|
beatlegs posted:It should be said that most conservative people (at least I think so) aren't lovely people, but just misinformed as a result of being saturated with non-stop media propaganda and group-think. The ones who are lovely (politicians, operatives, pundits, media types, regular smart conservatives who know better) are, I would hope, in the minority - but they poison the rest (which is another great reason they're lovely). No way. These ideas are only appealing to people who have something broken inside of them.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:No way. These ideas are only appealing to people who have something broken inside of them. Some of them can realize that they are broken and take steps to correct their views. I was pretty right wing(still not as much as a lot of my friends) when I was in high school. I realized that my viewpoint of the world was extremely myopic and started thinking about politics in terms of how it effects everyone rather than just me. Not all of them are a lost cause, but, like an addict, they can only stop when they come to terms with it themselves and will most likely push back aggressively if someone confronts them. Fuckt Tupp fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Nov 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:No way. These ideas are only appealing to people who have something broken inside of them. If that were the sole criteria every human being would be a conservative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:No way. These ideas are only appealing to people who have something broken inside of them. This is eminently wrong. What you tend to find, more often than not, is that a lot of these dyed-in-the-wool Tea Party/conservative types are quite generous and forgiving, but with people they already know personally. What right-wing radio/media does is it finds a wedge, and then it keeps pushing and pushing until it's basically replaced the person's own judgment. That's not "something broken inside of them", that's actually a combination of several very common human psychological traits that the media machine relentlessly exploits: (1) Instinctive fear of the "other", someone different from you and your close acquaintances, (2) submission to authority, and again, especially in people who have lived most of their lives in a world where typical news media channels (TV/radio/newspaper) have been considered to have a basic level of public trust. (3) Humans are, in aggregate, naturally conservative in terms of cultural values, behavior, etc. There's nothing surprising about this: status quo is easy, change takes effort. There are lots of others that fall into the category of "media giant takes advantage of cognitive biases." My grandmother died a few years ago at 98. She would vote straight-ticket Republican no matter what. BUT she had a soft spot for gay rights. Why? One of her grandchildren is gay. She knows him. He's not an "other" to her, and for all Fox tried to push the "gay agenda we all gon' die!" bullshit, she could look at him and see not an abstract threat, but a person who just wanted to be happy and love someone else. She still had her "social concerns" about legalizing gay marriage and such, but I think that was more wrapped up in being over ninety than it was about Fox screaming about the homosexual agenda. Now don't get me wrong, there are a good number of straight-up, "gently caress you, got mine" sociopaths out there, but the majority of conservatives are decent people who are literally brainwashed. That doesn't mean you don't oppose them at every turn, or even get mad at them, but let's keep away from this sort of Othering.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:This is eminently wrong. Its mostly because a lot of the Tea Party is stuck in the McCarthyistic mindset of 'You are either with us or against us' Yes, they are personable and friendly with people they know, but anyone that speaks counter to what they say and many of them literally suggest deportation or throwing their opponents in camps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Its mostly because a lot of the Tea Party is stuck in the McCarthyistic mindset of 'You are either with us or against us' Right. Like I said, it's not like we shouldn't oppose every single item of their party platform, rather that brushing aside all conservatives as "broken" is counterproductive and ignores focusing on what social and media influences create conservative thought, in favor of a blanket, "gently caress 'em, they can't be helped." It's funny, I'm struck by the similarity in attitude that a lot of conservatives have towards criminals: "Why bother, they're criminals. Don't talk about "rehabilitation," just lock 'em up and throw away the key. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY." If we can look at armed robbers and think, "It's possible that this guy's just a sociopath, but it's also possible that he grew up in a lovely situation and made some bad choices, and he could be turned into a productive member of society," I'd say that it's incumbent on us to be willing to pose the same questions about conservatives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
I don't mean to say that people who vote Republican are monsters. There are plenty of mainline conservatives who aren't acting out of hate. In the case of gay rights, they believe that gay people aren't really gay. Gays are just acting out, you know. If only they would just settle down and try to act straight, they'd be happier. It's not hateful, it's just lacking in life experience. Or they would look at a 15 year old kid who gets jumped into some neighborhood crew that calls themselves "Crips" and be terrified, and think that kid is a hardened criminal, because they wouldn't have gone down to a project and seen that the Crips are literally the only community activity going on in that area. It's not hateful to be afraid of that kid, or to wish that gays would act straight, it only has hateful consequences. The only problem is, how many separate times are these conservatives, with the best of intentions, going to have to personally know an individual, to be able to empathize with that person's set of circumstances and then make a broader inference? gently caress. Is that not broken, to lack all capability to understand that different people live in different situations? Most of these conservatives make a point of professing to be Christians; what the is the point of being a Christian, if you cannot comprehend this? That aside, I'm not even referring to those incurious, privileged types of conservative. They're not going all-in on the crazy rhetoric that has been coming from talk radio for 20 years. I think a lot of those folks are Nixon voters and they are probably dying off pretty fast, though. The people who avidly consume right-wing media most definitely do have something deeply wrong with them. I mean, this whole thread is us getting to know them; we know all about the stuff that is most popular to them. Their media is overflowing with hatred, and the message of denying rights and destroying what remains of America's social safety net is overt and is delivered with a tone of smug malice that is impossible to ignore. You need to be a hater to be into this poo poo, period.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
A number of my friends are both conservative and highly educated (one is in my history graduate program, one got a PhD in Music from Oxford). One thing that unites the two are the belief that government shouldn't be trusted because of personal experiences. One of them was in the military and grew so disillusioned with military bureaucracy that he now thinks government can't do anything right. The other recently got screwed by his healthcare provider and blames Obamacare. One of them also adheres to the idea that the Founding Fathers were absolute geniuses and is a strict constitutional originalist because Americans at that time were more aware of tyrannical usurpation than ever before and the average American has since lost that sense of vigilance. Social issues are a bit more fuzzy for both of them (I haven't heard a word on either abortion or gay marriage), although one is firm is his belief that anyone who chooses not to have children should be shamed for their selfishness. I guess my point is intelligence isn't a safeguard against voting Republican, or even against voting Republican with good intentions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:I realized that my viewpoint of the world was extremely myopic and started thinking about politics in terms of how it effects everyone rather than just me. That's really the key, right there. They're cynical and pessimistic in ways that are impossible to rectify through their world view (that things just aren't conservative enough) and feel disconnected from the world around them unless they're surrounded by people exactly like themselves. Such an odd way to go through life. Liberals feel the same way for sure but know that the solution(s) lie beyond the shopping mall, their bank balance and whatever Jesus says.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
Empathy, basically. EQ isn't variable along our traditional lines of thought when it comes to cognitive ability and what not. It's also not a characteristic we emphasize in child-rearing, what with our focus on tearing down communal instincts in the young.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Notice the problem? The Hannukah and Kwanzaa stamps have the name of their holidays on them, but does the Christmas stamp?! Noooooooo, it does not! Impeach, etc.!
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
I've got two books of Kwanzaa and Hanukkah stamps because that was all they had left at the post office. Not even the local hipsters would buy them for ironic mailing purposes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
Was that all they had left or was that all they ever had?!  In other conspiracy related news, Alex Jones decided to show up for the JFK anniversary and "protest" it, where "protest" is defined as yelling "STOP THE COVER UP" until he started coughing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkUwOIb2R3U And then someone punched him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCZ9S9xF5IY
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Was that all they had left or was that all they ever had?! Was it Buzz Aldrin? I hope it was Buzz. He throws the best punches.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:Was it Buzz Aldrin? I hope it was Buzz. He throws the best punches. Either way, the person deserves a medal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:If they're internally consistent about it, libertarians at least can usually be persuaded to support unemployment benefits because it gives people more of an opportunity to find work that they are most suited to instead of being forced to take the first thing that puts food on the table out of desperation. He said I made a good point, and he actually agreed with me. I think that's why I prefer libertarians over conservatives; if they're internally consistent, you can actually convince libertarians of certain policies by framing it in a libertarian mindset, like I did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
Each day my broken clock is completely, 100% on the dot accurate about the time. That doesn't mean the clock isn't still broken.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
fade5 posted:He said I made a good point, and he actually agreed with me. I think that's why I prefer libertarians over conservatives; if they're internally consistent, you can actually convince libertarians of certain policies by framing it in a libertarian mindset, like I did. That works up until you hit the "Just World" mental block they inevitably have. But yeah, generally speaking a self-described libertarian is probably more open to debate than a self-described conservative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
This obamacare is actually a good thing because it will allow the country to see exactly how corrupt the system is! This will then spur on the grand objectivist revolution where we cast off the parasites and negroes! gently caress it, why not. Let's spin the libertarians until they go out of orbit and into the sun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
fade5 posted:He said I made a good point, and he actually agreed with me. I think that's why I prefer libertarians over conservatives; if they're internally consistent, you can actually convince libertarians of certain policies by framing it in a libertarian mindset, like I did. I have a bit of a soft-spot for Libertarians because it really is baby's first political ideology. Growing up, I started my political thinking with being a conservative because, well, that was all the available information that was around me as a young one thanks to my parents, to being Libertarian because I started seeing the logical holes in Conservatism. I figured no one political group should be given legislative power over their people or other people because that's what led to such shining crown achievements such as war, gay oppression, the war on drugs, and so on. Once I realized that wow, conservatism is deeply flawed, I looked at my other options. I thought that (with my parents constant making GBS threads on anything leftist still ringing in my ears) I'd give a go at the whole limited regulations, isolationism, and free-ish market thing. A while later, never really researching any counter-arguments to libertarianism, I thought it was such a great thing that I would major in Business Administration to truly understand my beliefs. Well, I was severely disgusted at the gross disregard towards, well, humanity, that the business world was engulfed with. People are numbers, people are easily controlled and influenced machines, people exist to serve management, were some of the lessons that were given from these business classes. What disgusted me the most was the fact that, yes, management tries to acknowledge its workers were people who had needs and beliefs and ideas, and was taught that a key tool in management is to embrace its workers as people. Why? More numbers. More profit. More power. Not to, y'know, give people a sense of self when they're selling themselves as property to corporations, but as a bloody loving tool to extract more labour and productivity from what they only saw as pawns. I finally realized where Libertarian ideals began, and that it was nothing more than a business model applied to politics, and applied to human beings without regards to anything else. It was dehumanizing, and I could not stomach such a loathsome ideology. It didn't matter what libertarian policies consisted of, libertarianism was the fruit, and the tree that produced it was business. now i'm a democratic socialist  But yeah, I guess what I'm saying is: at least (actual, internally consistent, and not simply conservatives hiding under a lovely guise of "neutrality") Libertarians find problems with conservatives, at least they have enough critical thought to not be drawn in by that ideology. And hey, who knows, maybe they'll someday see the problem with letting greedy, manipulative, privileged dicks run the world, because at the very least, that is a far easier bridge to build than getting a conservative to realize how abso-loving-lutely wrong they are. Maybe it's just me projecting my old libertarian naivety onto others and assuming they all started as conservatives. But I really like to think that if they could find the glaring flaws in conservatism, they have the potential to see the glaring flaws in libertarianism  and hey if nothing else we can always agree on pot  vvvv- That is a far more succinct way of putting it
That Irish Gal fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Nov 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
An actual ideological libertarian is a lot closer to socialism than they are to the modern Republican party, just because they're already thinking about politics in economic terms. Some of them come to realize the flaws of the libertarian economic model and others don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 06:07
|
|
|
The problem with libertarianism is not that it is a step toward the river of progressive change, but rather that it's a selfish and emotional eddy that people get stuck in, expand and eventually subsume others in its disgusting brackish quagmire. Libertarianism is lovely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 06:09
|
|
|
fade5 posted:This reminds me, I was actually discussing politics with a libertarian at a friend's party. The topic of abortion came up, and I was actually able to get the libertarian to agree with me abortion when I framed the topic in a libertarian mindset. "Outlawing abortion is allowing the government to say a what a woman can and cannot do with her body. You may personally disagree with abortion, but that is her decision to make, not the government's. The government forcing her to carry a child she does not want is a direct infringement on her freedom and liberty." Ah, but it sounds like neither you nor your friend know the actual Libertarian argument for abortion rights: evictionism! You see, the womb is kind of like a domicile in which the fetus has established tenancy, but of which the mother is the landlord. Now, if we apply property rights in this situation.... Here's Walter Block explaining it at the Ron Paul rally in Tampa last year. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnWlWdl-Dq0
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Ah, but it sounds like neither you nor your friend know the actual Libertarian argument for abortion rights: evictionism! You see, the womb is kind of like a domicile in which the fetus has established tenancy, but of which the mother is the landlord. Now, if we apply property rights in this situation.... I. Can't... 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
I don't even..
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Ah, but it sounds like neither you nor your friend know the actual Libertarian argument for abortion rights: evictionism! You see, the womb is kind of like a domicile in which the fetus has established tenancy, but of which the mother is the landlord. Now, if we apply property rights in this situation.... I used to make this analogy to troll free-marketers that were anti-abortion. I never thought anyone would actually take it seriously. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 07:37
|
|
|
We've got to stop making jokes. They just turn them into sincere political beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 08:12
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:I don't even.. You can look through the latest libertarian thread for a view into these people's minds. Trust me, that is not nearly the worst of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 11:29
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:You can look through the latest libertarian thread for a view into these people's minds. Trust me, that is not nearly the worst of it. No thanks I'm plenty depressed
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 11:37
|
|
|
I got into with a libertarian about the ACA he gave a bunch of privatized is good crap and I pointed out that the ACA is buying from private companies on a market place so its great free market. He hated it because his tax money will go to subsidize people who cant afford the plans. This fucker had trouble at work once and got to borrow rent money from his uncle. So he has experienced what hardships can be but hey gently caress EVERYONE BUT ME. I think for alot of identified libertarians its just a badge of gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 12:45
|
|
|
If there are honest libertarians out there, I haven't met one. All the libertarians I've talked to are hypocritical in some way. Maybe the wealthy ones are honest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 12:52
|
|
|
max4me posted:I got into with a libertarian about the ACA I dunno, it's worth noting that Libertarians, especially young libertarians, do have a leg up on traditional conservatives. Their media (Personal Liberty, various PaulTard sites) is better, too. For only one simple reason: their libertarianism usually extends in a consistent way to social and personal issues. It's a little myopic to focus on how lovely libertarians are on economic issues - and make no mistake, I am as frustrated as anyone with 19 year olds who believe in privatising the public schools they've never attended since mom and dad paid for private school from k-12. American Libertarians, at least the non-Tea Party ones, are often quite open on abortion issues, gay marriage, freedom of expression, anti-discrimination law, and more. It's worth remembering that it wasn't so long ago (2003) we had arguments before the Supreme Court about whether outlawing gay sex was constitutional and good for society. Most libertarians don't treat this or things like it as a live issue. This doesn't make up for their horrific economic views, but it is worth keeping in mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 12:58
|
|
|
Bill Kristol is starting to become a regular on Morning Joe. His smug loving right wing face keeps interrupting and moving goal posts on this Iran deal. I hate him so much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 13:14
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:No thanks I'm plenty depressed May I recommend the GOP rebuilding thread where the topic is the eventual economic crash we are facing down and our serf status in the new American feudal system?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 14:40
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:We've got to stop making jokes. They just turn them into sincere political beliefs. Days since irony was (last) killed: 0
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 15:06
|
|
|
Friday as I was driving home I was listening to Hannity like I always do but this episode he had Rick Santorum who was promoting his new Christian Christmas movie, "The Christmas Candle". You see after America wasn't ready for a Christian candidate like Rick he moved on and became CEO of a Christian centric movie studio to fight back against the Devil in Godless Hollywood. He went on to explain to Sean while they verbally stroked each other off that people don't want to see this garbage and filth but there just aren't good wholesome movies available to them to watch with their families. Sean took over at this point and was talking (bragging) about how he has all the movie channels at home (because of how well off he is) and when he sits down to find one to watch he gives up "Because it's all just sex, sex, sex, sex, violence, sex sex..." Well apparently the devil won because the Christmas candle was a total loving flop. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/nov/25/christmas-candle-movie-flop-rick-santorum
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 16:58
|
|
|
poor nose posted:Well apparently the devil won because the Christmas candle was a total loving flop. It probably wasn't a big draw in the bleugh community.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
I like how to these fundie types there's always this huge untapped market of people that desperately want banal, Christian themed pablum but Hollywood is just too dedicated to promoting sin that they don't want that easy money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
Radish posted:I like how to these fundie types there's always this huge untapped market of people that desperately want banal, Christian themed pablum but Hollywood is just too dedicated to promoting sin that they don't want that easy money. If there was as much market for it as for the Sex and Violence, the bloodmongering pornographers of Hollywood would spin off separate production companies just to churn that out. Cash Rules Everything Around Me and all that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
poor nose posted:Well apparently the devil won because the Christmas candle was a total loving flop. If I were a major Hollywood producer, I don't know how I'd resist the urge to call him and rumble, "WHERE IS YOUR GOD, NOW?" Trolling fundies should be a televised sporting event.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2013 17:29
|
|