#unconstructive

the time I've spent looking for it, organizing all my files in hopes of it magically appearing, I could've spent writing it from the start.

"Oh, you aren't going to wildly overpraise that thing or person? You have some critique for something? You must be a HATER which is basically a big old BULLY which means every REASONABLE person should ignore and ostracise you"

Orrrrr

you do not employ intersectionality of gender, race, economy, politics, language and culture

you accuse another State of human rights abuses whilst ignoring your own State's record

you reduce religious identity to broad categories

you absent the roles of power and economy in the relationship between a religion and a State

you divorce power from psychology, physiology, ideology and theology

you regard the State as a new and 'unnatural' phenomenon rather than as an evolved and intrinsically human institution

you fail to recognise 'your gaze' on an issue - that how you perceive an issue has been shaped by multiple influences, many of which you may be unaware of

you underestimate the innate human drive for survival and how that motivates people to seemingly act against what you might perceive as their 'own group' or 'best interests'

you look at a conflict and quickly identify the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys'

your analysis is conducted entirely through the lens of one ideology

you absent the possibility that at any given time the information we gather to assess a situation and come to a judgement is a tiny fraction of what is actually needed to arrive at any conclusion about 'fact' or 'truth'

your understanding of the historical context is colour blind and gender blind

your motivation in a discussion is largely shaped by defensiveness of a national identity, culture or set of values regardless of their content or impact on others

you assume you are right simply because of the accident of your birth, colour, gender

you assume you are right regardless of the accident of your birth, colour, gender

you are unable to 'put yourself in another person's shoes' and see an issue from their perspective, right or wrong

you frame your position in absolutist and universalising moral terms

you glibly label people with terms such as 'evil', 'ungodly', 'terrorist'

you don't 'follow the money'

you don't account for the corruptibility of people

you argue from a position of assumed superiority, legitimacy and authority

you fail to recognise the way fear and mortality shapes behaviour