by dexeron » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:11 am
That's where I think we'll always disagree, Desp, because I reject your premise, and your proposed solution.
I reject that the they system is inherently broken, that it's necessarily a bad system. Imperfect, sure, but I don't believe the system you'd hold up as an alternative is at all sustainable in the real-world (beyond groups of about 150 people.)
I also reject that the best way to address the current system's imperfections is (per your metaphor) just to "let go of the rope." I think there are too many real-world consequences in the lives of real people, and slow reform is a much better way to fix these problems in a sustainable way without the collateral damage caused by extreme measures.
---
I also think you're a bit quick to downplay your influence. Did you determine the outcome of the election? Of course not. But no man is an island, and I still think less of you (sorry, just how I feel) for willingly (hell, gleefully) sharing falsehoods just because you saw something about someone you hated and leaped to share it without taking to time to determine its veracity. Yeah, you're just one guy, but you could have been one of the voices preaching actual skepticism and reasonableness instead of being one of the voices sharing anything negative as soon as you saw it, and only bothering to check into it and issue a correction later if someone complained. You took the low road, and even now you're justifying it because you've already decided that the "other side" is playing dirty, so anything is justified. I get where you're coming from, but I just fundamentally disagree, and that's always going to be a point of contention between us.
Doesn't make us enemies. Your enemies are (for the most part) still my enemies, but I'm still sore about it.