jj@alice.UUCP (03/09/85)
Well, I see that net.politics is back to the "You don't agree with me, you must be subhuman" state again. Martin Taylor's article, besides being a vicious ad-hominen attack, ignores JoSH's point, and quibbles with what Martin would like, instead, to attack. This is a time ?honored? and established type of rhetorical manipulation. Martin also presumes to know what Greg K is thinking, and is thus able to know when JoSH is being libelous. I'm NOT evaluating JoSH's articles or actions here, you notice? Or DO you? JoSH, on the other hand, I suspect is sick of being taken out of context, and also sick of having to argue with emotional crud, rather than facts. He has had ONE factual article to reply to, and I await that reply. (It does suggest a serious problem with the point he's made, if true and correctly applied.) Greg's attitude I don't know about, since I've recently returned to net.politics (Dan McK, where ARE YOU?), and I've only read one quote, that seeming remarkably inflamitory and emotionally manipulating. Folks, can't we have a debate instead of a name-calling session? I remember quite a bit of the past history of this newsgroup. During the Grenada "Invasion" I was QUITE put out with the automatic knee-jerks that condemned the whole situation without even trying to get information. I said as much, and it was suggested to the net, and generally agreed upon that all conservaties, and myself in particular, were particularly dumb, stupid, and likely sub-human. This coming from, among other people, one of those mentioned here. This line also having been used for justification of the persecution of Jews, blacks, and about anything else that someone doesn't like, I find it pathetic, coming from individuals on the net! Several months thereafter, due to my position on abortion (for which there is a separate newsgroup, folks!), religion, and life in general, I was dubbed a "liberal bleeding-heart fool". Interesting, isn't it. When the Goetz issue came up elsewhere, I was actually accused of being a "red agent" for suggesting that one did not have the necessary information to decide that Goetz was innocent, yet, at least. This seemed to pull the strings of quite a few people, not all of them "conservative". It was suggested that I go get myself mugged/murdered in the subway, that I be forced to see my wife raped (I'm not married) and then killed, and all sorts of things, from those who were proposing that they should be allowed to carry a gun. <Please note, I'm NOT for gun control at all, but I find some gun advocates (shall we say) questionable.> Now it's all happening again, and to someone else. I find it quite revealing that those who decry the use of fascist, and who quote the defination, cannot see any reflection in themselves. EHOUGH! It's quite clear that there exist a population of LONG TIME net.politics users who participate only to make fun and libel of those who do not agree with their viewpoint. I think it's time that they move on to another newsgroup, perhaps net.flame, or net.dev.null. The net, in its current state of terminal overload and such, doesn't need traffic that reflects so poorly on the either the net or its participants. It is quite possible to argue with someone without calling them names, making insulting suggestions, and resorting to deliberately misleading emotional trickery. I suggest that if you (directed to ALL readers) don't know how to argue that way, that you shouldn't argue at all. ??High school? This isn't HIGH SCHOOL?? -- FESTINA LENTE "...rice is nice, that's what they say..." (allegra,harpo,ulysses)!alice!jj