Sure that is possible. There are definitely subjects on which others are more informed. But the moment someone shows up with a full blown CCCP banner (or similar) and a username to match... there is no good faith conversation to be had.

Just like people defending faiths that are radically anti-gay and at the same time professing to be an lgbti+ advocate....

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I can sympathize with why you would think this. I am also not saying you are wrong per se, but I want you to know that many leftists with seemingly strange opinions have spent much time analyzing and considering the stuff they are vocal about. That does not mean they are automatically right, but it could mean that to understand their positions fully, in order to do things like evaluate bad or good faith discussions, more effort is required than usual. Hence I think you might be in danger of mischaracterizing those you think you disagree with. Ultimately, that might contribute to you having stances that could disagree with your values.

As a personal example, one thing that I had to spend a lot of time thinking about was the concepts of violence and authoritarianism. I have deep aversion for both, but also a clearer idea of what they actually are than I had before, with the consequence of some different stances on a range of issues.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Well and this is it, the civil discourse and healing a good talk. Thanks!

I hope I see you around on Lemmy more often as I'm open to new viewpoints and maybe I learn new thing. I will also enthousiastically block those who bring nothing but vitriol.