Registered On: May 8, 2017
I’m not going to get in to your relationship with Gurney on this forum JI. However, I am quite keen to respond to this:
‘One of my personal dislikes is the way that, in general, our capacity as a society to disagree without becoming personal and nasty seems to have deteriorated. Hence my constant appeal in previous and more regular visits to the forum to be less scathing when someone has a strongly different perspective.’
On face value that all sounds reasonable. But unfortunately I think it amounts to invalidating anyone’s argument as soon as they become animated and passionate about a subject. For instance, I think there’s a danger of mistakenly equating ‘right to reply’ with ‘now you’re getting personal’. You mention ‘ideological outrage’ in a previous post as though to be annoyed about an ideology is somehow wrong and illegitimises the posters argument. I suspect you have an argument about the BLM movement that centres on movement infiltration, riots and statistics that ultimately undermines the cause, but hey, you’ve decided it’s time to vanish again. A pattern has emerged.