Re:Biden wins White House, vowing new direction for divided ...
by blub on Sunday November 08, 2020 @04:26AM
(#25024374)
What I like does not define what a dialogue is.
Dialogue means engaging with the opposite party. No engagement, no dialogue. Enumerating a bunch of random things in reply to anything is not dialogue.
Re:Biden wins White House, vowing new direction for divided ...
by pqhwan on Sunday November 08, 2020 @05:56AM
(#25024855)
The comment is talking about how the gp has their priorities wrong. Separation policy, etc are actual problems, and more important than “my neighbors don’t love this country like I do: they don’t admit to being inspired by its founding myths, they don’t like to sing the anthem or say the pledge of allegiance”. Come on, in a country with a reputation for rough, independent individuals, that’s your top grievance? So the comment has a clear point, and it relates to what the gp stated. That’s a dialogue. You’re the one refusing to further engage with the counterpoint, which is how the dialogue was disrupted.
Yes it is. You just don't like it.
The post you're replying to lays out, from their perspective, a list of actions that they believe are self-evidently unjustifiable.
Do you agree with that assessment? Do you believe there's justification to be had? I think most of the real arguments in favor of them have been left unsaid, because they fundamentally contradict a number of modern western paradigms regarding inherent rights and human dignity. But that's not really fatal to the philosophic position; maybe those paradigms are false.