Anyone Wanna Start An Intelligent Revolution?

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

impressed with how quickly this turned into genocide denial lmao

It has to be a record. *pats self on back*

Honestly, I thrive on chaos and I felt like stirring the pot to see what soup froths to the top.
And I love debate/discussion of shit that, genocide denial or not, pertains at least a bit to the real world.

 

[Johnny Based Cage]

Jesus KKKrist what the fuck

 

[Aramonde]

I dunno, I think it's a not so great idea.

Here's the thing, I can argue with someone on here about game-stuff, we can reallllllllly go at it, but it's still game stuff. The hard feelings are much more minimalist.

Like, if you and I disagree on Supergirl or Deadshot or Sub, and a Tournament cones around, or some other event where we may meet up IRL, it's hardly s big deal. We can sit there and be cool to each other and, maybe even good naturedly argue on the spot... But if our disagreement is political, the good nature tends to drain away and we end up legitimately angry with each other.

The FGC is small and we (NRS Community) don't even account for the largest %.. adding fault lines via political discussion just stands to fracture us further. I just don't see that we have anything to gain. Politics and religion are srs biznis.

An example.. I have a long time friend I haven't really spoken to in a WHILE now, and I think the primary reason is he, kind of spontaneously, became political. He went from not really caring, to caring a lot, and having numerous opinions. I myself have very strong political opinions and ive come by them honestly - just like everyone else - and we went from talking about gaming to talking about Trump, the Trans Community, world events and politics, etc
It didn't take long for our talks to become arguments and, while that's not the only reason we don't speak anymore.its definitely the foundation of it.

Politics aren't discussed.. it essentially never happens than any kind of discussion happens. I believe something, to the point that TO ME it's self-evident. Like, there's nothing to discuss, it's the TRUTH..and so do you. So we just end up hollering back and forth at the air in front of each other's faces because we damn sure aren't listening to what's being said.. I'm 35 and I can honestly say I have NEVER seen anyone in a political.or religious argument say "oh ok you changed my mind". The best I've ever seen/heard is along the lines of "I didn't know that.. BUT STILL" .

I just don't see the value at all. It just looks like a way to segregate an already small community that's prone to bickering in the first place.

DING! DING! DING! DING! Winner winner chicken dinner!

I can't see anything good that would come from this. It would just cause more anger and drama which we dont need around here.

 

[Nausea]

Theres intelligence on tym?

Wigy, a love you m8

 

[Marlow]

I enjoy talking politics, public policy, and current events, but it's hard not to see things taking a turn for the toxic. For it to work, I think you'd need a highly organized debate format, with strong moderators. Throw out a topic, give people a week to choose sides and build arguements or perform research, and then present those arguements in some type of Lincoln-Douglas debate style, or something similar. Otherwise I think it would just turn into people making increasingly toxic comments on a post.

 

[SaucyD0ge]

I enjoy talking politics, public policy, and current events, but it's hard not to see things taking a turn for the toxic. For it to work, I think you'd need a highly organized debate format, with strong moderators. Throw out a topic, give people a week to choose sides and build arguements or perform research, and then present those arguements in some type of Lincoln-Douglas debate style, or something similar. Otherwise I think it would just turn into people making increasingly toxic comments on a post.

Dude the exact thing just happened to me in this forum and I’ll be damned if I mention anything controversial in a random internet thread again, so many incomplete arguments and random opinions.

 

[Marlow]

Not really. You gave a fairly controversial and somewhat suspect account of Armenian/Ottoman history in denial of the Armenian Genocide. Call it a genocide, call it an "incident", but it's not a "both sides are equal in blame" situation. The Ottoman Empire mistreated and provoked the Armenians, then used Armenian backlash as a means to justify exiling and killing over one million Armenians. Most who study history recognize the Armenian Genocide, so your opinion is very much in the minority.[/QUOTE]

 

[SaucyD0ge]

Not really. You gave a fairly controversial and somewhat suspect account of Armenian/Ottoman history in denial of the Armenian Genocide. Call it a genocide, call it an "incident", but it's not a "both sides are equal in blame" situation. The Ottoman Empire mistreated and provoked the Armenians, then used Armenian backlash as a means to justify exiling and killing over one million Armenians. Most who study history recognize the Armenian Genocide, so your opinion is very much in the minority.

[/QUOTE]
All in all, the conflict and tension between the Armenia extremists and the Ottomans ended in the exile and the death of many innocents, so by no means do I think that the Ottomans have their hands clean.However, this is after all an incident pertaining to the last days of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey in no way should be shouldering Ottoman crimes against humanity.

 

[SaucyD0ge]

Not really. You gave a fairly controversial and somewhat suspect account of Armenian/Ottoman history in denial of the Armenian Genocide. Call it a genocide, call it an "incident", but it's not a "both sides are equal in blame" situation. The Ottoman Empire mistreated and provoked the Armenians, then used Armenian backlash as a means to justify exiling and killing over one million Armenians. Most who study history recognize the Armenian Genocide, so your opinion is very much in the minority.

Even if I may be the minority or the rare snowflake in this case, this does not give give one the rights to make claims concerning a political debate without bakcing their “answer” up.
If I had it handed back to me in truely convincing fashion where ACTUAL ARGUMENTATION was used, I’d be more happy than angry since htere’d be someone civil to discuss real life matters with.As things stand, most of TYM:
-is just memeing insolently about important matters
-does not even care about world history, knowledge or civil discussion
-does not deign to ratify his opinion even when he has to make an objection



Smh man, maybe someday the world will learn how to take things patiently and make actual compromises instead of pointing their index towards one side or another.

 

[Steven_a]

White powah