Trying to argue with conservatives.
All that they’re great at is detouring, distancing, playing down, doubling-tripling down, disassociating, strawmen and more illogical fallacies. They can’t take up an honest debate unless there are rules in place that gives them any outs from being pressed when confronted with questions they can’t give truthful answers to.
Trying to apply nuance to a discussion that consists of people that only want to polarize the subject.
I tend to find people who claim this actually just have shit worldviews and don’t like being called out for it. For example, do you agree that ICE is an extralegal occupying paramilitary?
No I don’t. ICE is a valid institution. Immigration laws should be enforced, like any law.
Are you sure it’s your worldview that isn’t shit, since I’m assuming you think ICE should be abolished entirely, and further, that immigration laws should not be enforced/not exist? or maybe we should go further and claim national borders/nation states are evil and shouldn’t exist?
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or if you’re legitimately responding to a complaint about polarizing escalation replacing conversation by escalating and polarizing the conversation.
doubt they are being sarcastic. they are just morally grandstanding, because anyone who disagrees with their extremist viewpoint is morally bankrupt human being, because they believe their views are the most moral ever and any ‘decent’ person must agree with their very moral viewpoint or not be moral.
very common mentality on lemmy.