News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Both sides, amiright fellow citizens of the nation just north of the gulf of America?
While conservatives are obviously worse than liberals in just about every way, I don't think rejecting the "both sides" argument in such a general way is a legitimate argument either.
It takes two to tango, and the Democratic party obviously deserves some of the criticism for the current state we find ourselves in. Mainly in their passivity in response to the rise of fascism in the conservative party.
The whole point of 'both sides' is both sides doing the same kinds of things.
One party failing to stop a coup because they try (and fail) to work within the legal system and making poor choices is the opposite of the side that is blatantly breaking the system. It isn't even close to 'both sides'. What a terrible take.
Yes, and in some areas this is a legitimate argument. Both parties are slaves to donors and the capital class, and have rarely disagreed with things like how we handle things at a geopolitical scale.
Right, but that's also ignoring the decades of thirdway politics that allowed the conservative party to position themselves to do a coup in the first place.
I'm not saying that both sides is a legitimate argument for every topic, but it also shouldn't be off-handedly rejected in every scenario either.
It should be dismissed because it is a false equivalence tactic used to fool people like you into blaming both parties for the actions of one party.
Lol, I've repeatedly said it's not equivalent, and not a legitimate argument when utilized in generality. I've just noticed people like yourself are increasingly utilizing it to rebuff all criticism for the Democratic party.
Wanting to discuss nuance in an argument isn't a blatant acceptance of an argument. You're just trying to force a false dichotomy.
I am literally saying that 'both sides' is ALWAYS a false equivalence.
ALWAYS.
Both sides can have overlap in things they do, but that doesn't make blaming 'both sides' valid.
Being ineffective at stopping something isn't the same thing as enabling.
Then you are either misinformed or blatantly lying?
There are plenty of examples of both parties overwhelmingly agreeing on certain topics. An obvious one is the vote to go to war in Afghanistan, or the Patriot act......
You're claiming that conservatives and Democrats haven't ever agreed upon anything that might be reasonably criticized.......
Again, you're just thinking in absolutes.
Me:
You:
I'm going to go talk to a brick wall as that is more likely to be productive.
Lol, if two people agree to do something stupid to an equal degree I can't blame both people? Are you trying to be obtuse, or are you really this stupid?
I had a good chat with the wall, and the wall didn't put words into my mouth that directly contradicted the last thing that I said.
Yup, that's the only thing they have. It's kind of crazy how often I see it here. They can't handle being wrong about this, so they go for the straw man, but they're really bad at it.
What you said was self contradictory....... Wouldn't surprise me if you actually attempted to literally talk to a wall, you both have rocks for brains.
Your claim was based in cognitive dissonance.... If the thing that they overlap on is deserving of blame then blaming both sides is valid.
How exactly are both sides not responsible for blame for voting to go to war in Afghanistan? How are they both not to blame for passing the Patriot act? They both agreed in complete consensus on both of those acts of Congress....well almost, two Republicans voted against the war in Afghanistan.
Go kick rocks.
You can find some sort of overlap between any two things. Two things having a few things in common doesn't justify saying both things are the same.
I already said several times that it doesn't apply when in generalizations.... However, that does not mean we should criticize the times when both parties behave in the same way.
The other person claimed there were no specific instances where both sides deserve the same blame.
Lol.
You've got your fingernails dug into a hair-thin crack here.
You might do well to stand back a bit and ask yourself why you're so desperate to absolve the Democrats of blame.
What the fuck are you even talking about?
Good luck. You're going to need it.
Don't bother, this dude is completely unable to understand anything that resembles a nuanced opinion.
Apparently the Democratic party is completely blameless for anything that's ever happened, even when they vote in complete consensus with Republicans.
Cognitive dissonance is a bitch.
As always, I just wonder if it's a pose or a delusion.
In much the same way that the Zionists have characterized any criticism of Israel as antisemitism, Democrats have characterized any criticism of themselves as "both sides." And it's for the same reason in both cases – so they can reject criticism out of hand rather than facing up to it.
For the professionals, it's simple, if loathsome - they get to feed at the money trough as long as they can continue to essentially pose as leftists but not really accomplish anything (since anything truly leftist would be at odds with the desires of the people and corporations who are keeping the money trough full).
For the rest though - the rank and file that just repeat the cant they're fed - what do they gain?
I've never been quite clear on that, but I assume it's that their self-images are wrapped up in the labels they wear, and one of those labels is "Democrat," and it only works as a boon to their self-images if it can't be criticized.
I can't see how that can be worth it though.
I don't think they realize what they're doing. A lot of people haven't ever engaged with rhetoric with any kind of objectivity, so anyone challenging their positions in any given subject is automatically rejecting their entire belief system.
Plus, I think it's good to remember that a lot of people on Lemmy are young, impressionable, and not really engaged with society outside of shitposting online.
You have to try to make the straw man sound at least plausible... Nobody here made that argument, fuck off.
Saying both sides deserve the same blame for enacting the patriots act isn't a false equivalency. There are plenty of specific instances where both parties have voted in consensus for acts that can be justifiably criticized.
I don't think you know what a straw man argument really is.....