No Neutral Global perspectives?

Seems it's hard in this day and age to have a global third party perspective.

On any given topic I'll post for or against this or that stance/politician or situation but that does NOT mean I support the opposition. They too need to step up their game and explain their actions as well. Be they a country, politician or any other entity etc.

I've noticed that in many debates, discussions and even arguments here as well as elsewhere, more and more people, so it seems, just assume you support whatever 'opposition' it is to their stance if you point out that what they're saying or posting is either not true, not the complete truth or just post/give a disagreeing opinion/opposing view.

I like to discuss, debate and sometimes argue just as much as the next poster but come on, some people need to get a grip.

This week I'll slam Hillary, Next week I'll take a swing at Trump, Sometimes I'll see Putin, Obama, etc, point of view then sometimes the very next day call them out on their latest BS etc etc etc...

You?

a reply to: SLAYER69

It seems to be tricky to be actually believed to be neutral on ATS. Whatever the question, whatever the comment on some issues, if it goes against the flow of a large number of posters - particularly if it's in any way shape or means classed as political - you are a shill, a left wing bleeding heart or a shill and a right wing wannabe dictator.

Gun control is an excellent example, if any question, any question at all is raised about it then swathes of posters equate gun control to taking the guns off everyone - period. Discussion is shot down in flames at that point.

Faith (or lack of) is another. Catholic? Then you must directly support child abuse. Follow any faith? Then you are stupid, a 'sheep' not 'awakened' yet. This probably by people posting their message while frantically playing Pokemon Go - go figure.

Clinton versus Obama (whether or not you live in America)? Don't even go there, neutral opinions are not welcome.

Don't believe we have undeniable evidence of sentient ET visitation? Well, you are brainwashed into believing that one, the truth will find you, you can't find it.

And on, and on, and on.

It's a shame, although some forums such as History and Ancient Civilisations do seem usually to be much more open to ideas, and of course many forums such as those based around media, and from what I understand things such as cooking seem an awful lot more welcoming to discussion...... Maybe, just maybe, post November everything will calm down a little.


Personally, I'm up for a chat and sharing of opinion, a lot of people just want to make damned sure you follow theirs.

a reply to: SLAYER69

I agree with you, I see it often too.

I'm pro:
Guns
Abortion
Small Govt.
Less taxes
Less war
Smaller military
gay marriage

Against:
religion
PC culture
taxes
war on drugs

I've been a left and right wing shill. Just comes with the territory I guess

a reply to: SLAYER69

It's not enough to just accept things.

It isn't just ATS, it's our society.

Take gay marriage.

If you're against it, you're a homophobe.
If you don't care, but don't promote gay marriage, you're a homophobe.

It's a segment of society that is telling us to think a certain way.

In a recent thread on racism, I stated that there will always be racists because you can't change the way people think. You can outlaw the way people treat each other, but you can't change the way they think.

I was called a racist because I was not FOR policing thoughts.

a reply to: uncommitted

Nicely written and concise.

I like to mix it up just as much as the next person. Sometimes I may come across as supporting the opposition but that's about 90% of the time simply not true.

"US/Russia did this that or the other!?"

I'll toss in a bit or two about how they/it [Whomever/whatever] aren't so innocent etc.

Wham!!!

"You support big brother/Mother Russia/Trump/Hillary/Terrorism/TMIC yak yak yak blah blah

Umm, no

a reply to: watchitburn

Yeah, I've been called a Left/Right [insert insult] before too.

One day I'll defend Israel/Iran/Palestine etc then point out the obvious 'Elephant in the living room" with a certain argument/stance the next, and get grilled alive over it....

originally posted by: DBCowboy

I was called a racist because I was not FOR policing thoughts.

Exactly

Labels. Makes a group easily identify and attacked. Then there's us others that think. We are enemies of both because we refuse to kowtow to the inane. To lib's we are con's and vice versa. The problem arises for a place where people need to be told what they believe and critical though is a thing of the past. We're good but we're relics.

a reply to: intrepid

Critically objective posts are not decisive enough I suppose.


Thanks for participating...

a reply to: SLAYER69

Bro..... I hope this is a cycle that only not get broken but eviscerated. A blight on cognitive thought , reason and yes.... freedom.

a reply to: intrepid

In all seriousness..

Back in the day, when I used to haunt the site before becoming a member, there were some great threads and replies that I'd spend hours, sometimes into the wee hours of the morning and beyond reading and they were very global in perspective.

Not this "OMG you love the Jooz/Ragheads!!??!" myopic crap we presently see...

a reply to: SLAYER69

I've never been a 'black or white' type of thinker... I've always found that to be a very small and closed off way of looking at things.

Life (as well as people/perspectives) is just far far too complicated and multi-faceted to fit nicely into any singular pigeonhole or label.

I can't count how many times I've tried to call people out on that silly way of thinking (particularly here on ATS)... but alas, it's just an exercise in futility and I don't particularly enjoy banging my head against walls.



And besides, I'm trying to avoid getting any more grey hairs on my head these days.

Or maybe I'm just getting too old and crotchety to give a damn anymore.

a reply to: SLAYER69

I think it's partially the growth in lazyass debating and people not evolving from the playground. If you say, 'most Muslims are moderate,' the retort would be something like, 'So you support raping women?!' or 'Typical Liberal!' neither of these counterpoints are implied by the opening statement.

Some people are equipped with the knowledge to discuss global issues. This is a problem for everyone else who can't but still wants to have their say. Faced with a well-informed poster, the alternative is to scatter-gun them with generalisations and insults. It's a method that works and reduces the level of debate right down to its lowest denominator. It's right here on ATS with most political commentary being so partisan as to be close to mindless.

Intrepid says 'Labels make a group easy to identify and attack.' It's true and labels also put constraints on the 'others' that allows people to ignore every point they make. Why listen to a conservative/libertarian/liberal?

"You've been labelled so STFU."

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: uncommitted

Nicely written and concise.

I like to mix it up just as much as the next person. Sometimes I may come across as supporting the opposition but that's about 90% of the time simply not true.

"US/Russia did this that or the other!?"

I'll toss in a bit or two about how they/it [Whomever/whatever] aren't so innocent etc.

Wham!!!

"You support big brother/Mother Russia/Trump/Hillary/Terrorism/TMIC yak yak yak blah blah

Umm, no

Like you I will sometimes throw in either the more reasoned approach and sometimes, dependent on the nature of the thread a pure devils advocate response to see how things fly - see how people take the response and consider it. As I spend an awful large part of my day on conference calls that can be fun, but it's always interesting to see how people take on a point of view they may not have considered before. Some ignore, some lambast, some give a very articulated response that leads to me thinking about my own view - which is why we should all be here on certain subjects.

Maybe we need a new little emoticon to suggest 'you may not agree, but I'd like to add...............' that shows we come in peace.

This is a topic that fascinates me to no end. Ask pretty much anyone, and they will tell you how balanced and unbiased they are with everything, and how its everyone else who is guilty. Due to the nature of our brains, it simply doesn't reconcile with reality.

This is, of course, used to manipulate groupthink and that actually becomes easier to accomplish as the number of "targets" grows (I.e. globally). I suppose that facet could be a book of its own.

Pretty much everyone is brainwashed and programmed at this point. The key is in understanding how seemingly conflicting social groups can be used to the same end. Even individuals who act reasonably (rather than just saying they do), as I consider you slayer, are only considered as such in comparison to other social groups rather than any objective measure. This creates a whole social system that can slide back and forth, essentially at a whim and according to what overall results are desired.

Realizing that we, as individuals, tend to be just as guilty as the errors we see in others would probably be a huge step forward. But, at this point, it would likely need the same methods that built our current system, and more years than most will be interested in. Not to mention that it would only be a small step in a rather large stair case of actual social evolution.

a reply to: Kandinsky

I think it's partially the growth in lazyass debating and people not evolving from the playground. If you say, 'most Muslims are moderate,' the retort would be something like, 'So you support raping women?!' or 'Typical Liberal!' neither of these counterpoints are implied by the opening statement.

^^^^this

This is, without a doubt, one of THE most frustrating and biggest problems on ATS.

It's gotten so bad now that many ATS members have simply thrown their hands in air and just can't be bothered to post in most threads anymore.

And who can blame them ? The majority of these threads end up getting whittled down to the lowest common denominator before they even reach the end of the first page which results in leaving no room for any further academic exchange on the subject matter.

Watching the evolution of this problem growing worse by the year has been very frustrating indeed.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Here is a list of the labels' that have been posted about me...
Homophobe,islamophobe,hate-filled bigot,racist,religious nutjob,
unnecessarily alarmed,pessimistic,and dangerous.

I forgot to mention that I wasn't upset about these labels and was
amused by some.


I have to admit that I would like being able to voice my opinion and beliefs without
being labeled the above list every time I post.

a reply to: mamabeth

Obviously, you're an anti-globalist!

a reply to: DBCowboy

You're right again,I am strongly against this NWO .

a reply to: CranialSponge

This is, without a doubt, one of THE most frustrating and biggest problems on ATS.

It's not only ATS either.

As a member and a staffer, I can only go by the T&Cs.

ATS is a mic for opinions and the current climate is reflected in the tone of the posts.

a reply to: Kandinsky

It's not only ATS either.

I've often wondered if this is an ATS only problem or if this dysfunction is a growing problem on other forums as well. I'm not on any other forums so I have nothing to gauge it by.

If this really is the situation all across the internet, forums are going to die a slow painful death because very few people are going to want to participate and sludge their way through the petty childish mudfest that seems to be happening more often than not.