[smhost]

> This is incredibly disingenuous.

> Much of the left considers simple disagreement to be micro-aggression...

Tone down on the hypocrisy. If you want your side's arguments to be evaluated fairly, don't make ridiculous oversimplifications of the other side's positions.

[smsm42]

Reading the lists of micro-aggressions, like this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... one can not fail to notice that some of them are clearly political disagreements and that disagreeing with the left tribe dogmas is declared to be micro-aggression there. I can agree that this is ridiculous, but apparently whoever wrote those lists does not think so.

[DalaiObama]

Have you tried actually disagreeing with leftists?

Many can handle it fine and have a decent discussion. But many will explode in self righteous rage and do all the things people blinded by hate do.

[LyndsySimon]

This is my experience as well. On the right, extremists tend to sort of "clam up" and just stop engaging in meaningful dialogue. On the left, they tend to attack the person challenging them.

I say this as as extreme libertarian, so I have my share of disagreements with both.

[twh270]

It's hardly a 'simplification' when people on the left regularly use the kind of speech I described to attack people who disagree with them. The right is just as guilty, but the comment I responded to was giving the left a pass on it, which is what I object to.

[rhizome]

They weren't giving the left a pass on it, they said the offended-right was using the same language.

[humanrebar]

To be fair, it was a reply to a comment pointing out hypocrisy with at least a bit of snark.