Many on FR seem to increasingly believe only sources on “our” side should be posted.
This makes criticism much easier. You don’t have to point out a factual or logical flaw in the article itself, only that it is from the “wrong” side.
This is beginning to get ridiculous. If we only listen to each other, we can never learn much, and most especially we won’t become familiar with the arguments of the other side and therefore be able to more effectively refute them.
It is also an argument more widely associated with leftists. No need to refute the actual argument of a “right-winger.” Just pronounce him to be such and therefore both evil and wrong, and move on. Showed him!
I’ve even had posters claim a reference from wikipedia or Snopes is by definition unacceptable, since some material from those sites is indeed infected with liberalism. They generally don’t bother to post a more authoritative source as a refutation, just assume wiki is wrong and therefore they can continue to believe as they choose without any need to prove their point.
I will cheerfully agreed wikipedia should never be accepted as a final authority, especially on anything involving politics, but it does contain a great deal of good material and is often an excellent starting point for research.
“Many on FR seem to increasingly believe only sources on “our” side should be posted.”
Worse, if you point out errors of fact, logic, or civility from one of “our” sources, you’re suddenly the “enemy yourself, to be zotted.
Bump! Completely agree Sherman!