When the smallest doubt is treated as support of the other side

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

You need to learn the difference between someone "being defensive" versus someone ripping at you when you show your ass is out in the wind.

It's rabid defensiveness. Akin to religious zealotry. Funny how that works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

You need to learn the difference between someone "being defensive" versus someone ripping at you when you show your ass is out in the wind.

It's rabid defensiveness. Akin to religious zealotry. Funny how that works.

For keeping coming back over and over again, you look pretty zealous and rabid, yourself. Take your own advice and do a little self-reflection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

You need to learn the difference between someone "being defensive" versus someone ripping at you when you show your ass is out in the wind.

It's rabid defensiveness. Akin to religious zealotry. Funny how that works.

For keeping coming back over and over again, you look pretty zealous and rabid, yourself. Take your own advice and do a little self-reflection.

I'm not engaged in viewpoint advocacy like you. I recognize extremists when I see them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Look at how the PP has projected some kind of delusional image of anyone who disagrees with them of being a communist by calling them "comrade." Proved the OP's point to a T.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Or someone lightly mocking a zealot . Prayers for you. May your eyes soon be opened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Look at how the PP has projected some kind of delusional image of anyone who disagrees with them of being a communist by calling them "comrade." Proved the OP's point to a T.

Another funny thing about zealots is they have no sense of humor and can't recognize sarcasm. If the shoe fits...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Look at how the PP has projected some kind of delusional image of anyone who disagrees with them of being a communist by calling them "comrade." Proved the OP's point to a T.

Another funny thing about zealots is they have no sense of humor and can't recognize sarcasm. If the shoe fits...

What was the humor, what was the sarcasm? The only people I've ever seen going around randomly accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being "communists" are far right wing zealots. That shoe seems to fit you well. Particularly given how upset and triggered you got about J6 being brought up.

And, you lose points for trying to claim that something that backfired and blew up in your face was just intended in jest as "humor" and "sarcasm."

You really suck at debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

Its ok OP we know for you:
A=Israel
B=Hamas

Some of is do no belive in both-sidesism, we believe in right or wrong. So there is no A and B.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Look at how the PP has projected some kind of delusional image of anyone who disagrees with them of being a communist by calling them "comrade." Proved the OP's point to a T.

Another funny thing about zealots is they have no sense of humor and can't recognize sarcasm. If the shoe fits...

What was the humor, what was the sarcasm? The only people I've ever seen going around randomly accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being "communists" are far right wing zealots. That shoe seems to fit you well. Particularly given how upset and triggered you got about J6 being brought up.

And, you lose points for trying to claim that something that backfired and blew up in your face was just intended in jest as "humor" and "sarcasm."

You really suck at debate.

J6 is a distraction. Comrade is a joke, Vlad (or is that for the MAGAs).

Do you not see that the flip side of that is shouting "MAGA!" or "troll!" any time someone deviates even an inch from you?

The monster you hate is within, my friend. A hit dog will holler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Look at how the PP has projected some kind of delusional image of anyone who disagrees with them of being a communist by calling them "comrade." Proved the OP's point to a T.

Another funny thing about zealots is they have no sense of humor and can't recognize sarcasm. If the shoe fits...

What was the humor, what was the sarcasm? The only people I've ever seen going around randomly accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being "communists" are far right wing zealots. That shoe seems to fit you well. Particularly given how upset and triggered you got about J6 being brought up.

And, you lose points for trying to claim that something that backfired and blew up in your face was just intended in jest as "humor" and "sarcasm."

You really suck at debate.

J6 is a distraction. Comrade is a joke, Vlad (or is that for the MAGAs).

Do you not see that the flip side of that is shouting "MAGA!" or "troll!" any time someone deviates even an inch from you?

The monster you hate is within, my friend. A hit dog will holler.

You don't seem to understand how humor works. A joke works best when it at least contains some kernel of ironic truth to it. In your case, the payload was empty, it was a wild swing and a complete miss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

Sure, Mr. Zealous and Righteous, Mr. My Point Is The Only Relevant Thing. Whatever you say. Aye aye, Capitano.

Take it up with the OP, or start a new thread about your pet obsessions, Comrade.

"Comrade?" Sounds like something an obsessive person would say.

Look at how the PP has projected some kind of delusional image of anyone who disagrees with them of being a communist by calling them "comrade." Proved the OP's point to a T.

Another funny thing about zealots is they have no sense of humor and can't recognize sarcasm. If the shoe fits...

What was the humor, what was the sarcasm? The only people I've ever seen going around randomly accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being "communists" are far right wing zealots. That shoe seems to fit you well. Particularly given how upset and triggered you got about J6 being brought up.

And, you lose points for trying to claim that something that backfired and blew up in your face was just intended in jest as "humor" and "sarcasm."

You really suck at debate.

J6 is a distraction. Comrade is a joke, Vlad (or is that for the MAGAs).

Do you not see that the flip side of that is shouting "MAGA!" or "troll!" any time someone deviates even an inch from you?

The monster you hate is within, my friend. A hit dog will holler.

Wow you just become more and more cringe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

You need to learn the difference between someone "being defensive" versus someone ripping at you when you show your ass is out in the wind.

It's rabid defensiveness. Akin to religious zealotry. Funny how that works.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

In what way is that specific PP “exhibiting the behavior of a zealot”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll try to make it as general as possible. What if there is a hot topic, A vs B. Say most people around you support A. You do, too, but you have questions or doubts about A, or you can understand (but not support) B’s reasoning. you don’t perceive A as something flawless.
However if you ask those questions, or even don’t support A with all your heart, you are labeled as (insert whatever insult du jour you can think of).
How to deal with it?
I find that in the most recent conflicts I can’t support one side without reservation, yet it seems like I am expected to. I am genuinely scared of all the silence is violence type tropes.

It sounds like you are talking about the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel was attacked by Hamas and attacked back, but if anyone expresses concern for the Palestinians (not Hamas), then you are labeled and a Hamas sympathizer. I get it. Like a PP said, we are now supporting loyalties, and there is no more critical thinking allowed. It’s sad.

Or if you criticize Netanyahu's settler policies you are called an antisemite.

I don't think people can legitimately attack when you cite specifics. They can try, but it's foolish.

The problem is that many people are unable to cite specifics. The example above of J6 denial shows that. Trump supporters say things like "deep state" but lack specific evidence and end up looking like fools.

Basically, people need to do better. But most people can either barely scratch the surface of a topic or are so far down a rabbit hole of delusions and fabrications that there's nothing coherent to be had from it.

The problem is you think this delusional behavior runs one way. Progressives have looked like idiots trying to walk back a number of issues on which they were demanding unquestioned fealty from all.

The likes of you cannot see this, because you are drowning in your own righteousness.

YOU are the problem.

Ahh finally there we have it. The whole intent of this thread was to try and find some way to smear the left.

Glad that's established and out in the open now.

Why are you getting defensive?

This is about behavior, not ideology or affiliation. You are exhibiting the behavior of a zealot and you are blind to it. You are the the cousin of the MAGA you so despise.

In what way is that specific PP “exhibiting the behavior of a zealot”?

NP - I take an earlier poster’s point that people are tribal (thought policing their own members and “othering”’/ justifying denigrating the other side), and the remainder of the thread is like a master class in proving that to be true.