Alright, since you’re confused, let me try to break this down for you.
Here’s your original message:
I mean…yeah…but also fuck the democrats. We shouldn’t be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or “just” genocide and fascism there. There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
Okay, so
I mean…yeah…
Okay, this could mean two things: you agree, or you are acknowledging someone’s position
but
Alright, so, now we know that if you agree, then you have a disagreement on how it’s presented. Alternatively, you have acknowledged their position and are disagreeing with it.
also
Again, this doesn’t tell me whether or not you agree, this just says you have something to say in addition to a prior statement (“I mean…yeah…but”). It still doesn’t indicate whether or not you actually agree or if you’re just acknowledging their position.
fuck the democrats.
Alright, so here’s an actual position. Not unreasonable imo; however, it is a very hostile statement.
We shouldn’t be stuck in this position of genocide and fascism there and here or “just” genocide and fascism there.
I agree with this too, absolutely a reasonable position to take. However, you’ve yet to clarify if you actually agree with OP, or if you’re taking an opposing side. If you think that it should be obvious by this point, you’re right.
In a sane environment this statement shouldn’t be ambiguous.
In a sane environment someone would read this and think that you’re describing the Dems (making an assumption here) as being the lesser of two evils.
However, this statement also indicates disapproval of the Democrats, which, again, is a reasonable position to take in a sane world. However, there are enough people who say this as a way to put people back on the fence (or even get them to vote for a different party) that I still can’t rule anything out at this point.
There are certainly degrees of being a piece of shit, but at this point, we are splitting hairs.
Now you’re reducing the idea of Palestinians being genocided vs Palestinians, LGBT, PoC, women seeking abortions, etc being genocided to “po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe”. That’s what splitting hairs usually refers to. It’s needlessly debating something considered trivial or mundane. I think that is what is getting you into trouble.
Implying that the difference between one group and many groups being subjected to genocide is not a trivial thing, and it casts doubt on the rest of your statement. Personally it makes me think you’re trying to argue for voting 3rd party during this election.
So, I can see how you thought your statement was clear, but unfortunately there are enough bad actors on Lemmy that it wasn’t as clear as you thought it was.
Edit: if you want to clarify your position, you could say something like, “fuck the Dems, I hate that Harris is our only option” or “I hate that I feel like I have to vote for Harris”. This way you have clarified that you intend to vote for Harris, or that you agree that Harris is better than Trump, while also voicing your distaste for the Democrats.
Alright, since you’re confused, let me try to break this down for you.
Here’s your original message:
Okay, so
Okay, this could mean two things: you agree, or you are acknowledging someone’s position
Alright, so, now we know that if you agree, then you have a disagreement on how it’s presented. Alternatively, you have acknowledged their position and are disagreeing with it.
Again, this doesn’t tell me whether or not you agree, this just says you have something to say in addition to a prior statement (“I mean…yeah…but”). It still doesn’t indicate whether or not you actually agree or if you’re just acknowledging their position.
Alright, so here’s an actual position. Not unreasonable imo; however, it is a very hostile statement.
I agree with this too, absolutely a reasonable position to take. However, you’ve yet to clarify if you actually agree with OP, or if you’re taking an opposing side. If you think that it should be obvious by this point, you’re right.
In a sane environment this statement shouldn’t be ambiguous.
In a sane environment someone would read this and think that you’re describing the Dems (making an assumption here) as being the lesser of two evils.
However, this statement also indicates disapproval of the Democrats, which, again, is a reasonable position to take in a sane world. However, there are enough people who say this as a way to put people back on the fence (or even get them to vote for a different party) that I still can’t rule anything out at this point.
Now you’re reducing the idea of Palestinians being genocided vs Palestinians, LGBT, PoC, women seeking abortions, etc being genocided to “po-tay-toe/po-tah-toe”. That’s what splitting hairs usually refers to. It’s needlessly debating something considered trivial or mundane. I think that is what is getting you into trouble.
Implying that the difference between one group and many groups being subjected to genocide is not a trivial thing, and it casts doubt on the rest of your statement. Personally it makes me think you’re trying to argue for voting 3rd party during this election.
So, I can see how you thought your statement was clear, but unfortunately there are enough bad actors on Lemmy that it wasn’t as clear as you thought it was.
Edit: if you want to clarify your position, you could say something like, “fuck the Dems, I hate that Harris is our only option” or “I hate that I feel like I have to vote for Harris”. This way you have clarified that you intend to vote for Harris, or that you agree that Harris is better than Trump, while also voicing your distaste for the Democrats.