Political psychology explained

Actually his post was a very thoughtful contribution and made a lot of sense. It is self-evidently obvious that Trump is unfit for office yet millions of Americans seem to view him as some sort of political messiah who is victim of a massive establishmentarian conspiracy. That so many believe this requires explanation and Dappy has put forward reasonable arguments as to how that has come to be, and most of what he has said stacks up. He did not say that the internet was invented in 2016 which is just an untrue straw man. What he said was actually more nuanced, that around about that time a certain populist operator whom he named as Steve Bannon, cynically realised the potential for using the internet to establish echo chambers where false narratives useful for his cause could become established. Other right wing populists have learned from this. If  the left also learns to do this on the same scale we really will be in trouble.

So basically, the problem is the right.  Ban the right and the left will live is peace and harmony forever and ever in the EU.

The mind zone is a place where we are supposed to be polite to each other . There is no rule that fallacies or false claims are prohibited.
You cant moderate a thread into making it a good debate . A fallacy free zone would soon deteriorate into an argument about fallacies .

A reasonable point, but even in your scenario they would be far less prone to flinging playground insults at each other than some of us have been guilty of on forums like this. For one thing, such a meeting would tend to be subject to some sort of chairperson enforcing reasonable conduct. And every speaker would be consciously aware of the physical presence of an audience whose reactions they would hear in real time. And the type of audience that would show up for such a debate would be unlikely to be impressed by playground insults. So even there speakers would tend to conduct themselves better than they might do here.

I know that many thought Corbyn unfit for office for a variety of reasons, some of them specious, some of them more valid.

I would say that on the personal level I believe Corbyn is a far better human being than Trump, who is clearly a self-interested narcissist.

Corbyn was at heart a back bench campaigner. As a leader he was too inflexible, not tough enough, too easily swayed in areas he did not feel strongly about. And rather too dogmatic. Too many past associations that could be weaponised against him as well. But he did at least genuinely care, which I dont think can be said for the likes of Starmer, Johnson, or Trump.

But I will say no more about this because it will side-track the discussion into areas of the utmost irrelevance. Corbyn after all is never going to be anything other than a back bench MP. Trump has a chance of again becoming president again.

Perhaps, but most of the facebook forums I have been on rarely degenerate to to depths that can sometimes be plumbed on forums such as this. Though they do also act as places where conduct might be less inhibited than in real life.

For one thing, if a person you are talking to in real life says something that makes you think him an idiot, you are unlikely to say so if he is a lot bigger than you through a reluctance to suffer a smack in the mouth. On any internet forum people would tend to be less inhibited at expressing their inner negativity. All the more so where they also have anonymity..