Posted by llrrrpp on June 28, 2006, at 9:22:08
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks- clarification needed plea » llrrrpp, posted by AuntieMel on June 28, 2006, at 8:51:42
AuntieMel writes:
> "Although my reasoning fails miserably when it comes to the election of the popular Adolf Hitler"
>
> Maybe it makes a difference if the leader is still alive???
>
> or maybe I'm grasping at straws....No, I think that's a good point, because in this case, the people who elected Adolf Hitler are mostly gone, so we needn't concern ourselves too much with offending them via critiquing their choice for the NAZI party to lead Germany.
Dr. Bob,
Am I getting close to understanding your reasoning? At psycho-babble we concern ourselves with incivility towards the common generic person, as well as specific psycho-babblers. So, when we say things like people who vote for ___ are ____, this is more likely to be considered uncivil than person X has done this bad thing, where person X is a political leader with widespread popular support. Is it possible to say bad things about person X without offending the populace who elected him or her? When would this be possible?For instance say that person X carries the brunt of responsibility for a policy that affects me personally, and i feel really bad about that decision, and I want to get some support from p-babble because I am hurting due to the policy enacted by person X.
Can I criticize person X?
Can I say that this policy is an example of person X's philosophy of ... and cite other historical evidence?
Can I evoke some personality characterisic of person X (i.e. s/he is racist) when trying to understand why person X has done this bad thing that affects me?
Do the answers to these questions depend on whether person X is currently vs. historically in a position of power?thanks for your attention,
I'm just trying to sort out this issue of what constitutes civil vs. less-than-civil discourse in political matters.yours,
-ll
poster:llrrrpp
thread:661433
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060622/msgs/662175.html