A response to claims of 'astroturphing'?

George Monbiot has written an article in which he has set out an argument about how he believes that some people use forums and comments on the Internet to advance a particular agenda that he disapproves of and that 'like minded' people should think of ways to deal with that - see the article here.

Basically, he appears to want to open up the debate with people that he agrees with - rather than with people who disagree with him.  He accuses this he opposes of 'being organised'; as if organisation for a particular viewpoint itself was a 'wrong' - but at the same time he then seeks to organise resistence to the views that he opposes. 

Experience tells us that there are some who will use the Internet to abuse others - even to lie and libel others.  Such abuse will need to be dealt with properly and proportionately, but to respond to argument, even organised argument, by refusing to engage is both divisive and potentially dangerous.

Divisive because if we don't engage with those we disgaree with, then we will never learn about their views and motiviations - we will never develop ideas and thoughts through engagement and we will never grow to understand that others disagree with us for perfectly reasonable reasons and with thoughts and ideas that are as valid as our own, even if we disagree when them.

Dangerous because the more and greater the division, the refusal to recognise that others disagree with us leads to a potential for misunderstanding and suspicion that helps no-one. 

It is not for nothing that the extremes of political views (on all sides) are very often punctuated by a belief that those that disagree with you are in some way less able, less intelligent, less informed or even less human.

George Monbiot needs to remember that those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.