I'm not a fan of referring to fellow humans who have fallen victim to the endless tirade of conservative propaganda sub-human. It's very blatantly dehumanizing and promotes division along party lines instead of proletariat unity. We should be focusing on the shitheads pushing that propaganda in the first place. I know that Elon is one of them, but calling all conservatives sub-human because of him is just wrong.
I would add that dehumanizing rhetoric of any kind can become a gateway drug to justifying atrocity. No matter what side you stand on. It can contribute to the radicalization of any group. Nobody is immune to becoming a monster.
Not everyone is willing to do what's necessary to cure the disease. I am willing. If that makes me a monster, then I am the monster they themselves created.
Conservatism is a plague of oppression and death. It always has been. History has proven time after time that pacifism cannot stop conservatives. We must be willing to do difficult things to survive this kind of deadly infection. Preaching peace is unfortunately not helpful. It placates those who are better served by understanding the danger we are all in and what needs to happen to stop that threat.
I am not arguing in favor of pacifism. I fully recognize the need to defend against harmful ideologies that infect people's minds with bad ideas. And if those who harbor bad ideas threaten violence then it may be necessary to react in kind. I accept that.
I'm simply saying that it matters what kind of language we use when we talk about it. Calling conservatives, or any opposing side perceived as a violent threat, subhuman creates the misconception that your own side could not ever be in the wrong. In so doing, it is possible that the we too could become infected with the bad idea that "All (insert opposing threat here) must die." I don't ever in my life time want to see anything like the Holocaust happen because people couldn't stop and think that at some point the killing needs to stop, because it's reached a point where we are no longer defending and only killing out of pure and base fear that the threat will rise up again. There is a point where self defense goes too far and gives rise to genocide. That possibility scares the hell out of me.
We should instead call all conservatives subhuman because the tenets of whatever the fuck passes for conservative these days are senselessly antagonistic and cruel to the vulnerable among us
You are not getting the point. Most conservatives are victims of indoctrination. Calling them sub-human is victim-blaming.
I don't disagree with you, but at some point, most of these folks are grown ass adults with full cognitive capacity and the same access to information as the rest of us.
It's a commitment and dedication to wilfull ignorance that is a conscious decision. They make the choice to ignore new information and ignore their own values and hypocrisy. They are 100% responsible for their own actions and treating them as victims invalidates their responsibilities and denies them personal accountability.
I don't know that I'd call them subhuman, but they are hurting, killing, and oppressing people in active worship to the God of ignorance. These are bad people, and they don't deserve your defense.
I understand what you're saying. They are bad people. The average conservative's behavior is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
There was a time when you would have been right, but at this point, they are a part of the problem, not a symptom of it.
They are actively voting in and supporting people who are disrupting attempts to mitigate the actual issues. For example, every American should be against gerrymandering, as it is expressly anti-democratic, yet here we are voting in toxic people who are running interference on any effort to combat it.
This should be a bipartisan issue. I lived in Maryland for a long time and my district looked like an electrocuted spider, in favor of the Dems. Republicans should be against this, but here we are slamming our hand into the car door every time we try to make progress.
The people pulling the strings should be held accountable, no question. Pretending that these folks aren't the problem is nice for diplomacy, but it's no longer the case.
Trump became the president in 2016 despite losing the election. The system is rotten to its core. Conservatives are definitely not helping and their behavior should be shamed, but it's crucial not to lose sight of the fact that the ideology they follow was deliberately created and propagated by the 0.001%.
We can hold them responsible for their actions and still recognize that they are victims of indoctrination. However, this would require the same intellectual honesty you chastise them for not having.
Straight to the personal attacks? Not really a great argument, particularly when the rest of it amounts to "NUH UH!!".
I'm gonna need more than that. @aerolemming@lemm.ee and I were having a pretty civil discussion, and I appreciate his points, though I personally disagree with them.
Read the room, man.
I'm sorry my comment didn't meet your standards. I'm tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day. "Why can't these evil/ignorant/despicable fools just see the world the way I see it!?" You treat them the same way they treat us and expect them to have some kind of coming-to-jesus moment as a result. IMO, thinking this way requires the same level of cognitive dissonance as being a Trumpster. You need to read the room and see that your method doesn't solve the problem you want it to solve. It exacerbates it. Instead of crying out to the world, wishing everyone else would do the hard work of expanding their understanding of political theory, history, and philosophy, maybe do that work yourself first.
Can you look beyond the harshness in the tone of my paragraph and take the constructive criticism I'm offering? This is what you're asking them to do.
It's weird. You're asking me to accept constructive criticism, but a) you're not offering any and b) you're continuing with the ad hominem, and failing to offer an actual position despite it being very constructive feedback to your argument. You're calling it "intellectually vapid nonsense" but you're only offering logical fallacies. You're just noise and hypocrisy.
My "understanding of political theory, history and philosophy" is backed by a career in the DC and NYC political sphere, including the White House, several campaigns, and extensive work with NPOs/NGOs. I've met and worked with 5 US Presidents, and more than 230 congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and have personal commendations from the CEO, COO, and CTO of the USA so I feel pretty confident that I've got a well developed perspective. You've seen my work. So please enlighten me.
If you'll notice in the previous postings, I was able to disagree with others while accepting their positions and without belittling them. Every assertion you're making now is disproved before you even typed it, so I'm not sure why you're rattling your cage. If you want to be a part of the discussion, and wish to bring about new information, I'm amenable to change my position, but your post is really just finger wagging and more of "NUH UH!!".
I’m sorry my comment didn’t meet your standards. I’m tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day.
Did you seriously type this passive aggressive nonsense and put it into the world? Do you hear yourself? Do better.
I'm not taking part in your argument with Timmy, I just want to know:
the CEO, COO, and CTO of the USA
What does this mean?
It's actually not something I really knew about before, the WH gig, but these are actual positions that help to advise the President on specific matters related to their specialties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Technology_Officer_of_the_United_States (I can't seem to find the others right now, but if I do, I'll post them). I did some work on the Open Data Initiative that took it from policy to practical, and received some official recognition for it.
Wow, interesting!
As long as they keep indoctrinating newer generations, they are part of the oppressors.
I brought that up in my reply to the other reply that replied to the reply you replied to.
Are they still victims when they become violent? Or when they promote violence? At some point the threshold is crossed.
One can very easily be both a victim and a perpetrator. If someone is indoctrinated into a cult at a young age and goes on to recruit others, they are both a perpetrator of suffering inflicted on others and a victim of the circumstances imposed on them.
So the poor defenseless indoctrinated are ok with racism in their party and nazism? They have no autonomy at all to choose?
Those "victims" will gleefully watch you suffer and die. They will smile as your existence becomes illegal. Those "victims" will proudly facilitate your death and, in many cases, will physically participate in committing that murder.
Nearly every act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history has been committed by conservatives. Nearly every act of racism, bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and antisemitism in our country is committed by conservafives. They are not the victims, they are the victimizers.
Conservatives have the entirety of the world's knowledge at their fingertips and access to the world's foremost experts. Yet, they choose to follow hateful ideologies. They choose to be opposed to education. They choose to condemn scientists and doctors as liars and traitors. Conservatives are not the victims. They are not victims of anything at all.
Have you interacted with conservatives in the real world? Most of them just don't pay that much attention to politics and don't realize what they're voting for. Some of them are fucking insane, sure, but the majority are just disinformed.
To be fair, my interactions with conservatives are mostly limited to people with only moderately conservative opinions.
I was born and raised in the south in a conservative household. I recently retired from a profession completely infested with conservatives. I know conservatism very well, unfortunately.
They know they are voting for bigots. They know they are voting for misogynists. They know they are voting for white nationalists. If they are able to consume media well enough to know what days to vote and where to vote, then they know what these candidates are.
The people you are describing often refer to themselves as "centrists" so they can pretend they aren't racist, bigoted misogynists like the people they vote for. That is deception. They are deceiving you so you don't disown them for being vile garbage.
I'm not a fan of referring to fellow humans who have fallen victim to the endless tirade of conservative propaganda sub-human. It's very blatantly dehumanizing and promotes division along party lines instead of proletariat unity. We should be focusing on the shitheads pushing that propaganda in the first place. I know that Elon is one of them, but calling all conservatives sub-human because of him is just wrong.
I would add that dehumanizing rhetoric of any kind can become a gateway drug to justifying atrocity. No matter what side you stand on. It can contribute to the radicalization of any group. Nobody is immune to becoming a monster.
Not everyone is willing to do what's necessary to cure the disease. I am willing. If that makes me a monster, then I am the monster they themselves created.
Conservatism is a plague of oppression and death. It always has been. History has proven time after time that pacifism cannot stop conservatives. We must be willing to do difficult things to survive this kind of deadly infection. Preaching peace is unfortunately not helpful. It placates those who are better served by understanding the danger we are all in and what needs to happen to stop that threat.
I am not arguing in favor of pacifism. I fully recognize the need to defend against harmful ideologies that infect people's minds with bad ideas. And if those who harbor bad ideas threaten violence then it may be necessary to react in kind. I accept that.
I'm simply saying that it matters what kind of language we use when we talk about it. Calling conservatives, or any opposing side perceived as a violent threat, subhuman creates the misconception that your own side could not ever be in the wrong. In so doing, it is possible that the we too could become infected with the bad idea that "All (insert opposing threat here) must die." I don't ever in my life time want to see anything like the Holocaust happen because people couldn't stop and think that at some point the killing needs to stop, because it's reached a point where we are no longer defending and only killing out of pure and base fear that the threat will rise up again. There is a point where self defense goes too far and gives rise to genocide. That possibility scares the hell out of me.
We should instead call all conservatives subhuman because the tenets of whatever the fuck passes for conservative these days are senselessly antagonistic and cruel to the vulnerable among us
You are not getting the point. Most conservatives are victims of indoctrination. Calling them sub-human is victim-blaming.
I don't disagree with you, but at some point, most of these folks are grown ass adults with full cognitive capacity and the same access to information as the rest of us.
It's a commitment and dedication to wilfull ignorance that is a conscious decision. They make the choice to ignore new information and ignore their own values and hypocrisy. They are 100% responsible for their own actions and treating them as victims invalidates their responsibilities and denies them personal accountability.
I don't know that I'd call them subhuman, but they are hurting, killing, and oppressing people in active worship to the God of ignorance. These are bad people, and they don't deserve your defense.
I understand what you're saying. They are bad people. The average conservative's behavior is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
There was a time when you would have been right, but at this point, they are a part of the problem, not a symptom of it.
They are actively voting in and supporting people who are disrupting attempts to mitigate the actual issues. For example, every American should be against gerrymandering, as it is expressly anti-democratic, yet here we are voting in toxic people who are running interference on any effort to combat it.
This should be a bipartisan issue. I lived in Maryland for a long time and my district looked like an electrocuted spider, in favor of the Dems. Republicans should be against this, but here we are slamming our hand into the car door every time we try to make progress.
The people pulling the strings should be held accountable, no question. Pretending that these folks aren't the problem is nice for diplomacy, but it's no longer the case.
Trump became the president in 2016 despite losing the election. The system is rotten to its core. Conservatives are definitely not helping and their behavior should be shamed, but it's crucial not to lose sight of the fact that the ideology they follow was deliberately created and propagated by the 0.001%.
We can hold them responsible for their actions and still recognize that they are victims of indoctrination. However, this would require the same intellectual honesty you chastise them for not having.
Straight to the personal attacks? Not really a great argument, particularly when the rest of it amounts to "NUH UH!!".
I'm gonna need more than that. @aerolemming@lemm.ee and I were having a pretty civil discussion, and I appreciate his points, though I personally disagree with them.
Read the room, man.
I'm sorry my comment didn't meet your standards. I'm tired of reading the same intellectually vapid nonsense every day. "Why can't these evil/ignorant/despicable fools just see the world the way I see it!?" You treat them the same way they treat us and expect them to have some kind of coming-to-jesus moment as a result. IMO, thinking this way requires the same level of cognitive dissonance as being a Trumpster. You need to read the room and see that your method doesn't solve the problem you want it to solve. It exacerbates it. Instead of crying out to the world, wishing everyone else would do the hard work of expanding their understanding of political theory, history, and philosophy, maybe do that work yourself first.
Can you look beyond the harshness in the tone of my paragraph and take the constructive criticism I'm offering? This is what you're asking them to do.
It's weird. You're asking me to accept constructive criticism, but a) you're not offering any and b) you're continuing with the ad hominem, and failing to offer an actual position despite it being very constructive feedback to your argument. You're calling it "intellectually vapid nonsense" but you're only offering logical fallacies. You're just noise and hypocrisy.
My "understanding of political theory, history and philosophy" is backed by a career in the DC and NYC political sphere, including the White House, several campaigns, and extensive work with NPOs/NGOs. I've met and worked with 5 US Presidents, and more than 230 congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and have personal commendations from the CEO, COO, and CTO of the USA so I feel pretty confident that I've got a well developed perspective. You've seen my work. So please enlighten me.
If you'll notice in the previous postings, I was able to disagree with others while accepting their positions and without belittling them. Every assertion you're making now is disproved before you even typed it, so I'm not sure why you're rattling your cage. If you want to be a part of the discussion, and wish to bring about new information, I'm amenable to change my position, but your post is really just finger wagging and more of "NUH UH!!".
Did you seriously type this passive aggressive nonsense and put it into the world? Do you hear yourself? Do better.
I'm not taking part in your argument with Timmy, I just want to know:
What does this mean?
It's actually not something I really knew about before, the WH gig, but these are actual positions that help to advise the President on specific matters related to their specialties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Technology_Officer_of_the_United_States (I can't seem to find the others right now, but if I do, I'll post them). I did some work on the Open Data Initiative that took it from policy to practical, and received some official recognition for it.
Wow, interesting!
As long as they keep indoctrinating newer generations, they are part of the oppressors.
I brought that up in my reply to the other reply that replied to the reply you replied to.
Are they still victims when they become violent? Or when they promote violence? At some point the threshold is crossed.
One can very easily be both a victim and a perpetrator. If someone is indoctrinated into a cult at a young age and goes on to recruit others, they are both a perpetrator of suffering inflicted on others and a victim of the circumstances imposed on them.
So the poor defenseless indoctrinated are ok with racism in their party and nazism? They have no autonomy at all to choose?
Those "victims" will gleefully watch you suffer and die. They will smile as your existence becomes illegal. Those "victims" will proudly facilitate your death and, in many cases, will physically participate in committing that murder.
Nearly every act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history has been committed by conservatives. Nearly every act of racism, bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia and antisemitism in our country is committed by conservafives. They are not the victims, they are the victimizers.
Conservatives have the entirety of the world's knowledge at their fingertips and access to the world's foremost experts. Yet, they choose to follow hateful ideologies. They choose to be opposed to education. They choose to condemn scientists and doctors as liars and traitors. Conservatives are not the victims. They are not victims of anything at all.
Have you interacted with conservatives in the real world? Most of them just don't pay that much attention to politics and don't realize what they're voting for. Some of them are fucking insane, sure, but the majority are just disinformed.
To be fair, my interactions with conservatives are mostly limited to people with only moderately conservative opinions.
I was born and raised in the south in a conservative household. I recently retired from a profession completely infested with conservatives. I know conservatism very well, unfortunately.
They know they are voting for bigots. They know they are voting for misogynists. They know they are voting for white nationalists. If they are able to consume media well enough to know what days to vote and where to vote, then they know what these candidates are.
The people you are describing often refer to themselves as "centrists" so they can pretend they aren't racist, bigoted misogynists like the people they vote for. That is deception. They are deceiving you so you don't disown them for being vile garbage.