Web Hate
Poor Gideon Rachman. Yesterday he wrote a typically even-handed, or perhaps very mildly progressivist, piece about the onset of world government. I linked to it below. The article, which had its author’s email address at the bottom, was also picked up by Matt Drudge. Today, Rachman woke up to find more than 200 emails, most of them horribly abusive, from enraged anti-globalists.
Today, Rachman blogs that “the whole experienced has given me an insight into the mindset of the gun-toting, bible-bashing, nationalistic bit of the United States.” True to an extent, but surely most of “gun-toting, bible-bashing, nationalistic bit” (it’s more like a chunk) of the United States do not spend their days reading Matt Drudge-linked articles from the Financial Times. Rachman, understandably wounded, has gone too far. Many respondents, he explains, were “End of Days” enthusiasts. No doubt they were, but a few–200 is not that many–hatemail nuts should not be conflated with the vast cross-section of America’s firearm-fond, flag-waving Christians.
Rather, the lesson here should be that a disturbingly high number of people who comment–the noble example of TAC’s polite and intelligent commenters outstanding–under web articles are mad and nasty and best ignored. Look around the web: it is often astonishing to see the levels of hatred and viciousness that the most harmless words can engender. The Internet places none of society’s constraints upon its users, so webman resorts to his default human setting: outright, depraved hostility. It’s quite scary when you think about it.
It is quite scary when you think about it. There are times in various threads around the internet where I really do fear, just a little, for my fellow man…
Rather, the lesson here should be that a disturbingly high number of people who comment–the noble example of TAC’s polite and intelligent commenters outstanding–under web articles are mad and nasty and best ignored
Your comment makes me so angry, you jerk. /irony
That is one of the main reasons I love reading this site and its comments. There aren’t 200 of them, most with horrible spelling/punctuation, and they’re intelligent and thoughtful.
Some site commenters are also quick to label those with differenting opinions “trolls.” It’s really quite awful.
Many respondents, he explains, were “End of Days” enthusiasts. No doubt they were, but a few–200 is not that many–hatemail nuts should not be conflated with the vast cross-section of America’s firearm-fond, flag-waving Christians.
Perhaps, but there are also a number harboring exactly the same views who don’t tune into Drudge (or blogs or online news much at all for that matter) who aren’t likely to respond via email.
Look around the web: it is often astonishing to see the levels of hatred and viciousness that the most harmless words can engender.
“Harmless words”? Really?
The concept of one-world government is so loathesome to me (and so poisonous to the future of human freedom) that I have a hard time imagining how any criticism of someone who spoke neutrally or favorably of it could ever truly be “too harsh”.
Could there be anything more monstrous than one-world government? I won’t belabor the obvious points of how power, once concentrated, would go unchecked, nor will I criticize an article that I didn’t read, but if advocacy or verbalized neutrality help make world government more likely (they might), and if it is an unmitigated evil (it is), then it’s worthwhile to resist the latter by verbally attacking anyone doing the former.
I, too, wish that everyone were always courteous on the internet, but I think that Barry Goldwater has a better word on this subject than Freddy Gray seems to.
“Bitter clingers”…when will the left let go of its prejudice?
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/
…but the depraved hostility is SO entertaining!
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/
OMG! i cant bleev u ppl! al u xtreemists shud b taken out str8 away and shot!
Sorry, but there’s a time and a place for everything, and I’ve been just itching to type “OMG” and “ppl” somewhere on @TAC comments.
Twitter anyone?
I have to agree with Mr. Swarz.
As much as I appreciate the civility of the discourse on this site, I don’t see any reason to pull any (verbal) punches with anyone who advocates or tolerates the movement of mankind towards government that is increasingly powerful, increasingly distant from and increasingly unaccountable to the people it governs. No great offense against mankind can succeed without the cowardly abetment of opinion-makers that believe— and worse, convince others— that something intolerable must be accepted, because it is inevitable.
‘Rather, the lesson here should be that a disturbingly high number of people who comment–the noble example of TAC’s polite and intelligent commenters outstanding–under web articles are mad and nasty and best ignored.’
I agree up until ‘ignored’. Even assholes make a point sometimes. And since I’m someone who occasionally has a good point but am not a very good writer I wouldn’t want only the washed being heard.
The problem isn’t the anger it’s the level of education. Alot of people simply have no idea what they are talking about and yet they seem to be the most confident in what they’re saying. We’ve spent too many years appealing to people’s common sense that some have come to believe that common sense is a gift, that it’s not what it’s name says, common. They’ve ignored education because they were told they don’t need it, coomon sense is all you need.
Don’t ignore them, help them. They’ve been misled.
Further reflections at Volokh Conspiracy. http://www.volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_12_14-2008_12_20.shtml#1229381121.
Volokh and TAC — two of my favorite websites!
Oh, really? Have you ever considered that it might just be the opposite?
Read the e-book The Underground History of American Education, by John Taylor Gatto, and see if it doesn’t rearrange some of your prejudices. It sure did some of mine. ◄Dave►