I think, Jacob, that part of the problem with your liberal stance here is that it doesn't really take into account the fact that it factors out any kind of emotional response to anything, and tends not to consider the emotional response of others. When you make attempts to consider the point of view of a group of people or organisation who are considered bad by the overwhelming majority, you will inevitably astound people.
Since you apply the liberal attitude to the viewpoint of the KKK, I would imagine you'd be happy to apply the same liberal attitude to the viewpoint of people who see you commenting on this stuff.
For instance, let us consider the standard viewer - through the eyes and mind of whom, I will attempt to observe your postings. When I look at your comments, I see someone who is making an effort to understand the KKK's point of view. However I question your reasons for this... why are you doing that? For the average person, the answer to that might be, because you sympathise with them. You have to remember, that most of these people are so hateful of the KKK that they don't consider their viewpoint to be worth considering, as to them it would be "redundant by default". Therefore anyone considering it objectively without showing any signs of emotional response to the subject matter, is entirely and wholly logically open to accusations of sympathising. It makes sense if you think about it.
This may seem offtopic but I think it's interesting to look at how people react to this sort of thing, as it's something that I dealt with in my child sex thread. Looking at it objectively, outside of any preconcieved ideals, you see the logic and merit in the form of how and how not something may be beneficial. It's suprising how much subject matter people's perceptions on their own can bring to a debate.
|