sense.

I was once a good debater, able to argue either side of the toss which taught me that words, stance and tone could easily be manipulated to suit a given situation and later showed me the meaningless of much arguement and the power of the rightly chosen phrase and the carefully selected fact.

Blogging of course takes away the personal exchange of eye contact, and voice. Its interesting, surprising and enlightening to be treated so very differently on the 'net' compared to how one is treated in the flesh.

Good stuff. I find that although I line up more or less on one side, I can see the arguments from other perspectives - doesn't make it easy to hold a line of argumentation, imho. Getting beyond our own intellectual frameworks is the hardest thing - I too am saddened/angered by what I see as the unnecessarily abusive language of the other 'side', but I know (at least I think I know) that within their own frameworks, it's 'our' language that is beyond the pale. It's rare to come across a blog thread on a sensitive/controversial subject that doesn't descend into playground insults. No wonder we have wars.

sheesh! I liked your post at LP Suse, but could only get about halfway through the comments - how disheartening. Lurkers just waiting to pounce and tear a person to shreds...must be fun for someone. My own backwater blog will definitely be sticking to knitting patterns and reports on family happenings. Following on from Phil's thought, wouldn't it be interesting to see a blog where controversial issues were discussed in a civil, respectful manner, without denigrating different opinion-holders. Possible?

There is no point talking to someone who can't change their mind as a result of the conversation.

That callousness you speak of got us into the war in the first place. It was a colossal failure of imagination, an inability to emphathise or see consequences.

The comments to this entry are closed.