Convince Me

DasJazz

Well-Known Member
Open challenge. Forum wide. Convince me. I thrive on challenge.

How is The Thriller not hateful to the right, republicans and conservatives. Hate is the key word.

I don’t make these statements about anyone else. I’m clearly the outlier. That by itself is cause for reflection. At the least. How can it not be if anyone attempts any level of intellectual honesty?

But my evidence is his post history by itself. Constant anti right, and trump, spamming. 24/7. Advocating financial hardship for “trumpers” to teach them a lesson. Calling Bush a demagogue. Calling 10s of millions of Americans racist and sexist... go read it. Literally, it’s all there.

Again. I openly admit. I’m the extreme outlier here. No one else has this stance, at least not openly. Only me. So what the ****? It has to be me right?

So gauntlet thrown. I’m listening. And will honestly try to do my best to be open and thoughtful.

Show me better.
I absolutely have this same exact stance. And for what it's worth, it's not just him, there are several posters here guilty of the same nonsense.
 

Stoked

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
I absolutely have this same exact stance. And for what it's worth, it's not just him, there are several posters here guilty of the same nonsense.
I disagree for the most part. He’s on a level of his own. Closest I’ve seen is Straightline with his Nazi comment. But that’s comprised in part of trolling fun.
 

Stoked

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
I applaud you for calling out people on both sides of the political spectrum when you feel that they are being hateful or unreasonable, and you absolutely do.

I don't see Thriller being focused on individual posters much and being hateful towards them in personal ways. He's a huge Democratic Party fanboy and has his homer glasses on too tight a lot of the time, but I see him going after political ideas and not people. Maybe I'm wrong and I gloss over him making hateful personal attacks, but that's my impression of him.
I’ll agree that he avoids attacking posters here. He isn’t personal like that with anyone here. I also think he is an honest person with obvious intellect.

But again, he is hateful toward 10s of millions of our fellow Americans and I have a problem with that. It’s not ok.

I just don’t get it. I truly don’t.
 

Jazzta

Guest
I’ll agree that he avoids attacking posters here. He isn’t personal like that with anyone here. I also think he is an honest person with obvious intellect.

But again, he is hateful toward 10s of millions of our fellow Americans and I have a problem with that. It’s not ok.

I just don’t get it. I truly don’t.
He’s definitely not who opened my eyes about Trump, in fact I think that he creates the opposite effect among those that could still be “rescued”.
 

Red

Well-Known Member
I think Thriller has a solid grasp of history and political science. And I do think such an education helps in judging current events and the state of health of our nation. He seems to be fully engaged in American current events. That kind of focus is not for everyone, it's not for Framer, for instance, but if you enjoy history and the social sciences, it's pretty hard to sleep through such a time. And I think Trump can make it easy to be fully engaged. For or against. The anger, sarcasm, and frustration on Thriller's part reflect that full engagement. No minced words and no love for the Republican Party. I see it as righteous anger more then hatred.

If you know you're right, you can choose to mince words, so as to not alienate fellow Americans too much. Or you can say "screw it, I'm telling it like it is". I think it's better to show a little diplomacy, even when you know you're right. Sure it's arrogant to "know" you're right, but we stand or fall on how we speak up for right and wrong, as we see it. Thriller believes he knows the right and wrong of these times, he doesn't care to mince his words. These are tough, tough times. There will be righteous indignation from all quarters.

I do know there's more then one point of view, and I also know that today just seems to be the most divisive and emotionally charged time I have experienced, as an American, in my life, to date. And I ask myself "how the hell can today be worse then the Vietnam War era?" I'm thinking maybe it's the existence of social media. It may be that social media makes today seem more "American against American" then the Vietnam era did, whether it truly is, or not. And all these thread conversations are taking place on social media, not in one of our living rooms, and I suspect that makes a difference, both in how we perceive someone, and in how we present our own personas.
 

Stoked

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
“If we can avoid doing violence to the minds of unseen others on the internet, others will learn to do the same. And then perhaps our internet traffic will cease to look like one, great bloody accident.”
― Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century
We can’t even avoid doing violence to others when we look them in the eye. Why would it be different given the safe anonymity of the Internet?
 

Red

Well-Known Member
We can’t even avoid doing violence to others when we look them in the eye. Why would it be different given the safe anonymity of the Internet?
Really? So if we're all sitting around someone's living room, instead of the anonymous venue of the Internet, we're still going to troll each other to our faces, bad mouth each other, etc? I do believe we would behave better when we're all live and in living color. Anonymity encourages incivility I do believe. In person removes that anonymity, and we might think twice before simply slamming someone just because they have a different view then our own.

So, as far as behaving better online, sure, we don't have to try. I just think the deterioration of civility in our society overall, has been aided by how we behave in the anonymity of the Internet. Just a theory of mine, that's all.
 

Stoked

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
Really? So if we're all sitting around someone's living room, instead of the anonymous venue of the Internet, we're still going to troll each other to our faces, bad mouth each other, etc? I do believe we would behave better when we're all live and in living color. Anonymity encourages incivility I do believe. In person removes that anonymity, and we might think twice before simply slamming someone just because they have a different view then our own.

So, as far as behaving better online, sure, we don't have to try. I just think the deterioration of civility in our society overall, has been aided by how we behave in the anonymity of the Internet. Just a theory of mine, that's all.
I agree that in person causes people to think twice. And you do see lots of civility. people are still often rude, assholes to each other.
 

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
I’ll agree that he avoids attacking posters here. He isn’t personal like that with anyone here. I also think he is an honest person with obvious intellect.

But again, he is hateful toward 10s of millions of our fellow Americans and I have a problem with that. It’s not ok.

I just don’t get it. I truly don’t.
He absolutely has a history of attacking other posters. I did a quick search and decided to actually repost one from GF about thriller's attacks on me when I finally decided I'd had enough of both that and his insane leftist vitriol and put him on ignore. I've only ever ignored 2 posters in this site really, and that one I do not regret in the least.

https://jazzfanz.com/threads/all-gun-control-advocates-please-report-here.68546/page-3#post-1424755

Everyone all of a sudden pretending he is just a benign passionate left-wing nut is just ********. He's absolutely been as bad as Dutch ever was, he's just more articulate and actually can be conversed with from time to time. Otherwise the hate he spews is both general and specific.
 

RandyForRubio

Well-Known Member
LOL.

"It's not that he wants to label everybody a racist, it's not that he calls Republicans uneducated idiots, it's not that he thinks you're a Nazi, it's just righteous anger!"

It's okay that he labels people unjustly, it's okay that he spreads dislike, hate, anger, rage, etc, because he's mad about how things are. AND because I think most of his opinions on social and political aspects are correct, I will defend him!

Thriller is articulate. He is intellectual. He's also an ******* that denigrates anybody who disagrees with him.

He's clearly an unhappy person. He's clearly an asswipe. If some of you want to defend him because you agree with some, or all, of his political takes, go for it. I hope you enjoy the irony of complaining that Republicans don't condemn Trump enough.




/Obligatory statement that I'm not saying Trump/Thriller are equatable. Everybody should be able to understand that, but it's the internet and nobody gets ****.
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
He absolutely has a history of attacking other posters. I did a quick search and decided to actually repost one from GF about thriller's attacks on me when I finally decided I'd had enough of both that and his insane leftist vitriol and put him on ignore. I've only ever ignored 2 posters in this site really, and that one I do not regret in the least.

https://jazzfanz.com/threads/all-gun-control-advocates-please-report-here.68546/page-3#post-1424755

Everyone all of a sudden pretending he is just a benign passionate left-wing nut is just ********. He's absolutely been as bad as Dutch ever was, he's just more articulate and actually can be conversed with from time to time. Otherwise the hate he spews is both general and specific.
He's attacked me on a personal level too.
 

Stoked

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
Hate is indeed the key word. It means "feel intense or passionate dislike", apparently. The Thriller is certainly passionate, as his voluminous posting and willingness to defend every word of it shows, and he does express a strong dislike. So I agree that he hates "the right", and certain politicians on the right.

The more interesting question is whether, and to what degree, his hate is misplaced, wrongly aimed, or unfair.
Individually it can be fair. People like Trump, and McConnell, are deserving. Are they not? But 10s of millions? When you know nothing about them? Not even their names?

How is that not a major red flag?
 
Last edited:

gandalfe

Well-Known Member
Individually it can be fair. People like Trump, and McConnell, are deserving. Are they not? But 10s of millions? When you know nothing about them? Not even their names?

How is that not a major red flag?
You certainly don't know whether or not they support someone who brags about assaulting women and defends white supremacists. Oh, wait...
 

Stoked

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
You certainly don't know whether or not they support someone who brags about assaulting women and defends white supremacists. Oh, wait...
So you hate all the Trump supporters you do know? The friends, family members or coworkers that support him? They’re all worthy of hate?
 
Top