This is objectively untrue. If a zebra doesn't perceive the threat of a hungry lion, the threat doesn't magically vanish. If we use this logic, Trump is Hitler because there are people who perceive that. Which makes his supporters Nazis.
That takes this argument to an ideological extreme; Zebras have no concept of reality. They may have instincts, and those instincts do usually lead to their survival, but until something raises the hair on the 'back of the neck', the threat doesn't exist to them. Particularly with a stocking & ambush predator like a lion, which aims to remain 'not a threat' until too late.
Leftists have a habit of engaging in a particularly bothersome form of deception. They identify a subset, whether it belongs to the larger set or not, and proceed to rhetorically weaponize that subset against their target group until the target, for fear of being judged by leftists, gives up and concedes the match. It's emotional manipulation.
I'll agree with you here, but the right is far from innocent when it comes to deploying these tactics. No one side in history has ever been above appealing to an emotional response to get their way.
Take, for example, the alt-right. The alt-right is very easily defined (see
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/08/what-alt-right-is.html for further detail) and it's members very easily sorted. But, because white nationals happen to be a subset of the philosophy's subscribers, we must be
extra vigilant to distance ourselves from them and the movement. Can't be in the same camp as a leftist-identified bad guy, you see.
Forgive me if I don't accept a BlogSpot URL as a definitive authority on what is or is not 'Alt-right'. Right now the media uses Alt-Right to describe neo-Nazis, so as far as the public is concerned, that is what they are. If you want to change this, hold rallies for conservative politics calling yourself 'Alt-Right' and make it undeniable that you are against neo-Nazism. Punching a Nazi in the face on live national television might get the point across - but it is so ingrained that even this might not suffice.
So if the masses has agreed that a certain social terms means one thing, why should they be wrong? It's an opinion at the end of the day, not a mathematics proof.
I call it the disavow game. A leftist or concerned right winger identifies a villain and the rest of us are supposed to rollover and play ball like good little doggies, or else they'll call us names too. They tried it during the campaign and it looks like most people no longer want to play, as the endless charges of isms and phobias against Trump were met with a collective yawn on Nov 8th.
Trump deployed just as many of those phobias about Hillary; a-la "her emails", scandals when she was Sec. of State, and other general (successful) attempts at character assassination. Neither side has the moral high ground, because there is no such thing as a moral high ground.
I'm not a conservative and I'm not a part of the alt-right. What I am is tired of left wingers repackaging dishonesty and manipulation as enlightenment and righteousness. And I am doubly tired of their thinly-veiled duplicity of playing the disavow game while remaining all but silent when it's their people burning down communities and beating people in the street.
Didn't mean to imply that you were, and I apologize for that. When I used "you" in my last post (and in this post), I refer to a hypothetical "you" to keep the language clean - rather than referring to a group of hypothetical "others"
The correct solution to that problem isn't to attend a bubble (rallies) in the hope that leftists will play fairly. The solution is to destroy their credibility and influence. Which, if current national and international trends are any indication, is happing at a fairly good clip.
Those methods of destroying credibility will only perpetuate the cycle. No one is a saint, no one is the devil, but if you spend all your time deifying one person or group and vilifying another, it is only going to come back to bite you later on.
This doxing story is safely within the realm of 'nobody cares.'
I would say it is safe to say that people who get doxxed, on the left or right, very much care. Be it because they were or are trolls online and fear reprisal, or because they some of the things they do are embarrassing, albeit genuinely harmless. You don't give out the full set of your contact info to every single person you meet, you don't post it online, why should someone else posting it without your permission being something that you shouldn't care about?
On a separate note, you seem to think that I am liberal, bordering on the extreme? I would consider myself pretty center on most issues.
