In the rare instances that the lib you are talking to truly doesn’t know any better and is only a lib because of upbringing/political illiteracy it can be, depending on how constructively you go about it. If you are arguing with a clear turbolib then no that isn’t praxis.
I would contend that publicly shaming/humiliating unrepentant libs for the sake of highlighting their flaws to libs more on the fence could be considered praxis. I’m curious to see if others might agree with that sentiment.
There are a lot more lurkers on any forum than active members who comment. Everyone here has read a thousand more posts/comments than they’ve made. Getting lurkers to consider what you say is a very real thing, and people do change their political beliefs based on what they read online.
Agreed, and there’s a social component too. The ability to form communities around ideology and common ground is the biggest gift the Internet gave to leftist thought (and the ability to dismantle liberal thought in the open).
This was also why it was so important to capital to dismantle leftist spaces on Reddit like Chapo Trap House and imply an equivalence between it and fascism by simultaneously removing the Donald (which should have been purged long before).
Not to oversell the utility of arguing with libs, but usually it’s the bystanders who get something out of the conversation, not the lib you’re conversing with directly. There’s no point in conversing in old posts, and little point in continuing a conversation beyond the “X more replies →” fold, because there’s usually no audience.
In the rare instances that the lib you are talking to truly doesn’t know any better and is only a lib because of upbringing/political illiteracy it can be, depending on how constructively you go about it. If you are arguing with a clear turbolib then no that isn’t praxis.
I would contend that publicly shaming/humiliating unrepentant libs for the sake of highlighting their flaws to libs more on the fence could be considered praxis. I’m curious to see if others might agree with that sentiment.
There are a lot more lurkers on any forum than active members who comment. Everyone here has read a thousand more posts/comments than they’ve made. Getting lurkers to consider what you say is a very real thing, and people do change their political beliefs based on what they read online.
Agreed, and there’s a social component too. The ability to form communities around ideology and common ground is the biggest gift the Internet gave to leftist thought (and the ability to dismantle liberal thought in the open).
This was also why it was so important to capital to dismantle leftist spaces on Reddit like Chapo Trap House and imply an equivalence between it and fascism by simultaneously removing the Donald (which should have been purged long before).
Not to oversell the utility of arguing with libs, but usually it’s the bystanders who get something out of the conversation, not the lib you’re conversing with directly. There’s no point in conversing in old posts, and little point in continuing a conversation beyond the “X more replies →” fold, because there’s usually no audience.