My issue with the two sides

One fairly common concept you’ll inevitably stumble upon if you spend any modicum of time reading discussions on the web is the idea of “two sides”. Some will tell you that the two sides are not the same and one is clearly better than the other, others will argue that not taking one side means that you’re tacitly supporting the other, while someone else will tell you that trying to argue that maybe more nuanced positions exist, in addition to the two sides, is wrong and you’re a bad person for doing that.

All this is fair, and I’m more than happy to concede that, in some circumstances, one side is indeed clearly better than the other. I’m also happy to concede that again, in some circumstances, not expressing a preference for one of the two camps, when one is clearly better than the other, can be seen as tacit support for the worse one. I’m also more than happy to agree that sometimes dragging a discussion into the mud that is the infinite fractal world of the fine details is not really all that helpful.

Having said all that, I still think way too often conversations on the web have the tendency to completely obliterate any level of nuance. Which is understandable, considering most conversations are taking place on social media platforms that aren’t designed to have nuanced conversations in the first place. There are ideas and concepts that demand more than 300 characters to be expressed fully, but unfortunately, sometimes even saying that can be seen as problematic in some circles. And that is unfortunate.

It is unfortunate because progress can only be had if people have enough space and time to express themselves fully and then have their ideas challenged constructively. And yes, I’m already hearing you screaming that some racist bigots out there don’t deserve to have their views treated respectfully and be given time and space. I get it, and I understand it.

The problem I see with this, though, is that the internet is a weird place. A lot of people aren’t vocal. Most of them are just lurking around, absorbing content and forming ideas in their head and maybe discussing things in person with close friends and family. And amongst them, there probably are a lot of people who would be more than happy to support and join the good one of the two sides, but are probably kept at a distance because of the insanity they see unfolding.

I’m gonna pick a stupid example to make this point a bit clearer. Let’s imagine the topic of the day is “kicking puppies”. One camp is happily going around supporting the kicking of puppies because it’s a fun thing to do, and puppies are worthless and annoying, while the other camp thinks puppies are adorable—they are—and they are living creatures and deserve to not be kicked and instead loved and adored. It’s fairly easy to see that one camp, clearly, is better than the other, and if you are a sane and decent person, you should not have a hard time figuring out which camp is worth siding with. And sure, you might be one of those people who might argue that in some cases, puppies can be problematic because maybe they are puppies of a terrible invasive species that will destroy the solar system in 3 years if we don’t kick them all now. But, generally speaking you should find it easy to side with one of the two sides, even if only with some asterisk attached.

But what if the pro-puppies camp you hear from online doesn’t stop at "puppies should be loved" but also argues that people who kick puppies should all die now and be dissolved in acid and their families be shot into the sun? You clearly are supporting the puppies' cause, but you are definitely not on board with all the rest of the nonsense.

What do you do then, when someone screams at you, asking which side you are siding with? You clearly love puppies, but you also don’t want to support drowning people in acid. So you’re fucked. You could try to explain your position, but nobody got time for that. Chances are, you say nothing, and you silently move away from the public discourse space, never to be seen or heard again.

I don’t know about you, but I think that’s bad. It’s bad when a lot of people are scared to express what they think because they are scared of the repercussions. Because you can’t have a healthy society without open dialogue. And I don’t even know how we fix this at the internet level. I don’t think there even is a way to fix this to be perfectly honest with you. It’s up to the individuals to go through the effort of giving other people time and space to express themselves and engage in dialogue. And if that's the only way out, well, shit.