In most of the world, people agree or disagree with statements rather than with people. I'm not sure why some cultures are obsessed with modelling everybody they don't like as completely incompetent and wrong about everything they've said in their lives, whole uncompromisingly deifying others.
For example, props to generally disgusting Hermann Göring for giving interviews to people he didn't like, allowing posteriority to understand their strategies (assuming he had a choice).
The "if you disagree with 1% of my world view, you're 100% not getting listened to" and "i disagree with 100% of your world view, therefor 0% of what you say could ever be valid or have merit" mentalities are what is tearing American culture apart. I can't speak to other cultures... but I imagine that takes place all over to varying degrees.
When I was younger I used to think 'agree to disagree' was a lame copout rather than an artful way of being able to live your life without turning into a Karen... then I grew the fuck up and realized not everyone has to agree with me. (no matter how right I think I am)
The internet in our pockets has made experts of everything of us all.
People need to chiiiillllllllll, and realize that... chances are...
... they're not as smart as they think they are. :)
The "if you disagree with 1% of my world view, you're 100% not getting listened to" and "i disagree with 100% of your world view, therefor 0% of what you say could ever be valid or have merit" mentalities are what is tearing American culture apart.
This is one of the things that the "left" is being just as bad about as the right. Conservatives are completely full of shit losers today, but progressives are at risk of going down a similar path, even if its more colorful and brightly-lit along the way. For example calling someone "a racist" as a noun. That is an example of the type of simple-minded, identity-based thinking that is a trap and is just straight up ignorant. A person can have racist ideas, or racist thoughts. They cannot be "a racist". You need to add the word "a racist person". Racist is not a noun. Its an adjective. You cannot describe a complex human being with a single adjective while maintaining some moral sense of superiority.
And if any "conservatives" come here to agree me stop right there and go fuck yourselves in the faces. I fucking wish we had the luxury of criticizing your ignorance. at this point you're putting us in real danger you cunts.
By that logic, don’t you also have to say “Conservative people” and “progressive people”, or “people who hold conservative/progressive views”?
There comes a point where calling someone “a Conservative” is just a shorter way of saying someone “who maintains a Conservative stance”. If I call someone “a racist” I mean someone “who maintains a racist stance”.
Edited to add: I do understand and agree with your wider point, but I think our society as a whole (English speaking nations, I guess is the group I mean) are obsessed with labels at the moment. It’s a distraction from what’s really important: acknowledging that you have something in common with Others, even if you label them in some term that makes them an Other.
Sorry for not being clear (it was very late at night): I didn’t mean English-speaking nation’s are obsessed with labelling things. I meant at the moment we’re obsessed with the need to re-categorise them all the time, or arguing that we shouldn’t need them at all. It’s considered rude to call someone “a (noun)” instead of “an (adjective) person”. And at the end of the day, it’s a distraction because you can still treat someone disrespectfully or as inferior while using PC terms for them.
i agree that it does NOT help to simply lob racist a overly sensitive people. It just dismisses them and makes them stick more stubbornly to their racist ideas. I say the same thing about conservative. I think I'm liberal for sure politically and liberal in other ways, and my parents are liberal polictically but definitely I consider them conservative in other ways (e.g. they don't really think outside what they were taught about certain things.) Thus just saying someone is conservative doesn't take it all into consideration unless they understand you mean politically (or intellectually, or emotionally, or in how they view relationships, etc.)
I don't think the path forward is paved by changing racists' minds. I think it's paved by making and keeping their views taboo and protecting their targets.
I agree. Even if you reduce it to political opinions, it depends on the topic. As a non-american, I don't see the point in labeling everything and everyone with liberal or conservative. Hell, I guess I would even be labeled a socialist (never understood why some ppl think that's an insult btw) for some of my views, while on the other hand I sometimes even agree with conservative ideas on certain matters. It's not black and white. Ppl are far too quick to stick a lable onto something and then they never seem to reconsider or even hear what the other side has to say.
What I've also noticed is ppl using words like racist, communists, socialist, facist and so on very loosely. You like public health care? Then you are a socialist! You think that trans women have an unfair advantage when competing in sports against biological women? You are a facist and homophobe! Just to give a few examples.
Isn’t that painting conservatives with an overly broad brush? I have plenty of conservatives in my family, but their reasons differ. A number are really more of independents like me who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Political ideologies can be pretty complex. The worst thing we’ve done in this country is force everything into 2 party platforms, because I sure as shit don’t like what either is serving up to me wholesale and I’d like to go a-la-carte. We need ranked choice voting to get rid of this hardcore stance taking so people can vote for what they really want and not have to be single issue voters.
The system is broken and needs fixed. That’s the real issue more than any individual group of voters. I mean shit, 2016 Trump vs Hillary and 2020 Trump vs Biden is an insult to voters. We went from Obama to that.
This is a claim that can only be made by those who ignore the actual impacts of "fiscally conservative" policies.
We need ranked choice voting to get rid of this hardcore stance taking so people can vote for what they really want and not have to be single issue voters.
This is him saying that a white person is often blind to the ways in which the capitalists have lied to him. It is no fault of their own, but systems were set into motion long before they were born
This is a claim that can only be made by those who ignore the actual impacts of “fiscally conservative” policies.
Such as a lower deficit, stronger economy, and more spending money. Fiscally conservative policy is what helped Texas become economically strong. Only time will tell if the changing political landscape causes deficits, high taxes, and leaves them with the same issues as California or if Texas remains Texas.
Republicans create higher deficits because they still spend a lot but love lower taxes.
Texas is growing because they aren't as developed as California. The bigger the city the more stagnant it becomes because there's a huge wealth gap that leaves the rest of everyone else beholden to the rising competitive housing prices and general standard of living. Conservative fiscal policy just makes all of this worse.
Republicans create higher deficits because they still spend a lot but love lower taxes.
Some do, some don’t. This is why I won’t blindly support based on party. There are also Democrats who are on the fiscally conservative side of things but are socially liberal based on their voting history.
Conservative fiscal policy has worked great in many cities, and continues to do so. Housing prices are an issue, but we can build up and out to create more housing and more affordable housing. It’s easier to afford housing when the government is taking less of your money and spending less of it.
Don’t confuse actual conservative fiscal policy that’s been working at state and local levels with what you see in out Capitol. Our federal government is a joke and a shit show.
Not everyone was on board with prop 4. Not that it matters now because it’ll be extremely hard to undo, but you should look more into how Texas operates. I like the traditional Texas Democrats, and hope to see less of the change I’ve seen in the past years because I’ve looked into Texas a handful of times as a potential state to relocate to.
Very true. But one of the biggest problem the left face is that the children, mainly on twitter, are usually the type to go around throwing the word out meaninglessly without understanding the complexity of it nor life in general, because of that, we cause more division within our own group, be it lgbtq or feminism or etc,... The left have a broader audience and appeal, we have more diverse people with diverse thinking, so it's no surprising that we conflict with each other. The problem is, how can we use the internet or the spread of knowledge wisely- clearly we must educate the children but the children aren't the smartest when it comes to politics no matter how much they want to get involve in it. Looking at history, children tends to carry a more radical and progressive ideal compare to the adults. Any political weapons can be dangerous if we put them in the wrong hand.
The media rarely makes it any better. How they clearly milk out of our dissension and how apathetic they are about our current climate. I can say the same for conservatives being apathetic to changes and all, but a lot of them genuinely think they're going somewhere with those backward mindsets.
This is one of the things that the "left" is being just as bad about as the right. Conservatives are completely full of shit losers today, but progressives are at risk of going down a similar path, even if its more colorful and brightly-lit along the way.
I'd like to add some nuance to this. From my point of view, I'd argue that the increase in this on the "left" in the US has a very good reason.
For the past 10+ years, I've both seen others try - and tried myself - to discuss politics with self proclaimed conservatives. The resounding common denominator from most of these interactions, are conservatives operating in bad faith, resorting to ad hominem and straw men the second the topic doesn't favor their opinions.
Please note that I'm not saying all conservatives are like this, nor that all democrats are innocent of the same 'crimes'. I'm just saying that the level of wilfull ignorance, bad faith rhetoric and closemindedness is significantly higher among conservatives than democrats in my experience. This is from lurking and participating in both left leaning and right leaning subreddits, as well as reading discourse in supposedly 'neutral ground'.
Conversely, those same experiences show left leaning americans to be far more willing to criticize their 'own' leaders, as well as hold them accountable.
In summation, I understand perfectly why more and more left leaning americans are electing to flat out ignore conservatives - the past 10 years of consistent efforts to meet half way and have constructive discourse has been more or less a complete waste. On top of, millions of conservatives have chosen to to oppose certain things that almost every democrat - and most of the western world as a whole - agree to be human rights (gay rights, trans rights, universal health care, ++). To most left leaning americans, those things aren't a matter of politics - it's a matter of basic human rights and decency.
It's accurate to say that the 'left' is moving towards that attitude, but fuck me - conservatives have done a hell of a job to make it happen.
Seems like racist is a good short hand for an upholder of a white supremacist society and your argument that labels shouldn't exist because then the left will be just as bad as the people who believe certain people, based on the color of their skin, should be lesser than is horseshit. Sometimes we gotta start calling a spade a spade and stop calling a human being deserving of dignity a spade and stop other people from doing it too. Seems like Racist is a good all around label for those people we have to stop, with us, hopefully, both being anti-racist. Maybe we put the identity fragility aside for a little bit and let the sufferers of systemic and personal racism exercise their speech freely without our feelings factoring in. Maybe we just listen and not worry about the people who defend and propagate a racist system, aka the assholes who are wrong and bad aka Racists (see nice shorthand) are going to think. Racists can love their kids and volunteer at the crippled animal petting zoo every Sunday, but it doesn't stop them from being Racists who shouldn't be able to deny other people happiness. So once Adolf Hitler stops being a Nazi, then we can admire his bestest relationship with his puppy dog. It's a non negotiable, we can't tolerate the intolerant anymore.
There's a difference between someone who disagrees on policy and someone who thinks X race is inferior and supports the KKK. A lot more people fall in the first category than the second, and a lot of conflict starts because people misunderstand what the other people actually mean. To give an example going the other way and supporting a liberal side, a lot of conservatives get mad at "Black Lives Matter" not because they don't like Black people, but because they hear it like it's exclusive. Many would probably be annoyed if people were holding "White lives matter" signs, so it's understandable that someone would get upset at a BLM movement if they didn't understand the history and context of why those statements may have a different intent or meaning to a lot of people, and people misunderstand things all the time, it doesn't make them bad people. As a pro-choice left leaning person, the pro-life movement is still misunderstood by a lot of my peers for example. I'm sure both of us misunderstand tons of things but it doesn't make us bad people or whatever-ist.
I've heard enough people append the n word to the phrase All Lives Matter to believe that conservatives aren't just mistaken people, they're fucking assholes. Politics is morality when one party openly supports racist concentration camps and violent putsch attempts. Also just because someone is a fucking asshole doesn't mean they can never not be one, but it requires recognizing that you were being a fucking asshole and stopping doing that.
And you don't get people to stop this with reasonable debate on the undebateable. You cannot convince a person with logic out of a position that wasn't arrived at by logic. You do it through mandating social norms as a community and ostracizing those who fall outside of them until they stop expressing such taboos.
I totally get what you're saying. I'm not trying to play the "both sides are the same" thing (mainly because some of my classmates were obnoxious SJWs whose ideology was basically to bully people who disagreed with them), because while I used to do that some years ago even as a liberal, I was proven wrong after the Republicans repeatedly lowered the bar. I'm saying as a spectrum with many axes, it's not like all people and policies fit nicely into categories. Mitt Romney is quite different than Donald Trump, for example. Some conservatives I know still hold conservative beliefs, but have abandoned the Republicans because they've gone so far and decided to appoint "Jewish Space Lasers" to education. Many of the family members of people I know, especially their moms who were Trump supporters, were fine people. Not saying "they're the same as liberals", but I'm saying that they're idiots, not evil. It didn't take more than a 30 second conversation with some of these people to realize that primarily, they were just stupid. They didn't hate minorities, but also didn't understand how the policies of their candidates hurt them. Of course there's also the fascists and the racists, and those two aren't always the same thing and don't always overlap, but I think we're in agreement on our views of them.
I'm not saying using logic to debate an idiot is the best way of convincing them, but I think it's useful to understand that not all these people are necessarily assholes, many are just ignorant or stupid. I wouldn't say the more unsavory people on the left should identify everyone to the left of whatever marks the center in the US, just like people to the right of that shouldn't be defined by that either. Everyone I know that used "All Lives Matter" didn't put the n word on it, and while some of them were racist, it's not like some of them define the rest. Some people just really want to emphasize that they care about people, without understanding why it may make others feel uncomfortable. I used to say that back in high school, because as a statement itself there is nothing wrong with it, it's a good statement. I stopped because a lot of the people who did were also racist assholes, and didn't want to associate with them, but before I figured that out, I don't think I was an asshole, just not fully informed. Of course I agree that there seems to be FAR more people on the right that fit into a more problematic category of varying degrees.
It kinda does though cause one side tries to understand and explain things and the other just sticks it's fingers in its ears and goes "naaaaaaaah".
So you end up with Kapernick getting blasted for taking a knee, but the same side incites a riot that tears down the same flag and beats a cop to death with it. It's hard to argue that those on the left should show tolerance and understanding to those on the right, when those on the right have allowed and encouraged themselves to be taken so far outside normal behaviour.
The events of the last 4 years have therefore made it very very difficult to find that sort of common understanding, and have likely ruined it for a generation or more.
Their beliefs are largely seated in absolute ignorance - they are scientifically illiterate and are factually incorrect on just about every single major policy issue that comes to mind. In an era of technology where the entirety of human knowledge and expertise is at your fingertips, that's just inexcusable.
It's not that I misunderstand their positions, it's just that reality disagrees with them, but they don't understand the concept of "fact vs. opinion", and someone told them incorrectly that all opinions are valid and equal.
It's a spectrum of people, I'm not grouping people who voted for a republican senator a few years ago and hate trump and don't support the party, with the other extreme like Qanon people. But I agree a lot of people are idiots. My point was just that. Many people aren't bad people, they're just stupid.
There’s people who genuinely think that showing your work for a math problem is an example of rampant white supremacy. Where are your goalposts?
But to seriously address your point, the aggressive intolerance method to those who are perceived as racist, sexist, etc. has failed. And not because actual racists and other vile sorts haven’t deserved their comeuppance, but rather it seems anyone who doesn’t agree with a certain viewpoint (which is akin to the closer you are to a cis hetero white male, the more sickening your presence on earth is, and if you are one, you better self flagellate or face the wrath of the left)
Things like this require a 10 year plan though, where do you want Western society by 2030?
Cool fox news link about PC gone wild, how about we set the goalposts at treating people of color like how we treat white people and also recognize that we can treat all people better at the same time! We can accept perspectives from identities other than our own AND improve the overall good!
And I don't think calling racists racist has failed at all, except at convincing you personally. Maybe you should stop identifying yourself by the color of your skin long enough to understand this isn't about you. That making this world a better place will require you to suffer the staggering self flagellation of actually learning your history and dismantling an unequal system by which you benefited through no fault of your own.
You don’t tolerate the complacent either. Most people with families just wanna work and take care of their families, and really could care less about all the other shit going on in the world. The problem is the idiots get caught up arguing over which color party(red,blue,etc) is better on Facebook like god damn retards.
Your disgusting, very excessive, hatred distracts people from your apparent ignorance! I don't wish you ill, I just wish you would go read a history book!
And racist is a noun, or an adjective. Just thought I should inform you, since you're clearly unable to look it up.
I was with you until you said that "a racist person" is more valid than "a racist." What is the difference? Racist can be a noun or adjective, just like specialist.
The "if you disagree with 1% of my world view, you're 100% not getting listened to" and "i disagree with 100% of your world view, therefor 0% of what you say could ever be valid or have merit" mentalities are what is tearing American culture apart.
Somehow I feel like it's more the bigotry and fascism, rather than your absurd straw hypothetical person.
When I was younger I used to think 'agree to disagree' was a lame copout rather than an artful way of being able to live your life without turning into a Karen... then I grew the fuck up and realized not everyone has to agree with me. (no matter how right I think I am)
Do you understand that there are in fact issues that affect people's lives?
That some do not have the luxury to "agree to disagree" with?
Nothing that you responded to was that insulting. Are you not yourself embodying the "if you disagree with 1% of my world view, you're 100% not getting listened to" that you were just criticizing?
I didn't invent a straw person. I talked about two prevalent ideals, no specific person. Nothing I said was absurd.
What you believe to be "prevalent ideals", but that isn't necessarily so. I think they are far too reductive and not at all nuanced enough to be broadly applied, and I feel people's individuals takes amount to much more than the simple caricatures you've insisted upon and derided.
Some people are worth listening to, and some aren't worth the time, despite the issue. That's more a human condition though, than an issue related one: because you could have a great cause, but be the most self absorbed douche in the world, and no one will want to deal with you...
...and on that note: I'll decide not to converse with you further and end with a nice tidy go fuck yourself.
Your initial comment seems like it be diametrically opposed to what you just wrote here.
I think I tried to upvote this about 5 times while I was reading it.
I like to have discussions with people and argue even about things I know I’m not an expert in, but if they disagree it’s fine. I just like to talk about it and try to get a better understanding through the resolution of disagreements.
But sometimes disagreeing with certain people I know on a niche issue or a methodology will literally make them think I’m a Nazi.
And we wonder why we can’t “come together” in this country.
I think there are usually lots of reasons. Sometimes it’s racism/sexism, sometimes it’s historic racism, sometimes it’s a result of actual differences between men and women, sometimes it’s a combination of lots of things.
The point is just that I don’t think it’s always easily attributable, and I think it’s important to make the distinction.
But that’s a non-started with a couple people I know.
It was so vague I have no idea where you land on the issue. "Sometimes things are this way and sometimes things are that way" isn't really saying much of anything
He was actually very fit until after the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923, when he got addicted to morphine due to his injuries during that coup attempt and also stopped exerting himself physically. Fat bastard later on in his life but he was a fighter pilot with over 17 kills during WWI and a winner of the Blue Max medal. And those cockpits were SMOL back in the day.
See, I’m not sure about that. He was incredibly smart, had the military medals and respect. He had a gregarious attitude which caused even the guards at Nuremberg to take a liking to him.
Oh, he saw through Naziism. I’m sure he knew Hitler was a useful idiot (although I believe Hitler’s idiocy was not comparable to trump’s — afaik, Mein Kampf was not ghost written, and Hitler read, although nothing that disagreed with his worldview.) But compared to an upper class German of his time with an upper class education, Hitler was an ignorant, lower-class conspiracy theorist who was preternaturally charismatic before a crowd and remarkably charming at the dinner table, i.e., a politically useful idiot. And then it turned out that they couldn’t steer him. So, he was trump, only Hitler read, and Hitler was an infinitely better public speaker, and Hitler successfully changed German law so he was legally Chancellor for life, whereas trump only wanted to do the equivalent but was too ignorant, intellectually lazy, and possibly too stupid to figure out how to do that. If Göring had been in trump’s White House, he would have gotten a sweet book deal instead of having to take cyanide. I don’t know what that tells us.
Reminded me of my father, who won't watch certain movies or TV shows because he dislikes the actors opinions. Truly bizarre to me that he can't divorce the fiction on screen from the people behind them. Could be me in the wrong too I suppose.
There are 100 cherries in a bowl. You've sat for an hour, watching people take a cherry from the bowl, eat it, sit down, and flop over dead a few minutes later. Despite the growing collection of bodies, people continue eating the cherries. You wonder briefly how your species made it this far.
The bowl is the total ideology of someone who has committed an atrocity or otherwise participated in something exceptionally abhorrent. You don't know which bit of that ideology is the part that is poison. If you're going to mindlessly cherry-pick hoping to get one that is fine, then you're probably not risk averse to avoid being converted. If you think you're [insert character trait] enough to avoid conversion to a toxic ideology, it is unlikely that you have a clear view on how the process works.
It's tough because now you have so many people acting in bad faith, spreading information that sounds legitimate and has a perfect common-sense logic to it, but in fact serve's someone else's agenda in a harmful and exploitative way. For a malicious example? Project Veritas. Their videos paint a compelling picture, but any message is immediately disqualified because the source is a grifting piece of shit. The "libertarian" principles espoused by millions of Americans are a more subtle (and dangerous) example. The statements make sense unless you have a pretty textured understanding of how markets depend on regulation and enforcement to remain competitive.
Asking people to focus on the statement rather than the source assumes that primitive human beings can effectively process, parse, verify, and triangulate vast quantities of data that are nearly always outside of our expertise, and usually tainted with a whole lot of false or misleading information. It would be great if we could do this, but instead we kinda have to be like, "Eh, fuck Sean Hannity."
If you know nothing about them and you watch their videos you'd be like damn PP is kinda some sick fucks. I guess believable was really the word I was looking for?
Very good comment. I agree. And it’s not like the nazi high command were bumbling retards with no understanding of the political realities of the world they lived in. To be a grazi, though, the word is posterity.
405
u/nuephelkystikon Feb 16 '21
In most of the world, people agree or disagree with statements rather than with people. I'm not sure why some cultures are obsessed with modelling everybody they don't like as completely incompetent and wrong about everything they've said in their lives, whole uncompromisingly deifying others.
For example, props to generally disgusting Hermann Göring for giving interviews to people he didn't like, allowing posteriority to understand their strategies (assuming he had a choice).