• Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Okay, I don’t really want to debate the merits of the position. I could but I don’t think we’re too far apart on it. So the character flaw is the preachiness and I misunderstood that’s what you meant, but you still have said something very interesting that I want to understand. I really wanted to know about this:

    As pointed out earlier, this person I responded to in this thread isn’t that person, and I do apologize for implying otherwise. But the person I’m talking about here DOES exist. That person is in this thread. And that person needs to hear this.

    See, this is a mistake that people making pro-dem arguments - whether out of utilitarianism or some misguided sense of allegiance - keep running into. I have seen so many arguments that boil down to (and I’m not saying this is exactly what you did but it’s a general pattern):

    A: Biden is screwing the pooch for XYZ clearly stated factual reasons.

    B: You want Trump to win.

    A: No, I think people should probably vote for Biden but he’s tanking it for XYZ clearly stated reasons.

    B: Fuck you, MAGA/Ivan.

    I was asking you about it because you are literally the first person out of dozens of these exchanges that I have ever seen admit to being wrong about this. I think that’s honestly admirable, and I was asking because I really want to understand if you have any insight as to where your misunderstanding came from.

    If your answer is that it doesn’t matter because the person your argument is for is out there somewhere, then I think that’s a problem for reasons I can explain if you want to hear them. If you have another explanation I’m interested.

    • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It seems to me we’re almost on the same page.

      You’re right - my posts aren’t referring to a SPECIFIC person, but general statements targeted at a casual reader of the thread.

      I think this is where most people’s overreaction comes from - being so passionate about the desired OUTCOME that they forget to actually be convincing about how to get there. Yes, there are a huge number of us that are not huge fans of many of Biden’s decisions, but voting for him anyway because of the limited number of choices we have. But there are clearly people out there who aren’t as inclined towards making those subtle distinctions, and it’s important that the discourse, as much as possible, makes clear to people that their vote need not be a declaration of undying love. It’s okay to say “Biden, but not happy about it.” It’s really important that those people see the whole view, particularly when there’s so much knee-jerk reaction towards both “YOU MUST SUPPORT HIM” and “YOU CAN’T SUPPORT HIM”.

      That said, while of course it eases conscience to talk about how Biden has problems, helping someone who is gung-ho about supporting him to have doubts has almost no tangible benefits to the external reality we live in from the standpoint of the outcome I desire (I don’t post here to be neutral - of course I have a bias), and may actually have a negative impact. Helping someone who is on the fence understand that despite voting being essentially binary, there is a whole spectrum of valid ways to think about it, can lead someone to making a decision that can have a real impact on getting the outcome I see as best, so of course I want to counter the former with the latter.