Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Ricochet Difference
I was on Fox News’ late-night roundtable show Red Eye this week. On the show, we talked a bit about the Netanyahu speech to Congress.
What I said on the show was that I think it was a risky move. (We talk a bit about this on this week’s podcast, too.) I think it was a high-wire act to appear before congress the way Netanyahu did — not because I disagree with him, but because you never know which way these things are going to cut. You never know if the American people — and the important 100 senators — are going to resent being lobbied so blatantly. And no one knows when, exactly, this deal is going to be announced, so the timing of the speech may be all wrong. I mean, if the deal points are announced in 8 weeks, when the glow of the speech has faded, Netanyahu can’t come back and speak to Congress again. He’ll have already played his best card.
Okay: agree, disagree, whatever. Here’s what I’m trying to say: the next day on Twitter, I woke up to a barrage of Tweets — most of them totally unprintable — calling me, essentially, a traitor and a liberal. (And HEY! Only Ricochet members can call me that!) Telling me to shut up, telling me I’m a disgrace, telling me I have my head somewhere dark and cramped. Calling me names that I can’t even imagine how to disguise with asterisks and semi-colons.
That’s what discourse is on Twitter and all over the web.
Here’s what happened, in case you missed it, on Ricochet the next day:
Member Larry 3435 and I got into a civil and spirited debate about the same thing. He made some excellent points. I made some points. We went back and forth. We disagreed. We were respectful and, yes, even kind to each other. Imagine that! On the internet! Talking about politics and national security! (We even got into a little history!) Check out the conversation, if you’re interested.
Look, the angry Tweeters may be right. I may in fact have my head in a tight and lightless spot. But, I mean, Good Lord! Shouldn’t smart, nice people like me and Larry3435 have a place to hash things over like civilized people?
The only thing missing from Ricochet sometimes is the glass of wine or whiskey to wrap up a debate or conversation.
Published in General
Let me run this up the flagpole.
How does the Ricochet method work? Why does it work? Yes, we’ve lucked into a reasonably sane, nice group of people. But other sites have nice people; after all, it’s a public site. And yes, Ricochet has a code of conduct; but then again, so do most other sites. And yes, there are editors who enforce the code, but then again, so do most other sites.
I suggest the difference is that on Ricochet, you’re expected to explain yourself.
Slinging mud is an emotive, subconscious, tribal, lashing-out behavior. It isn’t an opinion as much as it is a visceral reaction. But when you’re expected to explain yourself, you have to stop and think. Even if you (or the other guy, itching to insult you) come up with a completely artificial, bogus, self-deluded rationalization that everyone knows is BS, at least you had to take the time to stop and think about it. I mean, you had to come up with something to save face, and that takes time. That stop-time is what deflates the emotion. That pause is what gives your sanity a chance to catch up to your anger.
Besides, Ricochet also has some celebrities and highly visible professionals. Next to their celebrity, being a “feared gladiator” on a blog isn’t so impressive. So the urge to acquire an intimidating reputation (which other sites encourage) is muted here. But if you can explain yourself, you instantly put yourself on the same level as anyone else. Your reasonableness is rewarded.
Rob – we try to save the harsh language about you for our PMs……kidding, of course.
Thanks for what you have built here, it is very refreshing to have a place where one can have a conversation about Latin American trade policy and it does not degrade into insulting one’s mother
And for those thinking about joining but concerned they might miss the personal attacks. If you join I will be happy to send you an email every morning right after you get the Daily Shot where I swear up a storm and explain exactly where I think you have your head stuck
Actually, RyanM used his glass of Scotch as an illustration of a point on last night’s Nightcap Audio Meet Up. On there I also lamented how seldom we see Ricochet mentioned in the accolades and bonafides of contributors when they appear on Fox News and other outlets.
Hold on, Rob. Your membership drive has a small flaw. I shall explain.
Durn tootin’ no one can call you a squish.
You may be a RINO, but you’re our RINO.
I assume Harry’s will add those items to their product line at some point.
Rob, I will send an 11×14 naked poster to any new female enrollee.
It won’t be me though, I have tons of others in a file entitled Mike LaRoche. The fact that he doesn’t know I’ve been photographing him might be a legal issue though so ask your team.
Go Schilling on them!
The best thing about Ricochet for me was that it restored my faith in my fellow humans.
The commenters on other sites are not representative of the American population. :)
“A Tight and Lightless Spot”. Sheer poetry, Mr. Long. I will introduce this into my repertoire.
So you’re telling me that what Mike’s been posting aren’t selfies?
I like her better in a pair of boots:
In addition to the fine points Rob makes above, Ricochet has members who can find reasons to post cheerleader pictures into conversations regardless of the topic. So, join today and go Red Raiders!
I hear you. I’m always excited when I see Mollie Hemingway on TV, but I wish they would also mention that she’s a Ricochet contributor when they list her credentials.
I wonder if any nice, smart, curious people on the left would be interested in reading Ricochet? I bet there are some liberals out there who might like to converse with decent people who hold right-wing views.
Well, I just wanted to add…wait a minute…Whoa! That girl is cute!
What were we talking about again?
Mr. Long: I am sorry to hear you were treated badly by people who are on the right. Their behavior contradicts every true conservative principle. Edmond Burke would be pained. Russel Kirk would be miffed. Know that you have created a home for yourself and others here at Ricochet, where discourse remains civil and reason is respected.
Some lefties have tried, but their arguments always come back at some point to “but I feel this!!!!1!” and so they quit. When we respond, “go ahead and have whatever feelings you want, then explain how to pay for that proposal” they can’t take it anymore. We often feel many of the same emotions they do, but we’re simply much better at handling the truth that there is still (and never will be) such a thing as a free lunch. Sure, I’d love to just magic everyone out of poverty and into good “living wage” jobs, but if straightening the crooked timber of humanity were that easy we’d have done it by now. It’s just easier for people on the left to believe that we’re standing in the way rather than accept the reality that their utopia is not possible in this iteration of the existential universe.
I’d be delighted to have among us the kind of sensible leftist who would say, “Well, no, of course not, but that’s not what we’re arguing. We understand that the value of “lunch” is related to many things, including scarcity, so let’s look at commodity prices, how hungry people are, and so forth. We get all of these arguments, really. Our argument is that in some cases it may indeed make sense for taxpayers to subsidize lunches. If you accept that it makes perfect sense to subsidize MREs for the military, you’ve already accepted the idea of “taxpayer-subsidized lunch.”
“So what we’re arguing about is budget priorities. Here’s why I think it makes sense to subsidize lunches in certain public schools, too–if kids are genuinely facing starvation. But in a measured and careful way, given that we don’t want to create disincentives to ‘buying your own lunch.’ (Or parents buying lunch for their kids.) Possibly the best way to do this is to provide an awful but free lunch. The kind you’d only eat if you were genuinely starving–and we mean old-fashioned ‘starving,’ not ‘really hungry.’ MREs, in fact, might be kind of the right idea. Because if that’s the free lunch, we can be assured that the minute these kids’ parents can afford to buy them something that tastes like food, they will be highly motivated to do so.”
I’ve met that kind. I think having them here would make things more fun.
Conservatives THINK. Liberals FEEL. That’s the over-arching difference, and why those tweets were often vulgar. Libs have no real ideas, so they only way they can carry on a conversation is by name-calling and cursing.
Actually, it was conservatives that were sending him those tweets.
I’ve tried, oh how I’ve tried, to have rational, reasonable debates with liberal friends. The problem as I have found it is that liberals don’t take conservative arguments seriously. They tend to go straight to their talking points without refuting the conservative point, that, truth be told, if not refuted logically carries the argument.
There are so many examples.
Being unprintably mean to Rob Long would be too much like kicking a blind, three-legged puppy.
When I’m mean (for no reason) to Rob Long I prefer that it be printable.
;-)
Yabbut, no true Scotsman would…
That’s what I’m talking about, I know those people are out there, and it would be nice to converse with them. If they paid to participate that would be motivation to not allow things to descend too much.
Exactly! That’s why we have a CoC!