Fear of the Left . . .

[_Kishkumen]

He basically copy-pasted this article:
http://www.dennisprager.com/fear-of-the ... ica-today/

I can see how that seems like a reasonable article if you are inclined to buy into the conservative persecution complex, but its rhetoric (left-wing mob) is a pretty clear giveaway that it does not succeed at being an honest critique.

[_Kishkumen]

Fear of the Left. Fear of the Right.
Hate the Left. Hate the Right.
Fear. Hate.
Left. Right.
Fight! Fight! Fight!

(Cui bono?)

Deep State.

OMG!!!!!!

[_honorentheos]

(Cui bono?)

Now there's the real question. Who really benefits from keeping us at one another's throats?

[_Maksutov]

He basically copy-pasted this article:

http://www.dennisprager.com/fear-of-the ... ica-today/

Prager is a slick but shallow culture warrior, a professional ideologue for decades. He's a more polite confederate of slime like D'Souza and Corsi.

[_Some Schmo]

Here's what I don't quite understand. If you express a view and get massive blow back from a variety of people, how can that not make you re-evaluate the expressed view? Is the view that precious if it's so unworkable?

It's happened to me many times. How else does one learn?

The only reason I come to this place is because not everyone agrees on everything. It's instructive.

[_Jersey Girl]

I agree with you that it is a rare trait. It is one I am willing to attempt with a person who is engaging in an honest conversation in good will. There are many times, however, when I have other motives for starting a thread or participating in one. Some are designed to have fun. Some are posted to vent. Some are fishing for support, agreement, or sympathy.

And sometimes folks just want to shoot the bull without too much picking apart. I'm not saying that there was too much picking apart on this thread. I can't recall half of what was deleted.

I do think there might have been some level of venting factor involved. Perhaps his expectations weren't met or his expectations weren't realistic?

Ceeboo is in a real minority here, and, frankly, most of his pro-Trump allies on this board (I know he did not vote for Trump) are people I would be ashamed to be associated with. Sorry, but it's true. But Ceeboo is someone I find likable for the most part, and, to my knowledge, a decent fellow. Maybe he hangs out here partly because he is amused by the views and behavior of people whose experience is so different from his own. But there are times when it must be tempting to express alienation and disdain, and I would not be surprised if this atmosphere brought that out in him.

Well of coure it's tempting to express a sense of alienation and disdain, particularly when you're in the minorty. I recall that after my first few days online, I had written something (I can't recall just what) where the posters took it mean I was giving up (I was surrounded by atheists and agnostics) and one or more posters emailed me. My attitude at the time was Me? I'm not going anywhere. ;-) But that's me compared to a Ceeboo who doesn't seem to like the push and pull of the argument, and the personal growth that can come from it. I'm not saying he doesn't want to learn anything. I'm not sure if he sees that it can come from the argument itself? I dunno.

As for the speculation, the "maybe" of why he participates and why he participates the way that he does, perhaps that question should have been asked long before this.

[_Jersey Girl]

He basically copy-pasted this article:

http://www.dennisprager.com/fear-of-the ... ica-today/

Thank you, honor. I'll get to reading that right now.

[_honorentheos]

I do think there might have been some level of venting factor involved. Perhaps his expectations weren't met or his expectations weren't realistic?

I can't speak to the middle of the thread which really took a turn, but initially and at the end I don't think ceebs had any intention to engage people and their sincere views about what Prager was missing according to those Prager was castigating. He appears to have just wanted to see who howled. When he was met with questions or attempts at digging into the content a bit he either just ignored the post or said something trite. But he had all kinds of time to respond to low content bitchy posts with more low content bitchy posts.

You're giving him more credit than the evidence suggests he deserves here, Jersey Girl. He wasn't interested in a discussion or he would have had one because it was here to be had.

ETA: Let me be clear. I am saying what I think because it doesn't matter to me if ceebs comes back if he just does more of the same. I'd be interested in real conversations with him but I'm pretty used to being disappointed. He should know that.

[_Jersey Girl]

I do think there might have been some level of venting factor involved. Perhaps his expectations weren't met or his expectations weren't realistic?

I can't speak to the middle of the thread which really took a turn, but initially and at the end I don't think ceebs had any intention to engage people and their sincere views about what Prager was getting wrong. He appears to have just wanted to see who howled. When he was met with questions or attempts at digging into the content a bit he either just ignored the post or said something trite. But he had all kinds of time to respond to low content bitchy posts with more low content bitchy posts.

Maybe, if he was responding to bitch with bitch, he needed to let off steam? I saw one remark about knowledge signaling?

You're giving him more credit than the evidence suggests he deserves here, Jersey Girl. He wasn't interested in a discussion or he would have had one because it was here to be had.

I'm just trying to figure it out, honor. I hope he sees that people are talking about what happened from their differing perspectives. A healthy post mortem never hurt anyone.

[_honorentheos]

I can't speak to the middle of the thread which really took a turn, but initially and at the end I don't think ceebs had any intention to engage people and their sincere views about what Prager was getting wrong. He appears to have just wanted to see who howled. When he was met with questions or attempts at digging into the content a bit he either just ignored the post or said something trite. But he had all kinds of time to respond to low content bitchy posts with more low content bitchy posts.

Maybe, if he was responding to bitch with bitch, he needed to let off steam? I saw one remark about knowledge signaling?

Could be. If that need took the form of coming to a place where he felt most posters were to his left and throwing in a grenade because he needed to piss of people he disagreed with politically for sport it seems there isn't much to defend, either.

You're giving him more credit than the evidence suggests he deserves here, Jersey Girl. He wasn't interested in a discussion or he would have had one because it was here to be had.

I'm just trying to figure it out, honor. I hope he sees that people are talking about what happened from their differing perspectives. A healthy post mortem never hurt anyone.

I agree. And I hope if he comes back it's with intent to be open with his views and engage others sincere posts with something akin to, "Here's what I hear you saying and this is how it either doesn't reflect my understanding or may run into this fact here that I consider important..." Otherwise, meh.