As we head on into the home stretch before the election Tuesday, I am not feeling so great, even though I am only a Democrat-leaning independent, not an actual doctrinaire Dem. And I have mentioned here the deep ambivalence I feel, owing to the increasingly strident hard-left secular views of the Democrats wrt abortion and sexuality (as well as acknowledging real surprise that SCOTUS actually finally nuked Roe). I support the Dems in spite of these views, and wish that they had chosen to focus far more on 1) the actual truth of the economy 2) what they have done for the average American over the last two years, and 3) what the Republicans will do in these areas should they take power.
That said, I confess I am also struggling with real feelings of both resignation that many if not most working class white folks do not see this about the GOP, and growing antipathy towards these people. (and I, of course, am also working a decidedly working class low income job). It depresses and largely shames me to say this, but it would likely be more shameful to lie about it. Simply put, it is really very very difficult to respect people who 1) eschew learning and thinking, allowing them to 2) consistently get bamboozled by bad actors, all the while also 3) acting and behaving in ways that are really contrary to traditional American behavioral norms (Archie Bunker did not act like that). I am trying very hard to love these folks, to realize that they have in fact not been blessed with the intellectual and educational wherewithal I have, which has allowed me to better ascertain reality, etc. And I am well aware that one of the reasons why many of these folks say (at least to pollsters and reporters) that they are going to vote the way they are, is that they feel that people like the folks on these fora 'look down on us'. They are not wrong. It is perhaps like what recently happened wrt Hurricane Ian, where various red state denizens needed (and did not feel afraid to expect, and ask for) FEMA funds, etc, even as many of their politicians had voted against such distributions in circumstances such as Superstorm Sandy. Or maybe when people like this expressed genuine shock that Trump and Co actually sought to kill Obamacare, even though they knew he campaigned on it. Now, the GOP is not even bothering to hide objectives like cutting SS and Medicare, and is offering no actual plan to confront inflation. But many of these folks will vote for them anyhow.... I just do not know what to say, and how to act around such folks now...
To be honest, I think the current climate of the States (at least) is one that encourages everyone to look down on those they do not agree with. On both sides. I know each side will say, "No, they have contempt for us — they started it — I am only reacting to their bad behavior!" But nope. Each side is contemptuous.
The way I try to resist is is to focus on the fact that actually most people want pretty much the same things, even if they have different views on how to get to that point. And to acknowledge that humans are pretty vulnerable, pretty fickle beings, subject to all kinds of whim, bias, and influence — me included. We're all out here doing the best we can. Often we're really wrong. We just gotta keep trying.
Sometimes, when it all becomes a little overwhelming, a nice break and a little snack helps.
It's not hypocritical to ask for FEMA funds if your taxes are paying for them, irrespective of whether you voted for them or not. The democrats are so ideological now that they appear to have lost all interest in simple mathematics and the hard reality of having to make choices. Not everything we would like government to supply us with can be paid for, and I suspect the non-woke voters know this, because anyone who runs a household (even one consisting of one person) finds this out vividly every day.
I have a friend who thinks it is our responsibility to fix the third world so we will no longer have a flood of non-documented immigrants. Really? How?
QuoteTo be honest, I think the current climate of the States (at least) is one that encourages everyone to look down on those they do not agree with. On both sides. I know each side will say, "No, they have contempt for us — they started it — I am only reacting to their bad behavior!" But nope. Each side is contemptuous.
The democrats did start it. They have called just about every republican since Ronald Reagan "a racist." And when they ran out of 'white racist' republicans to smear, they made the black ones 'black faces of white supremacy.' They keep alive foolish, stale grievances like 'the glass ceiling' supposedly holding women back, even though we've already had candidates Geraldine Ferraro, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, a female VP and a slew of female representatives and senators. They sabotage the future for black people by telling them half of white America hates them. Now they think everyone needs to go back and check whether or not they have been going around identifying with the wrong gender.
Please.
They are beyond implausible and getting worse.
Sasha Stone: https://sashastone.substack.com/p/the-collapse-of-bidens-woketopia#details
Quote from: Hegemony on November 05, 2022, 01:56:27 AM
The way I try to resist is is to focus on the fact that actually most people want pretty much the same things, even if they have different views on how to get to that point. And to acknowledge that humans are pretty vulnerable, pretty fickle beings, subject to all kinds of whim, bias, and influence — me included. We're all out here doing the best we can. Often we're really wrong. We just gotta keep trying.
Yup. And keep in mind, it's the most noisy and extreme people on both sides who get the press. The quieter, non-radicals on both sides don't get listened to, because they don't generate the clicks.
Mahoganny proves my point perfectly. "But the other side did start it!" Both sides will argue this till they're blue in the face. Of course one could also observe that even if one side can be definitively proven to have "started it" (and I think the likelihood that such a thing can be proven, even if such a thing is that simple, is infinitesimal), the assumption is that "If they started it, any response on my part is wholly justified and virtuous and almost beyond my control! And like I said, virtuous!" Taking action to make the world better is admirable, but these expressions of self-righteous outrage I think exist mostly to make the outrager feel smug. Yep, on both sides.
Sometimes I successfully detach by observing, "There it's happening again. Yes, I knew they would react that way. It certainly shouldn't surprise me now."
It's time to get rid of political parties. They are no working.
In my part of the country (the Rust Belt) the political ads are pure ad hom propaganda from both sides. Both political persuasions blame China for the state of the economy and accuse the other side of colluding. There is no actual discussion of policy, simply allegations and cherry-picked soundbites taken out of context. One political ad actually blames a candidate for moving to California for a time, growing a beard and wearing flannel. It's hilarious.
That said, I've spent some time on places like One America News, Newsmax, FOX News, and a few other outlets. Even CNN cannot compete for the amount of distortion on these places. Some people are very vulnerable to this sort of psychological assault.
And then you imagine the average blue-collar worker who spends probably ten hours outside of the home every working day including commute, lunch break, choirs, etc. and then has family responsibilities. They are not going to spend a great deal of time reading The Atlantic or The New York Times or even to watch the evening news. So right-wing media gives them news stubs that conform to their preexisting prejudices and sense of victimization. Plus anger can be very validating if one is frustrated, and anger can be addictive. I suspect that this dynamic partially explains the phenomenon of the cult of Donald Trump.
Add to all this the longstanding trope of "the elites" in culture, particularly pop-culture, and the longstanding middle-class denigration of middle-class children who fail to mount professional careers. I honestly don't think most middle-class peeps look down on the plumber or mechanic, but they want their kids to wear business suits and hang diplomas on their office walls. My brother-in-law wears a blue shirt with his name on the pocket and, while he seems to have given up, my father-in-law, a former engineer, regularly embarrassed him about his job. This attitude filters down.
There is nothing new about Town vs. Gown. Consider the St Scholastica Day riot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Scholastica_Day_riot).
Quote from: Hegemony on November 05, 2022, 09:10:06 AM
Mahoganny proves my point perfectly. "But the other side did start it!" Both sides will argue this till they're blue in the face. Of course one could also observe that even if one side can be definitively proven to have "started it" (and I think the likelihood that such a thing can be proven, even if such a thing is that simple, is infinitesimal), the assumption is that "If they started it, any response on my part is wholly justified and virtuous and almost beyond my control! And like I said, virtuous!" Taking action to make the world better is admirable, but these expressions of self-righteous outrage I think exist mostly to make the outrager feel smug. Yep, on both sides.
Sometimes I successfully detach by observing, "There it's happening again. Yes, I knew they would react that way. It certainly shouldn't surprise me now."
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 05, 2022, 09:25:12 AM
It's time to get rid of political parties. They are no working.
[snip]
There is nothing new about Town vs. Gown. Consider the St Scholastica Day riot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Scholastica_Day_riot).
When the party that's about to get creamed says the system isn't working, the system is working.
And we do need to acknowledge that it is not just the hard working blue-collar worker who is vulnerable to propagandistic manipulation.
It's worse than being looked down on. It's the "when are you getting married?" from your thrice divorced relative or "why haven't you bought a house?" from your friend currently in foreclosure. Pots calling out kettles in the following way:
-Woketards in the education system getting involved in social issues WHEN FAILING AT THEIR ACTUAL JOB. If our math and reading proficiency rates were 100% and students could actually point out any of the countries we've bombed in the last decade on a map, maybe THEN we can get to the lecture about gender or CRT.
-Similar "elites" in Hollywood lecturing us about every possible moral failing that could make a twitter zombie's head explode WHILE PRAISING Woody Allen, allowing Weinstein to go on for YEARS and giving a standing ovation to someone who publicly assaulted a colleague less than 30 minutes previously. (Not to mention in general peddling smut and violence as an industry.)
It's one thing to have a personal trainer who is a little insensitive when telling you to shape up, but it's another thing entirely when that trainer is 350 lbs.
Look down on whomever you want to. It's a free country. However, if you really think that improves your personal situation, then I can see why disdain (or even hate) for the "other side" is important to you.
Related to my first paragraph, it used to be, a Republican found a way to situate themselves so they could be above the fray, so they didn't have to be dependent on the outcomes of an election for their own personal well-being. January 6 and its aftermath was a signal that the core tenet was gone forever from the Republican party.
How did we get here?
I'm trying to figure out how it came about that the Democrats, who were the working stiff's party, and the Republicans, of country club fame, switched constituencies! I'm not even sure when this started, never mind why. I suppose the beginning can be traced to the time of the Reagan Democrats. I further suppose that the Democratic party has tried to make up for the votes lost then in a rainbow coalition of small groups. That cements the opposition of the working stiffs, I believe.
Note also that there are no differences in economic ideology anymore. The Trumpists are anything but free marketeers. The game is about using government for one's own purposes. So, instead of markets allocating stuff, government does it. Make your voice heard in any way, make sure the rules give you what you want, 'cause there are no obvious majorities, in turn 'cause there's more cash at stake in these political decisions than ever before. We are all competing for resources against each other. We do not have the same interests.
That's my guess.
There's a plethora of stuff on how the polarities of the two parties switched online.
Quote from: dismalist on November 05, 2022, 10:33:21 AM
How did we get here?
I'm trying to figure out how it came about that the Democrats, who were the working stiff's party, and the Republicans, of country club fame, switched constituencies! I'm not even sure when this started, never mind why. I suppose the beginning can be traced to the time of the Reagan Democrats. I further suppose that the Democratic party has tried to make up for the votes lost then in a rainbow coalition of small groups. That cements the opposition of the working stiffs, I believe.
Note also that there are no differences in economic ideology anymore. The Trumpists are anything but free marketeers. The game is about using government for one's own purposes. So, instead of markets allocating stuff, government does it. Make your voice heard in any way, make sure the rules give you what you want, 'cause there are no obvious majorities, in turn 'cause there's more cash at stake in these political decisions than ever before. We are all competing for resources against each other. We do not have the same interests.
That's my guess.
One situation, laden with irony, was the failed attempt by democrats to make Latinos 'people of color.' The thinking was, you could count on them to hate Trump because he said some of the Mexicans and other Latinos coming into the country illegally were probably criminals. A suspicion easily borne out by the epidemic of street drugs. So instead of saying 'hey, Trump is a bigot' they said 'right on! We came to America to escape drug gangs and now they've followed us.' And they know they are never getting reparations for slavery, so they are being used to add warm bodies to someone else's grievance campaign. They are also religious (Christian), family oriented, self-reliant and socially conservative. Not eager to see their kids trade in their God-given anatomy for artificial genitalia and a victimhood badge.
And why would the despise 'racist' white people when they went to a lot of trouble to live among them?
The irony: it was white-centered thinking that did made this gross miscalculation. Thinking all Latinos think one way, or should, because it would be obvious that those humble democrats care about them the most.
For my part, it depends on just what you mean by "look down on".
I don't hold it against people when they're wrong but haven't had much of a chance to be right. If they ought to know better, then yes, I do think less of them. Just like I think less of an accountant who does a worse job of my taxes than I would have, and whose incompetent mistakes I end up having to fix. I also think less of movies which are poorly directed or edited, whose scripts suck, whose acting is wooden, etc. That doesn't change the fact that they're wrong, of course, and I may well try to show them what's right. But I don't need to be nasty about it, and I can always leave off.
But if they ought to know better and are wrong in a way that's morally reprehensible--a way that actually ends up harming others, for example--then that's something else. At that point, yes, I feel both contempt and outright animosity towards them. Similarly, I don't mind when a movie is bad in the ways described above--I may not enjoy it, but whatever. But if it's morally bad in addition? Then I will get exercised about it. And I think we all should. Otherwise, well, that's how bad things happen, and how good people end up silently going along with them.
I think it's fair to say that most Americans have had at least a rudimentary education in morals, history, and civics. And they've had a good chance to see what Republicans are like, and what Trump is like. So if, after all of that, someone is still all-in for Trump... well, they can fuck right off to hell, which is right where they belong. That obviously doesn't license behaving immorally in kind, but it sure as shit licenses censure.
QuoteI think it's fair to say that most Americans have had at least a rudimentary education in morals, history, and civics. And they've had a good chance to see what Republicans are like, and what Trump is like. So if, after all of that, someone is still all-in for Trump... well, they can fuck right off to hell, which is right where they belong. That obviously doesn't license behaving immorally in kind, but it sure as shit licenses censure.
This is just about how I thought several years ago. What caused me to rethink, gradually, were (1) a Black student who voted for Trump in 2016 ('we could use a cutthroat representing us the the world stage right now'), and (2) hearing day in and day out that Trump was going to campaign on white supremacy through something called 'racist dog whistling' contrasting with friends of mine who were voting for him and were nice people. Few said 'I'm all in for Trump' but all of them said 'he is the far better choice.' That's how most people vote, I believe.
Fast forward to a few weeks ago. Hillary Clinton's latest pronouncement is 'the republicans have already hatched a plan to steal the 2024 presidential election' or some such. This from one of the notables of the party that accuses the other of 'election denying.'
Quote from: kaysixteen on November 04, 2022, 11:13:15 PM
Now, the GOP is not even bothering to hide objectives like cutting SS and Medicare, and is offering no actual plan to confront inflation.
That you fail to see how cutting our old-age entitlement programs (which has been a standard Democratic line of attack for decades) would affect future inflation suggests that you don't very much about macroeconomics either. Besides, the GOP doesn't need a plan since gridlock will help to prevent adding any more fuel to the fire. All that's necessary is that the crowd of voters have enough common sense to apply the brakes (mixing metaphors).
Quote from: dismalist on November 05, 2022, 10:33:21 AM
How did we get here?
I'm trying to figure out how it came about that the Democrats, who were the working stiff's party, and the Republicans, of country club fame, switched constituencies! I'm not even sure when this started, never mind why. I suppose the beginning can be traced to the time of the Reagan Democrats. I further suppose that the Democratic party has tried to make up for the votes lost then in a rainbow coalition of small groups. That cements the opposition of the working stiffs, I believe.
Blame the New Left's long march through the party and the sharp reduction in unionized manufacturing jobs. Nixon started exploiting it by pitting the "silent majority" against McGovern's platform of "acid, amnesty, and abortion."
I have not voted FOR anyone in years!
I have already voted AGAINST many when I went to the polls last week.
There is no middle anymore. The Democrats have gone too far one way, and the Election Deniers in the Republican party too far in the other.
I lost a lot of little respect I had for the Republican Party when they would not even have a hearing for the Obama Supreme Court nominee more than a year before the election. Of course they said, "if things were reversed, we would not have hearings for a Republican Nominee either".... Then Justice RBG died, and they rammed through a nominee with weeks, much less months left in the Trump Administration.
I am closer to Social Security that it now concerns me. I may well not collect Social Security until I am 70, so more than a decade away, but that means to me, that there is more than a decade to derail my retirement plans! I wont live on Social Security, but IF they screw it up before I retire, I may have to work years more. IF they do it AFTER I retire, (but well before 70, when I plan to begin collecting), then I can not undo that decision!
As it is, inflation, which I blame equally on both the Trump and Biden administration as they both started the money printing presses, is another tax.
(Inter Thread Alert)
Social Security income cap just increased 13000 from 147K to 160 K (almost $1000 in additional taxes IF you had exceeded the cap). That is more than a summer class! I just got a real pay cut of more than a summer class! And I am not allowed to teach an additional summer class to catch up! (And we got zero - in both $ and % raises this year! with limited expectations that we will get anything next year! .... The administration was alerting us that one reason that we should be happy with no raises, is that they didnt increase our insurance costs - because the employer's share increased, but they didnt pass that on to us!... so we should be happy that we didnt get a take home pay cut!!)
QuoteThere is no middle anymore. The Democrats have gone too far one way, and the Election Deniers in the Republican party too far in the other.
They may have, but I will add, 'election denier' is a liberal media straw man term. They are trying to tie the skepticism over election integrity to the ugly specter of holocaust denial.
No one denies that elections were held or that people have been put in office as a result of the agreed upon result. Questioning whether elections were run with meticulous care is nothing new. It's needed, within reason.
Trump did not have proof, but he is still entitled to his opinion.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 05, 2022, 09:25:12 AM
I honestly don't think most middle-class peeps look down on the plumber or mechanic, but they want their kids to wear business suits and hang diplomas on their office walls. My brother-in-law wears a blue shirt with his name on the pocket and, while he seems to have given up, my father-in-law, a former engineer, regularly embarrassed him about his job. This attitude filters down.
And this isn't partisan or ideological; it's just human nature. I have no idea how to counteract that.
Quote from: marshwiggle on November 06, 2022, 06:11:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 05, 2022, 09:25:12 AM
I honestly don't think most middle-class peeps look down on the plumber or mechanic, but they want their kids to wear business suits and hang diplomas on their office walls. My brother-in-law wears a blue shirt with his name on the pocket and, while he seems to have given up, my father-in-law, a former engineer, regularly embarrassed him about his job. This attitude filters down.
And this isn't partisan or ideological; it's just human nature. I have no idea how to counteract that.
There's a weird phenomenon that occurs whenever I talk to locals or non-academic family members about the job. The conversation is something like:
"Teaching students is such important work."
If it were that important, I'd be making more than 40k/yr. Obviously it's not a valued profession.
"If you work hard, then you'll get paid more like (college professor from TV show who makes a zillion dollars and has an office)"
Actually, I haven't had a raise or COLA in 10 years, mostly because very few admins or voting citizens believe I deserve one.
"Maybe voters would appreciate you more if you didn't brainwash students with your socialist ideology."
Brainwash? I can't even convince them to bring a pencil to class, or to buy the textbook.
"Which is such a shame, because education is so important."
Quote from: RatGuy on November 06, 2022, 06:54:41 AM
"Maybe voters would appreciate you more if you didn't brainwash students with your socialist ideology."
The diversity equity inclusion and eternal life staff make as much noise as they can to show how necessary they are and how society needs to change, and the public thinks their nonsense is coming from the faculty. That and the fact that Kimberle Crenshaw, Robin DiAngelo et al were or are public intellectuals with tenure, so the public thinks the rest of are keeping busy churning out garbage ideas like theirs.
ETA: I bet the average person has never heard from a single source which they would be inclined to connect with the academic world, regarding a question like 'has the value of diversity to the results of innovation and excellence, just maybe, been a little overestimated?' Despite the fact that there are academics who have things to report. The lay public can't be blamed for thinking there's indoctrination. From their vantage point things like 'diversity' 'inclusion' etc. are just a mantra and pressure not a real dialogue.
Quote from: marshwiggle on November 06, 2022, 06:11:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 05, 2022, 09:25:12 AM
I honestly don't think most middle-class peeps look down on the plumber or mechanic, but they want their kids to wear business suits and hang diplomas on their office walls. My brother-in-law wears a blue shirt with his name on the pocket and, while he seems to have given up, my father-in-law, a former engineer, regularly embarrassed him about his job. This attitude filters down.
And this isn't partisan or ideological; it's just human nature. I have no idea how to counteract that.
As I've posted, Town vs. Gown is nothing used.
As I type this, I'm watching a rerun of
Frasier on Hulu. Its S2 E18---"The Club." It's a story about an exclusive club (not really a Seattle scene in the real world) that both Crane brothers want to join. The twist is that there is only open seat. They are competing with the existing members through puffery about, among other things, degrees and academic pedigrees.
Quote from: clean on November 05, 2022, 07:01:45 PM
I am closer to Social Security that it now concerns me. I may well not collect Social Security until I am 70, so more than a decade away, but that means to me, that there is more than a decade to derail my retirement plans! I wont live on Social Security, but IF they screw it up before I retire, I may have to work years more. IF they do it AFTER I retire, (but well before 70, when I plan to begin collecting), then I can not undo that decision!
As it is, inflation, which I blame equally on both the Trump and Biden administration as they both started the money printing presses, is another tax.
(Inter Thread Alert)
Social Security income cap just increased 13000 from 147K to 160 K (almost $1000 in additional taxes IF you had exceeded the cap). That is more than a summer class! I just got a real pay cut of more than a summer class! And I am not allowed to teach an additional summer class to catch up! (And we got zero - in both $ and % raises this year! with limited expectations that we will get anything next year! .... The administration was alerting us that one reason that we should be happy with no raises, is that they didnt increase our insurance costs - because the employer's share increased, but they didnt pass that on to us!... so we should be happy that we didnt get a take home pay cut!!)
Pyramid schemes implode when there aren't enough new patsies to sustain it. The baby boomers are likely the last generation to receive full benefits as S.S. is likely to become insolvent when Gen X begins to retire (Medicare is in worse financial condition). So the sooner that these programs are "screwed" with, the better.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 06, 2022, 02:29:08 PM
Quote from: clean on November 05, 2022, 07:01:45 PM
I am closer to Social Security that it now concerns me. I may well not collect Social Security until I am 70, so more than a decade away, but that means to me, that there is more than a decade to derail my retirement plans! I wont live on Social Security, but IF they screw it up before I retire, I may have to work years more. IF they do it AFTER I retire, (but well before 70, when I plan to begin collecting), then I can not undo that decision!
As it is, inflation, which I blame equally on both the Trump and Biden administration as they both started the money printing presses, is another tax.
(Inter Thread Alert)
Social Security income cap just increased 13000 from 147K to 160 K (almost $1000 in additional taxes IF you had exceeded the cap). That is more than a summer class! I just got a real pay cut of more than a summer class! And I am not allowed to teach an additional summer class to catch up! (And we got zero - in both $ and % raises this year! with limited expectations that we will get anything next year! .... The administration was alerting us that one reason that we should be happy with no raises, is that they didnt increase our insurance costs - because the employer's share increased, but they didnt pass that on to us!... so we should be happy that we didnt get a take home pay cut!!)
Pyramid schemes implode when there aren't enough new patsies to sustain it. The baby boomers are likely the last generation to receive full benefits as S.S. is likely to become insolvent when Gen X begins to retire (Medicare is in worse financial condition). So the sooner that these programs are "screwed" with, the better.
Full benefits have, what, 10-15 years to go? If nothing happens, a 20% benefits cut automatically.
The two parties are playing chicken with each other, each hoping the other will blink first by raising contributions [in some form] or keeping to the lower benefits by statute.
One possible outcome in a game of chicken is that both parties crash. They will want to avoid this, so I prognosticate a bilateral commission, along the lines of the Greenspan commission, 1983. I know there was a failed, more recent effort, but the emergency wasn't close enough.:-)
Of course the retirement age will be raised, but I have no idea what else will be done.
Quote from: Anon1787 on November 06, 2022, 02:29:08 PM
Pyramid schemes implode when there aren't enough new patsies to sustain it. The baby boomers are likely the last generation to receive full benefits as S.S. is likely to become insolvent when Gen X begins to retire (Medicare is in worse financial condition). So the sooner that these programs are "screwed" with, the better.
Yep. I'm Gen X, and I don't think Social Security will be there when I retire. Probably it will technically still exist for a while yet, but I picture payments worth less than the postage it would take to mail them out. Maybe those that are richer than me will be able to have a cup of coffee once a month. What I think I can hope for is pennies for my loafers. Or maybe there's a wishing well somewhere around here.
Mr. Larimar disagrees with me, but I'm not willing to trust the bureaucracy.
Larimar
Perhaps we could consider a few compromises:
D's can place all the gender neutral bathrooms they want, but R's will be allowed to bring AR 15's into them.
D's can legalize abortions on the R's condition that only future Muslims, gays, transexuals, and atheists will be aborted.
D's can build all the windmills, solar arrays etc. they want to prevent climate change, but the R's will transport the raw materials on great big noisy trucks that are fueled by coal, diesel, and ground-up endangered species.
That kind of thing. Win win.
Either that or a Texas cage match where AOC and Ron Johnson are handcuffed together and each given a lead pipe with instructions to beat the other one's brains in. Last ideology standing wins the presidency and the congress. Repeat every 4 years.
In any case, a pox on all their houses.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 05, 2022, 09:45:04 AM
And we do need to acknowledge that it is not just the hard working blue-collar worker who is vulnerable to propagandistic manipulation.
This hits close to home - and I'm not even American or living in the US. There was an election here in which plenty of profs voted in a way reminiscent of turkeys voting for Christmas. I had a discussion with a (now former) friend in which I pointed out a candidate's track record. This led to an outburst on her part. This wasn't what ended the friendship (I dropped the rope over an unrelated issue - at least not obviously related, as I can't speak to her motives) but, regardless, it's hard not to look down on academics who pull this kind of shit (and there are many of them in these parts), precisely because with their elite education, supposed experience with critical thinking, etc, they should know better, instead of voting purely out of tribal identity instead of out of enlightened self-interest. Interestingly, most of the local academics I know who didn't vote against their own interests either have colorful pasts (one who was an elite athlete, another who worked in a bunch of fields and jobs before becoming an academic) or had very elite upbringings, while those who merrily voted like lemmings seem to have overwhelmingly grown up as solidly middle or upper-middle class, attended public schools and universities, and have never worked as anything other than academics.
Quote from: Stockmann on November 06, 2022, 08:24:02 PM
...
This hits close to home - and I'm not even American or living in the US. There was an election here in which plenty of profs voted in a way reminiscent of turkeys voting for Christmas. I had a discussion with a (now former) friend in which I pointed out a candidate's track record. This led to an outburst on her part. This wasn't what ended the friendship (I dropped the rope over an unrelated issue - at least not obviously related, as I can't speak to her motives) but, regardless, it's hard not to look down on academics who pull this kind of shit (and there are many of them in these parts), precisely because with their elite education, supposed experience with critical thinking, etc, they should know better, instead of voting purely out of tribal identity instead of out of enlightened self-interest. Interestingly, most of the local academics I know who didn't vote against their own interests either have colorful pasts (one who was an elite athlete, another who worked in a bunch of fields and jobs before becoming an academic) or had very elite upbringings, while those who merrily voted like lemmings seem to have overwhelmingly grown up as solidly middle or upper-middle class, attended public schools and universities, and have never worked as anything other than academics.
This is the story of the rationally ignorant voter.
Do I benefit from my vote? Possibly muchly, multiplied by the probability of me determining the outcome of the election, which is zero.
Costs for voting in an informed manner? Hell, would have to become an expert in many things. Very, very costly.
Since I'm not going to determine the outcome of the election, why get informed?
Political parties know this. That's why there's the appeal to emotion instead of policy. Lot's of "we" and "they", and so on.
That's also why I don't talk to my neighbors.
Quote from: dismalist on November 06, 2022, 03:15:50 PM
Of course the retirement age will be raised, but I have no idea what else will be done.
More street fentanyl to reduce the number of SS recipients.
Quote from: Stockmann on November 06, 2022, 08:24:02 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 05, 2022, 09:45:04 AM
And we do need to acknowledge that it is not just the hard working blue-collar worker who is vulnerable to propagandistic manipulation.
This hits close to home - and I'm not even American or living in the US. There was an election here in which plenty of profs voted in a way reminiscent of turkeys voting for Christmas. I had a discussion with a (now former) friend in which I pointed out a candidate's track record. This led to an outburst on her part. This wasn't what ended the friendship (I dropped the rope over an unrelated issue - at least not obviously related, as I can't speak to her motives) but, regardless, it's hard not to look down on academics who pull this kind of shit (and there are many of them in these parts), precisely because with their elite education, supposed experience with critical thinking, etc, they should know better, instead of voting purely out of tribal identity instead of out of enlightened self-interest.
This is based on the unproven assumption that a person's "enlightened
self-interest" aligns perfectly with their
values. Raising taxes on fuel would not be in my "self-interest", since I own a non-electric vehicle, but I may support it in the effort to mitigate climate change.
This is one of the reasons I get annoyed by the unions who supposedly "represent" me. They would consider it in my "self-interest" for the university to take in tons of underprepared students, for instance, to keep enrollments high, and thus keep my job secure. The fact that this would make my job a nightmare is not something which can be discussed. (Much less the idea that I might simply support limits to enrollment for other philosophical reasons which may be even less obviously in my "self-interest".)
Quote from: dismalist on November 06, 2022, 08:54:29 PM
That's also why I don't talk to my neighbors.
We are friendly with a couple of our neighbors by willfully ignoring some of the egregious, provably factually-inaccurate things they've said.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 07, 2022, 08:10:56 AM
Quote from: dismalist on November 06, 2022, 08:54:29 PM
That's also why I don't talk to my neighbors.
We are friendly with a couple of our neighbors by willfully ignoring some of the egregious, provably factually-inaccurate things they've said.
For example?
Quote from: mahagonny on November 07, 2022, 08:19:20 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 07, 2022, 08:10:56 AM
Quote from: dismalist on November 06, 2022, 08:54:29 PM
That's also why I don't talk to my neighbors.
We are friendly with a couple of our neighbors by willfully ignoring some of the egregious, provably factually-inaccurate things they've said.
For example?
Nothing you will get exercised about, Mahag. More having to do with the employment outcomes of certain majors and the legitimacy of some classes.
Although there was the one neighbor who runs the R.O.T.C. program and is convinced COVID is purely a product of media-induced "fear" while ignoring the fear mongering regarding immigrants coming from his own party (he kept his Trump sign up in his yard well after the 2020 election results were announced).
That's kind of a pride thing isn't it? I remember people with Dukakis stickers on their car.
ETA: But I wonder this. If democrats, who are now the party with more education, are smarter than republicans, yet are likely getting red-waved tomorrow, doesn't that mean the democrats don't really want to win?
BTW, the way Biden is talking now, there's reason to suspect that if one makes too much noise in the way of curiosity about the techniques employed in the 2020 election, someone from government may just start to watch you closely. He is basically saying the republican party electorate is full of subversives, and we, all of us decent people remaining, need to do something about it. Nothing like this has ever been said by a POTUS in my lifetime.
Nixon's silent majority speech may have come close, but this is more extreme.
One of the things that happens is that some people become obsessed, not with policies and politics, but with the other party. Everything in their world is filtered through this obsession. The only thing these folks think about is the mendacity of the other political party----it is manic and tribal.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 07, 2022, 11:12:55 AM
One of the things that happens is that some people become obsessed, not with policies and politics, but with the other party. Everything in their world is filtered through this obsession. The only thing these folks think about is the mendacity of the other political party----it is manic and tribal.
But only one of the people who are currently doing this is the President of the United States.
Quote from: mahagonny on November 07, 2022, 11:22:48 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 07, 2022, 11:12:55 AM
One of the things that happens is that some people become obsessed, not with policies and politics, but with the other party. Everything in their world is filtered through this obsession. The only thing these folks think about is the mendacity of the other political party----it is manic and tribal.
But only one of the people who are currently doing this is the President of the United States.
If things go as expected we are guaranteed one in 2025 REGARDLESS of which party wins.
Quote from: Hegemony on November 05, 2022, 01:56:27 AM
To be honest, I think the current climate of the States (at least) is one that encourages everyone to look down on those they do not agree with. On both sides. I know each side will say, "No, they have contempt for us — they started it — I am only reacting to their bad behavior!" But nope. Each side is contemptuous.
The way I try to resist is is to focus on the fact that actually most people want pretty much the same things, even if they have different views on how to get to that point. And to acknowledge that humans are pretty vulnerable, pretty fickle beings, subject to all kinds of whim, bias, and influence — me included. We're all out here doing the best we can. Often we're really wrong. We just gotta keep trying.
Sometimes, when it all becomes a little overwhelming, a nice break and a little snack helps.
But do most people really want the same thing in the end? I think this is partially where the problem starts, people don't all want the same thing at all and thinking so is flawed.
Some people are fully in favor of social programs to give everyone opportunity, recognizing that this represents a greater tax burden on them. Others believe you should only get what you earn, and it is fundamentally not fair for them to subsidize anything. I dont think these two groups want the same thing at all.
Likewise, some people want to prioritize personal freedom above all else, while others want to impose their world outlook on others. Ironically, both parties do both on different topics but ultimately, not everyone agrees on what the goal should be at all.
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 07, 2022, 12:52:05 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 05, 2022, 01:56:27 AM
To be honest, I think the current climate of the States (at least) is one that encourages everyone to look down on those they do not agree with. On both sides. I know each side will say, "No, they have contempt for us — they started it — I am only reacting to their bad behavior!" But nope. Each side is contemptuous.
The way I try to resist is is to focus on the fact that actually most people want pretty much the same things, even if they have different views on how to get to that point. And to acknowledge that humans are pretty vulnerable, pretty fickle beings, subject to all kinds of whim, bias, and influence — me included. We're all out here doing the best we can. Often we're really wrong. We just gotta keep trying.
Sometimes, when it all becomes a little overwhelming, a nice break and a little snack helps.
But do most people really want the same thing in the end? I think this is partially where the problem starts, people don't all want the same thing at all and thinking so is flawed.
On lots of the big issues, surveys usually show that a significant majority of the electorate are pretty much in the middle. The fringes get all of the media attention, but consensus
of a majority of voters isn't that hard to achieve. But because it's not dramatic, even the media isn't keen to devote time to it since it's not as exciting (i.e., doe$n't get a$ many eyeball$ ) as the extreme proposals from both ends.
Quote from: marshwiggle on November 07, 2022, 01:05:26 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on November 07, 2022, 12:52:05 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on November 05, 2022, 01:56:27 AM
To be honest, I think the current climate of the States (at least) is one that encourages everyone to look down on those they do not agree with. On both sides. I know each side will say, "No, they have contempt for us — they started it — I am only reacting to their bad behavior!" But nope. Each side is contemptuous.
The way I try to resist is is to focus on the fact that actually most people want pretty much the same things, even if they have different views on how to get to that point. And to acknowledge that humans are pretty vulnerable, pretty fickle beings, subject to all kinds of whim, bias, and influence — me included. We're all out here doing the best we can. Often we're really wrong. We just gotta keep trying.
Sometimes, when it all becomes a little overwhelming, a nice break and a little snack helps.
But do most people really want the same thing in the end? I think this is partially where the problem starts, people don't all want the same thing at all and thinking so is flawed.
On lots of the big issues, surveys usually show that a significant majority of the electorate are pretty much in the middle. The fringes get all of the media attention, but consensus of a majority of voters isn't that hard to achieve. But because it's not dramatic, even the media isn't keen to devote time to it since it's not as exciting (i.e., doe$n't get a$ many eyeball$ ) as the extreme proposals from both ends.
I'd like to believe that, Marsh, but if true it would suggest that 1) political parties are stupid, and/or 2) the electorate is stupid. I can't bring myself to believe that long term and repeated voters are stupid, rational voter ignorance in a single election aside.
And, the Median Voter Theorem only holds for one issue at a time. Thus, the median voter on money to higher education may well be a different voter than on the issue of funds for the poor, and so on. The parties are trying to capture groups of voters with diverse median preferences. As I said before, I think the Democratic Party has a particularly hard time doing this because it is trying, for whatever reason, to be so
diverse.
I'm also not too worried about the influence of the media. That's entertainment for the believers, nothing more. It certainly doesn't convince anybody.
I see several fault lines, but the one I think is the most fractured right now is public school. Public education is simply not going to survive the intention on the part of some to encourage and 'instruct' very young people to reconsider which or what gender they 'want to join'. There isn't even any consensus that such thing can be a valid question. Someone's going to lose this battle and lose hard.
The larger question, playing out in other topics, is what Sowell talks about... the ruling elite who are convinced with their superior education and professional stature that they know better than ordinary people what is best for those legions of ordinary, self-motivated people.
con't
QuoteQuote from: Hegemony on November 05, 2022, 01:56:27 AM
To be honest, I think the current climate of the States (at least) is one that encourages everyone to look down on those they do not agree with. On both sides. I know each side will say, "No, they have contempt for us — they started it — I am only reacting to their bad behavior!" But nope. Each side is contemptuous.
Quote:
"The way I try to resist is is to focus on the fact that actually most people want pretty much the same things, even if they have different views on how to get to that point. And to acknowledge that humans are pretty vulnerable, pretty fickle beings, subject to all kinds of whim, bias, and influence — me included. We're all out here doing the best we can. Often we're really wrong. We just gotta keep trying.
Sometimes, when it all becomes a little overwhelming, a nice break and a little snack helps."
But do most people really want the same thing in the end? I think this is partially where the problem starts, people don't all want the same thing at all and thinking so is flawed.
For the first time in my life I will say no.
Interesting to me, some of the parents' groups who are fighting with local boards of education over sexualized education for little kiddies consist of Muslim Moms and Dads, now working with Christian Moms and Dads.
Aside: I'm old enough to remember what we said about the people who attacked us on 9/11. 'They hate us because we are free.' And I thought 'yeah. Like free enough to do stupid things like make pornography available to children.' (Never told anyone)
Long post summarized: Republicans want to be Christians but they're OK with you being something else unless you're woke. And I can see why. It's not just a religion. It's one of the worst.
Quote from: dismalist on November 07, 2022, 01:39:55 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on November 07, 2022, 01:05:26 PM
On lots of the big issues, surveys usually show that a significant majority of the electorate are pretty much in the middle. The fringes get all of the media attention, but consensus of a majority of voters isn't that hard to achieve. But because it's not dramatic, even the media isn't keen to devote time to it since it's not as exciting (i.e., doe$n't get a$ many eyeball$ ) as the extreme proposals from both ends.
I'd like to believe that, Marsh, but if true it would suggest that 1) political parties are stupid, and/or 2) the electorate is stupid. I can't bring myself to believe that long term and repeated voters are stupid, rational voter ignorance in a single election aside.
And, the Median Voter Theorem only holds for one issue at a time. Thus, the median voter on money to higher education may well be a different voter than on the issue of funds for the poor, and so on.
Sure. I agree. The fact that there are, say 3 big issues where 70% of the electorate can find consensus doesn't mean that it's the
same 70% on each issue. But it does allow a party to choose which hill to die on, if they go with the broad consensus on as many issues as possible, and only narrow down on one or two. (It's easier in countries other than the US where there are multiple parties that get some portion of the vote. In the two party system, it's not going to work nearly as well.)
Quote
The parties are trying to capture groups of voters with diverse median preferences. As I said before, I think the Democratic Party has a particularly hard time doing this because it is trying, for whatever reason, to be so diverse.
I'm also not too worried about the influence of the media. That's entertainment for the believers, nothing more. It certainly doesn't convince anybody.
It's not so much about the media
convincing anyone, as avoiding having public conversations that are sane. If the amount of screen time given to voices was proportionate to how
common those opinions were, rather than how
loudly they were expressed, the perceived polarization of society would be much less.