Empathy and nuance aren’t something that you do because you’re guaranteed to get something in return from the other person as a kind of, reciprocal action. They’re tools that you use to analyze your opposition, understand them better, and plan accordingly. They’re internally rewarding methods, rather than being something you just do to get a reward.
I think we’ve all understood it to be the case for quite a while now that plenty of conservatives, being relatively uninformed blank slate or single issue voters, will actually agree with communism, as long as you don’t use the word communism. Liberals, even, will not commonly do this, because they usually have much more pre-established and calcified opinions about the reasons why the world is the way that it is that go beyond just the surface level. That could even be considered a symptom of their higher education. We’ve understood that to be the case for like the last 20 years.
Why, then, is there still such a significant commitment towards mocking your rural conservative idiot voter, in the rhetoric of the left? I think there’s a lot of people who still hold onto some semblance of liberalism in their culture, their rhetoric, their attitudes, even after they become a part of the left. I think there’s probably also a significant proportion of actual liberals which, being controlled opposition, seeks exclusively to widen that divide and sort of, function as the pepsi to the coke, even as that strategy actively drives us towards more and more extremism and destroys the country. In any case, beyond the extremely cynical corporate institutional wing that actively desires for the country to be more right wing in service, at least theoretically, of tax breaks and a lack of regulations, or maybe more coherently, in service of short term gains, the regular individual should understand that this rhetoric, this strategy, it isn’t really getting them anywhere. It’s actively harmful. I think at some point with the individual participation in this behavior, people start to build up their own complexes around it, eerily similar to the complexes that conservatives begin to take, as I’ve described previously. A belief in a total and logic-defying free will, an innate moral character, meritocracy.
They fall for true liberalism. It shouldn’t be any mystery why I might not like that ideology, I should think. Not in my leftists, not in my liberals. We should understand that’s failed.
Why, then, is there still such a significant commitment towards mocking your rural conservative idiot voter, in the rhetoric of the left? I think there’s a lot of people who still hold onto some semblance of liberalism in their culture, their rhetoric, their attitudes, even after they become a part of the left. I think there’s probably also a significant proportion of actual liberals which, being controlled opposition, seeks exclusively to widen that divide and sort of, function as the pepsi to the coke, even as that strategy actively drives us towards more and more extremism and destroys the country.
Because I support policies that would help everyone, even “your rural conservative idiot voter” (your words), no matter how much disdain I have for their willingness to hurt everyone not like them. And that brings me to the point.
I could give a shit about them being rural. You won’t find me ever attacking them in a way that includes that facet of who they are. They support the party that is visibly, publicly, actively, destroying everything they claim to hold dear, AND they support the party who is ready and willing to do harm, big and small, to anyone outside a very specific demographic. In many cases, they are the people doing the harm, not just supporters of the people doing harm.
I can understand them just fine, from over here, where I will continue to keep myself and those who are dear to me out of their destructive path as best I can.
You’re not really who I’m talking about in my post, then. I agree with most of what you say. I was mostly talking about liberals who explicitly mock them, I was talking about “FAFO” shit, I dunno if you’ve seen it or not, but it’s become a prevalent reaction. Just the same as, say, when you see people online mocking the idea of a starbucks boycott because palestinians didn’t vote, right. Posing with their starbucks cups. Most of these people weren’t ever committed to a boycott, which, sure, fine. But it sees that sort of a politics as explicitly transactional, rather than being founded on just doing what’s right and good. That’s the sort of thing that I’m getting at, rather than people just, I dunno. Not going out of their way to talk to conservatives at all about their ideologies or try to convince them. I think people should do that still, sure, but I’m not going to personally fault people for not going out of their way to do that, or being like, explicitly focused more on the people immediately around them, and their safety.
You’re not really who I’m talking about in my post, then.
Ah good. It did feel lke we were talking past each other a bit.
I was talking about “FAFO” shit, I dunno if you’ve seen it or not
I have zero FAFO towards people who took a principled stand on Gaza with their vote. I really, really wish they hadn’t, but I understand why, and IIRC if they hadnt it wouldn’t have swung the election anyway.
OTOH, I do think the “Trump will be worse for Gaza” argument is proving true.
I have plenty of FAFO for your general bigoted shitstains who have proven (and continue to prove) that their commitment to the “values” they preached about for decades is entirely hollow. They are going down in this flaming wreckage with all the rest of us, and when they realize Trump isn’t just going to hurt the people they wanted hurt, it will do nothing but salve my own pain over seeing what they have done to our country.
Empathy and nuance aren’t something that you do because you’re guaranteed to get something in return from the other person as a kind of, reciprocal action. They’re tools that you use to analyze your opposition, understand them better, and plan accordingly. They’re internally rewarding methods, rather than being something you just do to get a reward.
I think we’ve all understood it to be the case for quite a while now that plenty of conservatives, being relatively uninformed blank slate or single issue voters, will actually agree with communism, as long as you don’t use the word communism. Liberals, even, will not commonly do this, because they usually have much more pre-established and calcified opinions about the reasons why the world is the way that it is that go beyond just the surface level. That could even be considered a symptom of their higher education. We’ve understood that to be the case for like the last 20 years.
Why, then, is there still such a significant commitment towards mocking your rural conservative idiot voter, in the rhetoric of the left? I think there’s a lot of people who still hold onto some semblance of liberalism in their culture, their rhetoric, their attitudes, even after they become a part of the left. I think there’s probably also a significant proportion of actual liberals which, being controlled opposition, seeks exclusively to widen that divide and sort of, function as the pepsi to the coke, even as that strategy actively drives us towards more and more extremism and destroys the country. In any case, beyond the extremely cynical corporate institutional wing that actively desires for the country to be more right wing in service, at least theoretically, of tax breaks and a lack of regulations, or maybe more coherently, in service of short term gains, the regular individual should understand that this rhetoric, this strategy, it isn’t really getting them anywhere. It’s actively harmful. I think at some point with the individual participation in this behavior, people start to build up their own complexes around it, eerily similar to the complexes that conservatives begin to take, as I’ve described previously. A belief in a total and logic-defying free will, an innate moral character, meritocracy.
They fall for true liberalism. It shouldn’t be any mystery why I might not like that ideology, I should think. Not in my leftists, not in my liberals. We should understand that’s failed.
Because I support policies that would help everyone, even “your rural conservative idiot voter” (your words), no matter how much disdain I have for their willingness to hurt everyone not like them. And that brings me to the point.
I could give a shit about them being rural. You won’t find me ever attacking them in a way that includes that facet of who they are. They support the party that is visibly, publicly, actively, destroying everything they claim to hold dear, AND they support the party who is ready and willing to do harm, big and small, to anyone outside a very specific demographic. In many cases, they are the people doing the harm, not just supporters of the people doing harm.
I can understand them just fine, from over here, where I will continue to keep myself and those who are dear to me out of their destructive path as best I can.
You’re not really who I’m talking about in my post, then. I agree with most of what you say. I was mostly talking about liberals who explicitly mock them, I was talking about “FAFO” shit, I dunno if you’ve seen it or not, but it’s become a prevalent reaction. Just the same as, say, when you see people online mocking the idea of a starbucks boycott because palestinians didn’t vote, right. Posing with their starbucks cups. Most of these people weren’t ever committed to a boycott, which, sure, fine. But it sees that sort of a politics as explicitly transactional, rather than being founded on just doing what’s right and good. That’s the sort of thing that I’m getting at, rather than people just, I dunno. Not going out of their way to talk to conservatives at all about their ideologies or try to convince them. I think people should do that still, sure, but I’m not going to personally fault people for not going out of their way to do that, or being like, explicitly focused more on the people immediately around them, and their safety.
Ah good. It did feel lke we were talking past each other a bit.
I have zero FAFO towards people who took a principled stand on Gaza with their vote. I really, really wish they hadn’t, but I understand why, and IIRC if they hadnt it wouldn’t have swung the election anyway.
OTOH, I do think the “Trump will be worse for Gaza” argument is proving true.
I have plenty of FAFO for your general bigoted shitstains who have proven (and continue to prove) that their commitment to the “values” they preached about for decades is entirely hollow. They are going down in this flaming wreckage with all the rest of us, and when they realize Trump isn’t just going to hurt the people they wanted hurt, it will do nothing but salve my own pain over seeing what they have done to our country.