this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
141 points (93.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43958 readers
1295 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why do you believe people who have a strong stance must be ignoring facts to have a strong stance?
Straw man. Or misunderstanding.
You admitted it, that's why I am asking.
You declared a causality that I did not intend to imply.
You are directly implying that pro-americanism and anti-americanism are dogmatism, and that these stances necessarily ignore facts to suit their chosen narrative.
You can elaborate what you meant here.
Even if you did not intend on implying this, you did introduce the concept of dogmatism to a conversation surrounding how Lemmy generally leans anti-America, inserting on your hand an implication that this is due to dogmatism. You're accusing the average Lemmy user of dogmatism by association, simply for holding an anti-America stance.
That's what I meant by causality. Pro-americanism and anti-americanism are not inherently dogmatic. It's just that the anti-american sentiments I see on lemmy are usually dogmatic. It's an observational theorem, not a derived one.
So it's a vibe you personally feel, and wished to interject unrelated, got it.
How is it not related?
"Anti-Americanism is bad" -> "It's not really Anti-American, it's Anti-America" -> "Dogmatism and belief in something while ignoring countering facts is bad"
It's an assertion of dogmatism on the Anti-America crowd with no real frame of reference.
More of an accusation than an assertion.