Typical Liberal Junk
You may just have picked up that I am neither a liberal, nor much enamoured of liberals. If you haven't picked this up, I suggest you take a long, hard look at the title of this blog. Anyway...
Spotted this on Slashdot: Blogger Launches 'Google Bomb' At McCain. The gist of it is that some liberal blogger has decided to manipulate the Google PageRank system to make Google searches for John McCain return negative news stories. What had me particularly disappointed in human nature was this quote from the blogger in question:
I think, funnily enough, that I am right about most things in life. I daresay I am actually wrong about a number of things, but I haven't been convinced of it yet; if I thought I was wrong, then I'd change my mind. I am so convinced that I am right, that I don't mind others hearing the other side of the story; I think that an informed debate will get us nearer the truth. I might even learn a thing or two from the other side. But this guy doesn't seem to think like that. His campaign is not to convince people that he is right, but to silence opposition: "Unless you act ... your opponent's information is going to get out there."
I guess I shouldn't be surprised; from the French revolution to the Stalinist purges, the idealism of the left wing has always turned to violent repression of anyone who disagrees. I don't say my side of politics is guiltless; Hitler is the right wing's skeleton in the closet. I think most on the right wing would agree that he was wrong, though; we would disagree with both his repressive actions and the motivation that lay behind them.
Pilate asked the rather excellent question, "What is truth?" Is truth that which is real? or that whiich you can convince someone to believe, even by such crass means as manipulating Google search results?
Spotted this on Slashdot: Blogger Launches 'Google Bomb' At McCain. The gist of it is that some liberal blogger has decided to manipulate the Google PageRank system to make Google searches for John McCain return negative news stories. What had me particularly disappointed in human nature was this quote from the blogger in question:
Obviously, it is manipulating, but search engines are not public forums and unless you act to use them for your own benefit, your opponent's information is going to get out there. [As cited here.]I hope we can all spot the rather blatant, cynical hypocrisy here. "Search engines are not public forums," he writes; then why do you consider them forums for spreading your own views? And, rather more disturbingly, "Unless you act to use them for your own benefit, your opponent's information is going to get out there." Right, OK, sorry for thinking that informed, respectful debate was important to our society. Yes, sir, I'l just shunt myself off to the gulag right now. No more spouting about those infamous right-wing ideals, like freedom of speech, or respect for people with differing ideas.
I think, funnily enough, that I am right about most things in life. I daresay I am actually wrong about a number of things, but I haven't been convinced of it yet; if I thought I was wrong, then I'd change my mind. I am so convinced that I am right, that I don't mind others hearing the other side of the story; I think that an informed debate will get us nearer the truth. I might even learn a thing or two from the other side. But this guy doesn't seem to think like that. His campaign is not to convince people that he is right, but to silence opposition: "Unless you act ... your opponent's information is going to get out there."
I guess I shouldn't be surprised; from the French revolution to the Stalinist purges, the idealism of the left wing has always turned to violent repression of anyone who disagrees. I don't say my side of politics is guiltless; Hitler is the right wing's skeleton in the closet. I think most on the right wing would agree that he was wrong, though; we would disagree with both his repressive actions and the motivation that lay behind them.
Pilate asked the rather excellent question, "What is truth?" Is truth that which is real? or that whiich you can convince someone to believe, even by such crass means as manipulating Google search results?
posted by Tom at
09:54
2 Comments:
It's just as bad to dump all lefties in with Stalin as it is to lump the right-wingers in with Hitler. And really, Stalin wasn't a liberal. He was a communist. Liberal/conservative is a different spectrum. Oh, and I'd hope that what he did isn't taken as indicative of small-l-liberalism, but rather small-minded-pissy-ism.
Honestly, to try and say "this person is indicative of this particular ideal" is most often quite difficult. I subscribe to both liberal (minimal interference by government, don't legislate morality) and conservative (people can't be trusted, and nor can the government) ideologies, as well as practices that are traditionally assigned to either the left-wing mob (assistance for those who need it, appreciating a need for unions, equitable treatment) and the right-wing mob (sensible economic principles) all at the same time. I'm definitely left of centre, and I'm probably closer towards the liberal end of the scale than the conservative (when it comes to politics and government, at least).
The TLDR version for those who don't want to read it: don't pigeon-hole.
By
Anonymous, at 14:31
OK, fair cop, guv, not all liberals head down the Stalinist route. It was a broadside meant, largely, to annoy you, so we've succeeded there.
But I think it is disturbing that this guy thinks it's right to stifle debate rather than answer your opponent's ideas, and I do think that it is indicative of a large streak in left-wing politics. When people abandon the idea of absolute truth, then truth becomes whatever you make it; it is then OK to pull whatever dirty tricks you like.
It is stunning that this guy is so brazen about it. Supposing that the right wing were to try this sort of thing, it would be immediately labelled part of the "vast right-wing conspiracy". And what dirty, underhanded methods were used by this conspiracy? Formal charges in Congress! But when someone on the left actually tries something underhanded? It's called a grass-roots movement, necessary because, "Unless you act... your opponent's information is going to get out there." The importunity is staggering.
By
Tom, at 22:28
Post a Comment
<< Home