Most political discussions fall apart due to people's inability to tolerate dissenting views. The inability to tolerate disagreement in a civil manner is likely just one cause.
The amygdala hijack kicks in and suddenly people are frothing at the mouth shouting and are then soon reaching for their metaphorical pitchforks. Online its all about silencing that dissention. Shut up! You can't disagree! Steps are soon taken to make such disagreeing wrongthink disappear.
It suits a child-like yet patronising view of the world but really its anti-intellectual / anti-diversity / anti-tolerance.
This is pretty much why I've checked out. I used to love discussions with people who made me see something in a different way, but these rage-driven shouting matches are illiberal (in the classical sense) and toxic. It's politics for addicts.
How’d you go from people not wanting open conflict and harassment to being anti-diversity? That’s a big leap. There is a place for civil discussion but if you get kicked out because you start screaming at people and flipping tables it’s not because you’re being oppressed, it’s because you’re being an asshole that no one wants to be around.
"[...] a place for civil discussion but if you get kicked out [...]'
That "but" is the dividing line. As soon as you cross it you've left civil discussion. (And become the asshole who needs to be ejected because of it). Most times, especially in political debates, its caused by an inability to tolerate a diverse range of views, including those you don't agree with. Polarisation overwhelms this ability even further.
"Diverse" is an overloaded term. Its not always loaded with emotion or about oppression. Diversity of opinions is useful. Tolerance of that is important.
No, I provided an example of uncivil debate namely screaming and flipping tables. As long as you can sit peaceably and discuss your views it doesn’t matter what they are.
The amygdala hijack kicks in and suddenly people are frothing at the mouth shouting and are then soon reaching for their metaphorical pitchforks. Online its all about silencing that dissention. Shut up! You can't disagree! Steps are soon taken to make such disagreeing wrongthink disappear.
It suits a child-like yet patronising view of the world but really its anti-intellectual / anti-diversity / anti-tolerance.