Why not? Is it because you think that they are, in fact, not dumb? Is it because you realize that calling them dumb is unlikely to spur intellectual growth?

Is it because they consider their opponents to be smug intellectuals with no common sense, and calling them dumb would just reinforce a kind of reciprocal dismissal?

Is it something else? Seriously, I'm curious about your reasons.

@TheMiddleWay I "100% Absolutely" disagree with this. If a Democrat claimed one of their Republican colleagues supported Al-Qaeda and got censured and punished, I would totally understand it. You honestly think Republicans and Democrats are exactly the same on this front?

@TheMiddleWay That's not what I asked at all. You were asking about silencing of voices and claimed that Republicans and Democrats have an equal lack of understanding of it. Show me where huge swaths of Democrats were unable to understand why a Democrat who spewed hate speech or incited a terrorist attack got silenced or something even remotely as egregious.

@TheMiddleWay Okay, I'm specifically asking about this:

People are people and a singular statistic, such as political leaning, religious belief, or scientific knowledge, does not make people any less tribalistic about their beliefs.

If a Democrat claimed one of their Republican colleagues supported Al-Qaeda and got censured and punished, I would totally understand it. You honestly think Republicans and Democrats are exactly the same on this front?

@TheMiddleWay So you think that if a Democrat incited a domestic terrorist attack and got banned from social media, Democrats would be behaving the same way? Do you have any evidence you're basing that conclusion on?

@TheMiddleWay Not exactly, but commensurate. Not sure what violence you're taking about, or who promoted it, or what your definition of promotion is though. If we're taking about BLM protests like the equivocators at Fox like to drone on about, and you are saying statements like 'I understand why people are rioting when there is clear evidence of systemic racism and no movement on it whatsoever' are supporting it, I think that's horribly disingenuous. Did "liberal media" actively condone it, call them patriots, etc? Were there liberal leaders inciting the violence at the protests? Did liberal groups collect huge sums of money for violent perpetrators? Maybe I missed all that. It's possible, I don't follow the news closely at all. But until you can really find counterparts for all the most egregious shit the Right does, I think you're lying to yourself and everyone else here when you say they're two sides of the same coin.

@TheMiddleWay That's a cop out. That's like saying that someone who robs a house is on the same level as someone who robs a house with a gun and while doing so ties up the whole family and rapes them. There are degrees to crimes and additional crimes do change the nature of the situation. To pretend they don't is incomprehensible equivocation.
I'm not saying you can't condemn reprehensible behavior of Democrats. By all means, have at it. I'm just saying it's intellectually dishonest to claim they are essentially the same when they are anything but.

@TheMiddleWay I'm sorry, that's not isomorphic either. By that rationale Bernie Madoff and my nephew became isomorphic when my nephew stole a stick of gum.
Something that is far more egregious and far more supported by one's own party than the acts and support from the opposition is not corresponding in form. It's just not.

Good to hear your views are not based on a foundation of equality though.

@TheMiddleWay But these situations aren't even isomorphic.

@TheMiddleWay Well, we're not going to get anywhere. That's pure nonsense. If your "mapping" is so loose that it ignores degrees of crimes, levels of depravity, or breadth of support coming from one's own camp we can't have any sort of meaningful conversation. What I can tell you is that your non-qualified-statement that the actions on both sides are isomorphic is horribly misleading to anyone who doesn't question you about it like I did. To me, and I imagine a majority of people, it would no different than shouting "OJ is INNOCENT" in 1994 without qualifying you are taking about him shaving points in a game and not a double homicide.

@TheMiddleWay So then wouldn't the Republican arrow on regards to the Democrats non-existent coup attempt and terrorist attack on the Capitol being zero make them non-isomorphic?

@TheMiddleWay Wait, what?! Didn't the Senate Intelligence Committee release a report that clearly detail cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russia?? I can't with this conversation any more.

So wait, they support so those horrible things, but I can't call them dumb? Doesn't thinking 'white skin makes you superior' make you dumb alone?

@TheMiddleWay I have given up all hope that any of the people I'm taking about have any chance whatsoever to understand a reasonable, logical argument. In the argument that prompted this post, the Republican "100% Absolutely" thinks that anyone should be allowed to say anything they want, any time, any place. I tried multiple times with very clear examples why that made no sense and he was "100% Absolutely" impervious to reason. I'm sorry there's such a negative connotation to the word 'dumb'. There shouldn't be. No one chooses their level of intelligence any more than how tall they are or the color of their eyes. But it's no less factual that there are dumb people. It's the Dunning-Kruger that goes along with it that's the real problem. When I'm in a room with a bunch of people who are smarter than me (which happens semi-regularly at my job) I shut the fuck up and listen. The truly dumb people don't. They think they're geniuses.

@TheMiddleWay As stated, I don't think they have any ability to "work on" anything. If you can't understand something that's clearly explained to you with analogous examples, then there's no hope. My post is not really about fixing them, it's about highlighting another reason why the divide will grow until we get done with Civil War 2 or fall into authoritarian rule.