Political/economic identification survey

[palou]

VGPolyglot said:

palou said:

I really don't think identifying clear foes helps in any manner. Even if they hold dangerous views.

 

If you disagree strongly with something specific, argue against it, say why, exactly, you consider the position dangerous.

 

Don't dismiss the person, as a whole.

 

Just because someone holds a bad viewpoint on one topic, does not mean that their viewpoint cannot be changed, or that their opinion on other issues is necessarily without value.

That's assuming that they can be reasoned with. If they don't see the dangers in genocide, massacres, ethnic cleansing, expansionism, etc. what are we supposed to do?

Well, take the necessary measures to prevent those atrocities, with others that agree - but in discussion, your goal should always be to collectively come to a better understanding.

 

I believe that ultimately, no matter what you do, you should *always* consider everyone, first and foremost, as your peers. If you need to defend yourself or others, that is unfortunate. It is good to fight for our collective interests. But I think that it is also important to keep in mind that our collective interests includes *everyone*, including those that are working in the opposite direction of yours.

 

I think identifying *foes* rarely helps you in your fight, and can often make the issue harder to resolve adequately, or permanently.