posted on Feb, 25 2017 @ 11:42 AM
I debated on whether to put this in 'mud-pit' or here, but let's see how it goes here and let the mods decide where it best fits...
Recently there seems to be an increasing number of threads here on ATS lamenting the exponential increase in politically oriented threads. In other
words, OPs about threads on ATS (political ones). Indeed there has been a substantial increase in both content and volatility. Equally, we are in
some pretty tumultuous political times around the globe right now. There is significant unrest, the media has gone completely off the rails (on BOTH
sides) and people are tired of rhetoric and are demanding action after far too long (again, on BOTH sides).
For my part, I genuinely try to thoroughly read much if not all of an entire thread before posting. I will readily admit I don't always succeed, but
I try. And, I will further acknowledge that sometimes my rejoinders can be sharp. I do enjoy healthy debate, and I loathe bias and blind allegiance
without reason. I equally abhor political correctness for the sake of not hurting someone's feelings; I think this only censures true debate and
further fosters festering attitudes below the surface. I'm all for debate, and frankly, the more spirited the better. However, there are points at
which some of these discussions/debates just descend into nonsensical rock fights, serving no purpose.
One of the observations I personally have made over recent months is many of the 'flame-wars' here on ATS stem from issues surrounding
'terminology'. As noted above, I am by NO means advocating sanitizing discussions to the point of ambiguity for the sake of people's feelings, but
I do wonder if we could all agree on some things...
(Note: I abhor the word "trigger", and I will try my utmost to not use it here in this post)
There are certain words which do seem to get a rise out of people more so than others. I think part of the visceral reaction to these words is the
context in which they are used. I further believe that upwards of 80%+ of the time some of these words are used out of context, or just completely
incorrectly. For example, words like...
- Permutations on the words 'democrat' and 'republican'
I'm sure there are many more, and perhaps we should discuss those too, but it seems to me when it comes to political discussions the misuse of these
words are chief among some of the more problematic discussions. Of these words, the one I see most often misused is the word "Fascist" (just my
opinion though). I would be willing to wager that if we could somehow post a blind survey here on ATS asking members who use this word to define
their interpretation of it (without being able to see anyone else's responses first) that 9/10 posters wouldn't even come close to the true
definition of the word 'Fascist'. It would seem perhaps there should be an unwritten rule if one doesn't know the definition of a word they are
not allowed to use it in a debate. (Again, NOT advocating more rules here, but rather hoping to seek consensus).
Second right behind 'Fascist' would be "Communist". Again, if we did a blind survey like that noted above, I'd wager the vast majority would be
unable to define 'Communism'. I'm not going to go too far down the rabbit hole of definitions here, but communism and socialism are related but
different. Similarly, fascism can exist in both communism and socialism. Just a couple examples of some of the problems with these terms. So when
people of a clear political alignment start tossing these words about without knowing what they actually mean conversations and debates quickly
escalate out of sensible control.
It sure would be nice if we could at least benchmark the definitions of some of these terms so when they're used at least they're used correctly and
in context...not just as a label or name calling in a rock fight.
How might we go about accomplishing some benchmarks for terminology, and what are some similar terms we might also apply to this list?