this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023
379 points (74.2% liked)

Political Memes

5428 readers
2145 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

But…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 36 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The meme is more targeting so-called "devil's advocates" and people who argue from a position of extreme privilege. An example I can think of is people hand-waving away the existence of concentration camps and Democrats' role in colonialist border policy, which is easy for someone to say who's not imprisoned in those camps.

Or implying we need to compromise on LGBT+ equality, etc.

Does that sound like what you're doing? I'm not seeing that sort of thing in your description.

It's ok to be a vocal ally or supporter of a cause, but "devil's advocates" usually don't have anything worthwhile to contribute.

[–] flames5123@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I do love doing devil’s advocate where it helps me and my friends understand our position when faced with these questions. But I’m definitely not playing it all the time.

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I think it depends. When someone starts playing "devil's advocate" with me about the US border when I literally have friends and loved ones being wrongfully imprisoned or deported, I'd say they get a negative score on the empathy meter.

Or people playing "devil's advocate" about trans people in sports when they themselves are not trans, I'd say the same.

In fact, I can't think of an example in which someone can play devil's advocate without being so far removed from the topic at hand that they'd perhaps benefit from forestalling sharing their opinion, though I imagine between friends might be such a case, as you said.

[–] dfc09@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what "Devil's Advocate" means. It's literally the argument of the "Devil"

The way I've always used it was to lay out the arguments of my opposition, to predict how they'd think so I could prepare counters accordingly.

If somebody is claiming to play devil's advocate while voicing their own stances, they just know they have the wrong opinion on a topic and are trying to shield themselves from scorn.

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 1 points 11 months ago

they just know they have the wrong opinion on a topic and are trying to shield themselves from scorn

This very thing, but I'm not so sure they know their position is wrong per se. They just know they won't be able to defend it.

[–] flames5123@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I play devils advocate when people are talking about how to handle homeless population, taxes, etc., but if they try to debate human rights, I agree that they can f- off.

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Homeless population debates are about human rights. People who dehumanize the homeless or NIMBYs who want them displaced are horrible people.

[–] flames5123@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yes, exactly, but we all have different solutions on how to deal with the underlying issue, or even what the underlying issue actually is. I take a different stance depending on the discussion with my friends so we can poke holes in the argument together and really understand the underlying issue together. That’s what devils advocate is really for.

I’m super progressive, so I think we should be having safe use sites, making all drugs legal. For the drugs that can kill from withdrawal, we should be supplying this at these safe use sites with the hopes of weaning them off. As for homes, we just don’t have enough. Get rid of these stupid parking lots in the cities that only ever have a dozen or so cars in them and just build subsidized housing.

[–] scorpious@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

”devil's advocates”

Aka the “just asking questions” crowd.

[–] EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] scorpious@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago