"This whole "talk about politics on the internet" as if it makes a difference thing? We're still doing this? We think the things we say on the internet matter to literally anyone? We think if we craft the perfect anti-Trump argument, maybe one person will change their mind? I mean listen, go ahead. I'm not saying you shouldn't do it. I'm just saying it's worse than internet porn."
"We're still doing this? We think the things we say on the internet matter to literally anyone? We think if we craft the perfect anti-Trump argument, maybe one person will change their mind? I mean listen, go ahead. I'm not saying you shouldn't do it. I'm just saying it's worse than internet porn. Because at least with internet porn, you eventually achieve end goal with that."
Online political conversation is futile and unlikely to change anyone's mind. There is skepticism that crafting ideal arguments, even anti-Trump ones, will convert a single person. Continuing such efforts is permitted but framed as pointless compared with internet pornography, which at least delivers a clear, tangible result. The tone is sarcastic and resigned, implying online persuasion is performative and self-rewarding rather than efficacious. The argument emphasizes outcome-oriented value, asserting that activities that reliably produce a result feel more sensible than protracted, fruitless debate.
Read at Portland Mercury
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]