Political Bias on Army.ca

[CivU]

anything from the left...

 

[Cloud Cover]

anything from the left...

NO! NO! ... Your other left!!

 

[Infanteer]

anything from the left...

Although most of the senior members aren't very convinced by things from the left-of-center of the political spectrum, this is something that is a personal, member-to-member debate rather then Moderators stepping in to enforce forum guidelines.  Although I've vigorously argued against certain political ideas, I've never had to apply the user guidelines to these threads.

 

[RCA]

See generalizations don't fly. Being left of centre myself, you have to able hold your own as opposed to jumping on someone else's bandwagon, and then being unable to articulate your own position.

Comes down to one man, one kit. State your opinion, and be prepared to defend it.

 

[Ty]

anything from the left...

Actually, this is a little bit of a sore point for me.  I'm admittedly left or centre- this doesn't preclude me from embodying some traditionally "right" ideas nor does it bound me to a Liberal platform.  I try to be receptive to a wide array of thinking and when there is a cohesive and decisively informative rebuttal to my point, I usually concede.  What I've noticed is that many political debates in the forums end up with broad generalizations and labels such as "Pinko commy", "redneck warmonger", "you've been brainwashed by the leftist media", "your tin foil hat is on too tight" and so on. 

If we are to here to portray the image of professional Canadian soldiers, then I believe that there's no room for this kind of behaviour.  This is not to say that there shouldn't be debate, but debate based on facts and opinions of the matter at hand- ad homnium attacks don't accomplish anything.

 

[CivU]

"I don't go over to protester.com or turn-left.org "

I didn't realize this was the army.ca/right wing CF representative forum.  In keeping with what the other posters mentioned, while the predominant set of "values" for lack of a better term appears to be more right oriented, there is certainly an attitude on this forum that associates leftist views with exclusively juvenile unrealistic undergrads or anti-military peaceniks...I don't think this is the case.

 

[Infanteer]

I didn't realize this was the army.ca/right wing CF representative forum.

You're missing the point.   This is a private forum (thus, it isn't bound by an official neutral policy) and thus the general persuasion of the forum is going to be set by those that frequent it the most.   In that senior members tend to be (although not all) soldiers/ex-soldiers with right-or-center viewpoints, that's going to be the prevailing outlook.

There are plenty of other bulletin boards on the internet where the established membership would happily cater to the political viewpoints that some members like to express.   If people don't like the overtones here, they are free to leave and find them.

 

[CivU]

I think your missing the point.  It was asked to mention things you find disruptive or non constructive to the staff on the forum.  However, a clear lack of varying perspectives is both disruptive and non constructive to hosting a forum for meaningful discussion.  Having nearly everyone on the forum of the same right wing view is in of itself contradictory to holding a forum that discusses anything more than how much everyone agrees that Stephen Harper is the greatest thing to happen to politics since The Republic...

 

[aesop081]

you're missing the point....no you are....no you are...no you are....no you are.......i know you are but what am i ?

sound familiar ?

 

[Infanteer]

Having nearly everyone on the forum of the same right wing view is in of itself contradictory to holding a forum that discusses anything more than how much everyone agrees that Stephen Harper is the greatest thing to happen to politics since The Republic...

Well, what do you expect the staff to do on this one, shield your eyes from the viewpoints of a majority of the forum?  Now it's sounding like you are just whining because a majority of the membership didn't roll over and say "Oh golly, I guess you're right - stupid me!".

Anyways, this is largely irrelevant.  In case you never noticed, this is Army.ca, a most members contribute their thoughts to issues about the Army.  The politics forum is a sidebar, and the intent of this thread is to point out behaviours that are disruptive in the boards in general, not just those in which you can't get your way.

As I said before, if you feel that the political outlook of a majority of the members (which isn't really relevent to the core issues that the forums explore) is such an grievous injustice to your sense of well-being, you're free to leave at any time.

 

[pcain]

Well, what do you expect the staff to do on this one, shield your eyes from the viewpoints of a majority of the forum? 

Infanteer beat me to it. If you want to debate current affairs, debate current affairs. If you don't, ignore the politics threads. If most people disagree with your politics, that would make it more fun, to my mind - more worlds to conquer and all that - but that's just me.

Lead, follow or get out of the way.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I think your missing the point.   It was asked to mention things you find disruptive or non constructive to the staff on the forum.   However, a clear lack of varying perspectives is both disruptive and non constructive to hosting a forum for meaningful discussion.   Having nearly everyone on the forum of the same right wing view is in of itself contradictory to holding a forum that discusses anything more than how much everyone agrees that Stephen Harper is the greatest thing to happen to politics since The Republic...

I would disagree with your perspective.  I am a relatively senior member of Army.ca with quite (small l) liberal views, and I have been treated almost inevitably with respect - in fact I have been challenged more for my optimism than my liberalism.  People may disagree with my views, but surely we join these boards in search of discourse?  Perhaps it is because I avoid tilting at windmills, and that age has given me a bit of perspective.  Having said that, I also tend to agree with most of the posts on this thread - one doesn't go to Army.ca to talk about knitting or blacksmithing...

Dave

 

[vangemeren]

Like what other people said, the main focus of the this web site is all things military, especially Canadian, with some entertainment on the side. I like this website because it challenges opinions that I hold, which is good because it better shapes my opinions by giving the other side. This results in me changing my opinion or makes me try to get a better way to justify my thoughts. In the end, here it doesn't matter what your political stripe is, what matters is the common interest that everybody on this site has in the Canadian military and its affairs.

 

[Spartan]

I think the point of contention that I and others have is when someone presents a left of centre viewpoint - only to be ripped apart and discounted simply because it is a left idea. I do understand the strong right on this board - and that's ok, but when people are discounted on their ideas simply because of their beliefs rather than their arguements- this raises question of why.

------
BTW: This is by far the most professional and civilized forums I've come across. The wealth of information, the level of discussion, the experience tied together with real life outlooks, heck even the arguements are mainly civilized. Kudos to the staff, members and all who make it what it is.

 

[CivU]

I agree with Symchyshyn.  Discounting ideas merely because they are not consistent with your ideological platform should be left to political punditry.  Not all ideas from the left should be considered socialist fantasy, just as not all ideas from the right should be considered as Christian fundamentalism.  There is inherent value in notions from all extremes and positions on the political spectrum...

 

[Pikache]

I think your missing the point. It was asked to mention things you find disruptive or non constructive to the staff on the forum. However, a clear lack of varying perspectives is both disruptive and non constructive to hosting a forum for meaningful discussion. Having nearly everyone on the forum of the same right wing view is in of itself contradictory to holding a forum that discusses anything more than how much everyone agrees that Stephen Harper is the greatest thing to happen to politics since The Republic...

What's your point?

Want us to go out there and drag in people with different points of view?

I can't help that there is a bend towards certain views around here; the board don't enforce certain ideology, nor are there going to be such things in the future.

I suggest you either get over it, or deal with it.
If you want more people with left leanings, convince the members of your views in intelligent manner. Perhaps you'll get more people to appreciate your views.

 

[George Wallace]

I think the point of contention that I and others have is when someone presents a left of centre viewpoint - only to be ripped apart and discounted simply because it is a left idea. I do understand the strong right on this board - and that's ok, but when people are discounted on their ideas simply because of their beliefs rather than their arguements- this raises question of why.

I find this interesting.  If you don't like an opinion to be "ripped apart and discounted", if it has been put forward without proof of backup, why make it?  If someone can prove an opinion or conception that you may have to be incorrect or wrong, why can't you accept that?  Some people come here with blinders on or very narrow small closed minds and still insist that their views are the only views that are correct.  If no one on these forums can convince them that the "sky is not purple, but blue" then they have lost all credibility, no matter what their leanings, and will toyed with and eventually discounted by contributers to these forums. 

GW

 

[pcain]

I think the point of contention that I and others have is when someone presents a left of centre viewpoint - only to be ripped apart and discounted simply because it is a left idea. I do understand the strong right on this board - and that's ok, but when people are discounted on their ideas simply because of their beliefs rather than their arguements- this raises question of why.

If someone you're arguing with commits a fallacy, call them on it and carry on. Telling someone they're resorting to the ad hominem because they can't support an argument with facts and logic is often enough to get them to work harder at their side of the debate.

 

[Ty]

I find this interesting.   If you don't like an opinion to be "ripped apart and discounted", if it has been put forward without proof of backup, why make it?   If someone can prove an opinion or conception that you may have to be incorrect or wrong, why can't you accept that?   Some people come here with blinders on or very narrow small closed minds and still insist that their views are the only views that are correct.   If no one on these forums can convince them that the "sky is not purple, but blue" then they have lost all credibility, no matter what their leanings, and will toyed with and eventually discounted by contributers to these forums.  

GW

I couldn't agree more, GW!  However, this type of treatment and reception should apply equally to posts from anyone.  For example, the statements "The war in Iraq was illegal, immoral, and unjustified" and "The war in Iraq was required for the stability and safety of the region and the Iraqi people, as well as the US" should be treated with equal disdain unless they're backed up.  I believe this is the contentious issue some of us have- especially when replies become personal attacks of your political bias, and not rebuttals to your arguments.  Thick skin never hurts- but, if we're going to be fair, treat all posts the same.

 

[George Wallace]

In some cases we just have to have thick skins.  In your examples of "for" or "against" the war in Iraq, we will have to assume that the authors implication was not fact but personal opinion.  A mistake that many of us make in our hast to put forward our views.  Thankfully, as was mentioned, most of our 'discussions' have been civil and those who want to start "flame wars" or "name calling" are soon sent packing.  Hopefully with a little sense of humour and open minds we can maintain the standards as we seem to be and make this a better site.

GW