The art of discussion , debate and middle ground….

Dogsdodogsstuff

For me, part of the issue with discussions about politics, religion , society (etc) is peoples inability to take a grounded view that’s not dominated by an absolute position. This in turn leads to divisions that ultimately turn to conflict , as people/sides can’t find a common ground with “winning the argument” being the primary target as opposed to actually talking it out.

I was chatting with my son about Immigrants into Ireland. He said they shouldn’t be letting them in because it’s at expense of Irish indigenous loosing out on houses etc. My personal position on this and a lot of topics are that I can see things from both sides but I’m not educated enough (or interested in digging more into it) to make an informed judgement.

However, when my son was asking me what I thought about it , my response was that he needed to understand why a government might keep taking in refugees when it’s so unpopular.

Why is Ireland taking in so many ?

What are we getting out of it ?

What’s the cost to bringing them in and what’s the cost to not doing it ?

Why is it being done in what I would call a less then transparent manner ?

Why can’t we have an open discussion about what is our preferred Immigration policy for the country ?

Before people start accusing this of being an anti - x post , it isn’t. My view is that there are multiple reasons , not least potential declining population, EU commitments (we have work with our partners) and the moral/ethical position of showing empathy to those in need.

The same thing happens in the US politics and Ukraine/russia discussions. There’s alot of bad faith posters looking to cause disruption but it works cause if I went into one of those threads and said something like “Trump was just as much created by the Dems ignoring people who have been left behind” , you’d be immediately branded some sort of MAGA fan.

I was on another website forum there reading people discuss Russia/Ukraine and one person was implying NATO played a role with its expansion towards Russia. There’s actually respectful discussion, nobody is calling them a commie or a useful idiot or an orc or any of that sort of childish stuff. There’s even concessions on both sides that some elements of other peoples views are fair. The person blaming NATO is even at the stage where they admit their knowledge on the topic is limited.

I seldom see a reasonably objective and respectful discussion in these forums. I mostly see people trying to bring other people down a peg. I understand that’s an Ironic statement considering I’m having a go at most people’s capacity for engagement.

But going back to my son, I will teach my children to ask questions. Who is telling me information? Is there other credible sources confirming it? (Not twitter or social media hacks) What is the potential motive of the communication? Is it possible to see things a different way or find out “what the other side is saying” to see if I can get a more rounded opinion?

One lesson I learned a good few years ago, is that “I’m not sure on that” is a very good way to be able to step back from something and get a more balanced view. But that’s not something that an awful lot of people can do or fathom. They get quite unsettled not being able to brand me a right/left leaning person , so what happens is if I am agreeing with them I’m a friend/right and if I’m leaning against them (or even questioning what they are saying), I’m by default the enemy/wrong.

The cynic in me thinks that philosophy and learning the capacity for critical thinking and analysing data, is not in the education system because it’s easier to manipulate people who are conformed in black/white or Right/wrong or them v Us thinking.

You see how poor politicians are an engaging opponents. They are far better at attacking other people’s views then defending their own , which is equally what you see on these threads.

Can people discuss these sensitive topics without insulting others, branding people (left/right/MAGA/pro putin/ snowflake/ anti semetic etc)? I’d say an awful lot of you would find that really difficult. I’ve done it done it myself so I’m not speaking from an ivory tower , more-so im probably just a bit more reflective on how toxic it is to debate.

There are really good, well informed posters in these forums , but I think they either get dragged down to a low level or they just give up out of frustration.

I know this is more like a blog then anything but I felt the need to qualify my views with more content to prevent somebody trying to sabotage the message by implying I’ve some sort of alternative motive.

This could also be taken as feedback for the boards thread about how to improve the site. Maybe have a forum or even threads where there is zero tolerance discussions, any derogatory names or accusations and it’s a thread ban. So you could have two threads for the same thing, one for the more animated or dramatic posters who want “to win the argument” and one for those who want to have an open discussion without being branded something or implied pejorative insinuations.

Ten of Swords

TLDR of the above post

my response was that he needed to understand why a government might keep taking in refugees when it’s so unpopular.

Why is Ireland taking in so many ?

What are we getting out of it ?

What’s the cost to bringing them in and what’s the cost to not doing it ?

Why is it being done in what I would call a less then transparent manner ?

Why can’t we have an open discussion about what is our preferred Immigration policy for the country ?

We have a thread discussing refugee policy already

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058281647/time-for-a-zero-refugee-policy-read-op-for-mod-warnings-and-threadbans-updated-11-5-24

Thread closed