You would be mistaken to think that I am suggesting meekness.
I mainly read the Qanon threads out of curiosity.
Two things that I have observed are disturbing:
1) the apparent unwillingness or inability of Q-true believers to engage in constructive dialogue with critics in a manner that is logically consistent, and
2) the apparent lack of good moral reasoning, amongst a lot of folks who say they pray and read the Bible.
I define your approach as meekness based on this quote of yours,
The ends justify the means is not an argument that conservatives should be making.
That attitude is one I have watched conservatives have since the culture wars began in ernest in the sixties. We take the high moral ground while the left uses every dirty trick in the book. And we have lost. Now we find ourselves on the brink. And you suggest we continue our losing strategy?
That is the road to ruin, goodman. In time of war, the ends DO justify the means, to a certain extent. I don't advocate fascist or genocidal tactics, but a brief suspension of the Marquis of Queensbury rules of engagement are in order and necessary. Anything less I consider meek.
Regarding morality and Christianity as an excuse to lay down and lose? I reject it.
The bible is not a suicide pact. Neither is the Constitution. I will not have the very foundations of our society turned on us and used as weapons to defeat us.
I am by no means attacking you and I appreciate your sentiments. They come from a good place, I know. I just say we cannot keep the America we know if we don't get down in the mud and fight these people.
With all due respect, goodman.
the apparent unwillingness or inability of Q-true believers to engage in constructive dialogue with critics in a manner that is logically consistent
I have to disagree with you strongly here. This group of people (Qbirds) seems very polite and reasonable to critics and the curious. Until the contingent of hostiles jumps ugly. Maybe you haven't seen that. Keep reading the threads and just watch. This is a basket of very non-deplorable people.
Our purpose, as defined by Q, is to learn together, solve puzzles together, and share knowledge. We are told to "red pill" each other and the outside world. What would be the purpose of alienating our own community members?
No. The disruptors disrupt. Some of us engage them. That is what you see.
Again. With all due respect.
First of all, I am not sure what a Q-true believer is. Even though I think I have a very good hypothesis as to Q's identity, which I will not share, to the extent that Q is just one person, and I think Q is the mouthpiece for a team, I remain skeptical as I think most Q sleuths are. They just don't have to preface every statement with an "if Q exists, then I would interpret this as follows."
Second, though the effort of Q-followers is to try to interpret what Q is saying, because the first indicator that Q is "real" is that you can find a logical, consistent credible meaning in what he is saying, a meaning that corresponds to real world events. It is like any theory. A theory is a hypothesis that some statement about reality is true. Some will claim that they have debunked the theory, e.g. evolution. But the real test is, if I assume that the theory is true can I explain things in the world that I cannot explain otherwise.
Third, some of this will be elusive because if Q is, then Q's purpose is to propagandize. And what is the purpose of propaganda - to shore up the morale of your suporters and join them in a common purpose, while undermining the morale of you enemy, confusing him and subverting his plans. Its a balance between telling truths and telling falsehoods, seeming benign to your friends and overwhelimingly terrifyingly powerful to your enemies. Q is certainly doing this.
Fourth, Q has served one purpose well, which is to remind everyone that the battle being fought is a lot bigger than fake golden shower gate and other kinds of election shenanigans. Allowing that Q is a 14 year old kid playing hooky (a singularly brilliant 14 year old as I challenge anyone here to replicate what he has been able to do), he has successfully drawn connections between a lot of the things we see going on broadening our consciousness beyond just that some idiots at the FBI got taken by a couple of Russians selling fake [or real] Trump scandal.
So the problem is that if you want to debate does Q exist before you debate what does Q mean you will be called foul names. It's one of those deep existential things. Q's existence is only meaningful to the extent what he says has meaning.
Too much time is wasted on too much blathering with trolls but the discipline not to has to be tweaked up to avoid that.
Also, some of us are so tired of the attacks of the trolls that we may be a bit trigger happy with nonsense posts, questions and contrarian tweaks.
1) the apparent unwillingness or inability of Q-true believers to engage in constructive dialogue with critics in a manner that is logically consistent, and
2) the apparent lack of good moral reasoning, amongst a lot of folks who say they pray and read the Bible.
In my view we can be Michael Medved, or we can be Donald Trump. With Trump at least we have a chance.
We are nearing the end of an 80+ year political dogfight.
Most of what we (and our parents) thought worthwhile and worth preserving has been subsumed by our enemies.
Look where they've won:
In the end, whatever we're able to prove from this Q stuff will be a footnote. The left owns the education system, and before this is erased from the history books it will be treated as nothing more than a tantrum by the illiterates.
But it's still worth doing.