I agree it would be good to be able to harness this sort of BS tactic, but I think part of the problem is that the people who generally use these tactics just don't give a shit about what's true. The other thing is that conservative groups and businesses tend to have a lot more money and control over media platforms that left wing groups do, so it's much easier to spread their message.
spiffmeister
joined 1 year ago
NSW police are famous for their well measured and reasonable use of power so you're probably right.
As someone who drives almost every day I can confirm that I perceive motorists to be less than fully human just based on their behaviour.
You might be right, but when you don't care at all about truth, you can say anything you want. Most claims they're making can be easily fact checked, but they also rely on most people not having the time or the energy to actually read anything in detail.
They would either a) lie and say it anyway or b) find something else to bitch about. The conservatives oppose the voice and no amount of reason or evidence will stop them from finding an issue or making one up.
So they've just turned the AEC I to a misinformation peddler, excellent.
Probably more direct than I would have been but good post, glad you've argued with people on the internet so I don't have to.
A mixture of slippery slope, a complete disregard for the weight of history and a lack of understanding of the difference between "law" and "justice" seem to be a recurring set of arguments when it comes to disagreeing with social justice issues.
But what about the economy‽
Who could have seen this coming.
Dr Andy Schmulow, an associate professor of law at the University of Wollongong, said the disclosures highlighted industry-wide structural issues needed to be addressed.
The structural issue being using these firms at all.
Are you sure it's not a tunnel for a single row of Tesla's to go through?
In my mind there are two main branches of reasoning: One comes from either racism or a feeling of aggrievement ("why do they get something I dont" kind of thing). The second stems from a misunderstanding of systemic issues, a sort of demographic blindness like "this is a policy that only affects X and that's racist" kind of thing. Arguably the aggrievement fits in here too. This obviously ignores the fact that demographic differences do exist.
Of course there's also the "progressive no" argument that people like Lidia Thorpe argue for, but imo the other two are more common.
Whichever horde is in fashion