posted on Sep, 14 2020 @ 11:18 AM
The problem is NOT the left and right dicotomy of ATS, nor of social media in general . The suggestion of this being the problem shows that someone
is viewing this too personally.
Who am I to answer this? Well, I'm nobody really. I'm a long time member, but have been gone for a long time. ATS still has a special place in my
heart, and perhaps I am lucky to not have hate it jaded.
We are talking about conspiracies here, and one of the biggest is the control structure that comes around Red and Blue. If we keep playing into this
with all of our fears and concerns, then it will do nothing to bring people together. ATS knows that the solution is something above party
boundaries, but it is simply clear that members with opinions are generally going to take a conversation back to those known points of Red versus
A real conspiracy theorist here would give some slack to both sides. It's a big issue, because we are controlled by politics. This is why it should
be understood how people could get fired up, which should make you expect passionate reactions. If politics is a big issue for control, then one can
do nothing but acknowledge the power of the media. You can argue against the media all that you want, but you are not paying it the respect that it
is due. You need to understand that people are told that the problems are Red/Blue, and the only issues is their way, or the other way, or not that
way. Some of these people are worried, and are listening to people who they think have their best interest at heart.
Those who believe in such conspiracies generally lead with a bit gentler tone. The conversation doesn't have to lead to someone being called an
idiot for their beliefs. "Hey, I understand why you believe that, but what I have researched tells me that is a lie from the media complex".
People respond much differently, when you acknowledge some of the lies that they have likely seen also. Why treat the other person with so much
disdain, if you understand the control structure that they are in? Once you realize that you're attacking someone who hasn't put it all together as
quickly as you, then you understand that there is quite a bit of headroom for decency in conversation.
One of the problems comes from people not remembering that most people are searching for the truth. There are those who will do nothing but argue,
and create false drama. Those shills are easily seen, if the discussion can be kept rational. The people who deny that media would ever lie ........
that kind of stuff is visible to those who know. The people who are unwilling to open their eyes at all are almost as bad as those who spread lies
intentionally, but the intention is completely different. Many people do not want to live in a world where they are uncovering lies against
themselves. It brings paranoia out in many, and it should not be forgotten when discussing problems of a forum on the whole.
So look, you're going to have people who make it about a singular issue. However, it's only the big issue to them. The board just needs to
understand how to make sure that each of these individual issues are met (when possible). No individual person's priority should stop someone else
from having an opinion. No one person's priority or opinion should ever be a direct physical or emotional threat against someone.
It sounds like the last thread (that was closed on Sept 6 circa), pointed to the fact that he feels political divisiveness. We should read that post
again, and see what can be pulled from the emotions shown there. Perhaps a section of the forum where we try to refrain from Red and Blue. The
conspiracy section has a Gray Area, and perhaps the Politics needs a Grey Area, where the focus is on trying to discuss topics constructively rather
than division upon ideals. There are some great truths to be discovered when evaluating the moderate beliefs of a country, as well as a conspiracy
Remember that THEY want to keep us divided, so even suggesting that our personal division is the problem is kind of playing into their agenda. I
personally see the problem in social media, and I distance myself from those who use divisive tactics. It's not the best, but it guards my heart the
strongest. ATS will never be a place where everyone can get protected. Oh, poor baby you got your feelings hurt... I'm sorry, but it's going to
happen, because there are people with all kinds of opinions, and we can't simply stop everybody because you're upset. That's right, part of the
solution is that ATS needs to wear big boy pants, if they want to talk about big boy topics. You can reread that with gender-neutral pronouns if you
wish, because general colloquialisms are not used to attack or infringe upon anyone's rights. If you were a good friend of mine, then I would try to
respect your wishes .... but dudes and man and guy and stuff just comes out in conversation. I think that falls into respecting people who are
trying, and be a little tolerant when they fail.
Respect and tolerance are two main issues, and BLM signifies that. Now, I'm not making this political about BLM, so again put those big boy pants
on. We can talk about some sensitive topics, without getting butthurt. Otherwise, why have the conversation on ATS. One of the biggest arguments
around Black Lives Matter, is the response of "All Lives Matter". I'm not here to argue one side or the other. I think it's ridiculous. This is
where intention and tact play a part. If you go to a BLM rally, and you intend to upset them by saying "All Lives Matter", then you are creating a
problem. I fully understand how saying that term should not upset anyone. You can make that argument elsewhere, at another time.
When you stand in BLM face, and yell "All Lives Matter", then you have decided to be inflammatory. You have likely seen people be upset at that
term, and you don't understand it. You don't understand it so much, that you want to go yell it to their faces. That is beyond comprehension to
me. If you think something is hateful, then why incite more hate? Violence is never the answer. Hatred is never the answer. To me, this just shows
how people think that simply because they feel their actions are just, that it allows them to act without tolerance or respect of other's viewpoints.
This is all context and presentation. The same thing can be said in a different tone of voice, in a different location, or to different people and
have different results.
Part of the problem with ATS is outrage culture. I am not sure how much it has crept into this forum, as I've been gone .... but it has swept into
the social networks like Michael Phelps into a head shop. Just because someone is upset at something, does not mean that they can treat others badly.
The idea of protected classes is part of the problem. Again, I don't know how much of a problem it is for ATS, but that's where you get my
outsider's perspective ... because I get to assume that that is part of the problem without pointing fingers.
And yes, reverse racism is still racism. Not sure if that needs to be said on a conspiracy forum, but treating any race differently than another
because of skin color is just wrong. We could argue power structure, but then do you really know the power structure? Part of the conspiracy world is
knowing how much that you don't know. Those who don't know are still open to learn.