this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
104 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15681 readers
225 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this.

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mentioned in a different reply that this isn't a new thing and you can probably find ancient authors discussing it. Just for fun, I checked a list Schopenhauer published circa 1851 that was basically just "38 things I've frequently seen assholes do to win debates" and lo and behold:

  1. A quick way of getting rid of an opponent's assertion, or throwing suspicion on it, is by putting it into some odious category.

"Re-education program? Sounds pretty authoritarian to me. Quit spouting tankie shit." etc.

Obviously Schopenhauer is highly fallible and this is a discarded listicle that even he himself didn't like that much, but my point is that this is a common thought that may not be as present in the public consciousness now, but has been at various points in history among various groups.

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Using examples of prior writers remarking on it (but without formally naming it) adds weight to its existence in my opinion. This kind of thing would strengthen it in anything written about it.