Growing up in this landmass was incredibly and painfully confusing. I was surrounded by people that told me my life was "better than everyone else", and if I ever dared to ask about what "over there" was like, I was mocked, ridiculed, isolated away in everywhere but small circles of post-teenage educated people.
I've only managed to fly outside these states once in my life, and I want to do it again and for the rest of it. The culture I was born into was and is rotting from a group of humans that are too internally frightened and humiliated by their lack of knowledge and feeling like they are owed things. I don't want to live here, and I have been trying to find a place that would accept my mentality as a citizen of a small blue planet even though I come from here... but I always worry I am guilty by association :(
The culture you were born into may very well be rotten, but don’t make the mistake of thinking that it’s the culture of “this landmass”. The USA is enormous, and contains a huge number of cultures and subcultures. I grew up here, too, and experienced nothing like what you describe.
Live the rest of your life abroad if you’d like, but don’t do so believing that everyone in the USA is from the same culture.
"Men can have babies. Communism will work this time. Etc". Seriously, anyone in the 70s/80s/90s (or asia today) would think left should be institutionalised. Problem is left call centrists right wing, and everyone right of Stalin Nazis.
Which was the stazi playbook (berlin wall was freedom/anti Nazi wall, keeping everyone in.)
Broken minds, like zombies.
Perhaps you should take a moment to understand what people on the left actually mean, instead of taking memes as sources of truth.
For instance, "men can have babies" is a simple result of politeness and observable reality. Transgender people exist, and can become pregnant and have babies. The polite, sympathetic and decent thing to do when interacting with a transgender person is to use their preferred gender terms. This is true whether you're a small-government, live-and-let-live libertarian conservative (you live your life, I'll live mine) or a Christian values social conservative (Jesus spent his entire life around lepers, beggars and prostitutes and washed their feet as an act of love and compassion).
Combine those two facts 1) you've got a person who had a baby at one point in their life and 2) who should be referred to as a man today, and the result is you get a man who had a baby. Nothing left-wing or liberal about it, just basic civility and politeness to another person, which are values we should all embrace.
if the goal is a population that is easy to control and overthrow, you want it to be full of a bunch of weak men who think they are women and a bunch of women who think they are soldiers
conveniently ignoring the fact that real western socialism and eastern larp have been different since day one of the establishment of the deformed worker's state known as "soviet union"
the first comment says "no tolerance for anyone that doesn’t think, act, look, and live exactly like he does" which is quite funny when you think about the fact that if you disagree with any of aspect of the insanely pervasive liberal ideology, you are immediately ostracized based on the fact that you do not you don't "think, act, look, and live exactly like" and get inundated with a plethora of dumb shit using "phobic" and "ist" as a suffix
And if one dares to mention that this kind of dogmatism is pervasive across the political spectrum, and so that that first comment is quite literally correct then despite its irony, then that's a "both sides" thing, and therefore just cope.
It's entertaining sometimes, but man, is it ever depressing too. Good thing the speech is free though... (not that e.g. curtailing dogmatic speech wouldn't be just a treating of symptoms)
definitely is the case that that dogmatism does exist across the political spectrum, it just appears more frequently from one side as opposed to the other.
like i stated in a different reply: "i might fundamentally disagree with what you say but i will defend your right to say it" which seems to only be echoed by one side
Your whole argument collapses when you notice the far right hates people for what they are and cant change, such as their sex or race, and the far left hates people for what they choose to be, such as racist, egoistical, violent...
"Hating women" and "hating people who hate women" are the same "hate" only if you are a shallow thinker who stays at the surface of things and takes words at their face value.
well clearly your hate is morally superior and thus you're justified in your hate opposed to another because you're a brilliant thinker, right?
regardless you saying that those who are far right hate people for something they can't change is just as funny as that first comment in the article, because for example, phrases like 'assigned male at birth' which is literally someone born as male then cosplaying a female. how is that someone who is "what they are and cant change"? i can personally find that to be revolting but it doesn't change reality.
here is a good way for your big brain to understand it, say a far left person wearing a bunch of pride badges gets attacked in public for no apparent reason, you will still see a far right person assist in defending the individual they fundamentally disagree. now reverse the roles and say a far right person wearing a MAGA hat gets attacked in public for no apparent reason, and you will see the far left person assist in the attack.
i might not agree with what you say but i will defend your right to say it, but the same sentiment seems to be lost on the opposite side of the political isle, they would instead celebrate and advocate violence against the other side "for what they choose to be"
Yes. They are saying that hating people for what they choose to be is better than hating people for what they are. Your point being?
Being trans is what you are, it has never been an open choice like how I can choose to associate with a different political party. If people could freely choose what gender they felt like without any mental distress or anguish involved, nearly no one would be trans because it is a massively repressed and limiting position in society, where a good chunk of the world population displays the emotional stability of a rabid bulldog when thinking about them. I could feel your fists clench through the text, especially when you think about only MtFs - a sign of very rational and stable views about gender roles.
Your example is just "let me tell you how good I imagine my side is, and how bad I imagine your side is. Not feeling so smart now huh?". Most far-rightists have no qualms about suppressing the other side if you look at how their societies act, from hyper-religious dictatorships to corrupt populist democracies. It's the right that's the most easily united under hatred, while the left is infamous for infighting and constant drama because they disagree on the minutia of some idea. A lot of the right can accept anything from a theocracy to the death of democracy if what they think gets instated. They do not care about anyone's rights or wellbeing. Maybe some on the regular right would disagree with some of these things, but not anyone who's deep into extreme ideology.
Conflating the underlying types of hate is not my intention (nor is conflating the moral character and mental state required to hold either views), what I'm saying is that both of these far-off crowds are genuinely insufferable, damaging to public discourse, and that their justification for being insufferable only goes so far.
You may find their justification to wash one of these sides, but that doesn't collapse jack about my "argument", we just disagree then. Sorry to hear this makes me a shallow thinker in your opinion, unfortunately, gonna have to disagree about that one too.
I did not put forward any arguments by the way, I stated opinions and an anecdote.
I really don't understand people who put being polite and cordial before everything. And honestly, it reeks of "I am not directly affected by it, therefore I don't want to engage with it". "Why can't we be nice with people who call liberal women pestilence that will end civilization?" Clearly you're not a women in the military whose career (or basic safety from sexual assault) may be affected by these guys. But let's not be "insufferable" here, right?
As an atheist I have literally never discovered a religion that respects women, individuality or liberty.
Its always about following rules- which conveniently were made up by other people centuries in the past. People with penises.
Dehumanizing part of the population is historically the first step to atrocities.
Americans are never allowed to pull the exceptionalism card ever again after this administration is kicked to the kerb.
Growing up in this landmass was incredibly and painfully confusing. I was surrounded by people that told me my life was "better than everyone else", and if I ever dared to ask about what "over there" was like, I was mocked, ridiculed, isolated away in everywhere but small circles of post-teenage educated people.
I've only managed to fly outside these states once in my life, and I want to do it again and for the rest of it. The culture I was born into was and is rotting from a group of humans that are too internally frightened and humiliated by their lack of knowledge and feeling like they are owed things. I don't want to live here, and I have been trying to find a place that would accept my mentality as a citizen of a small blue planet even though I come from here... but I always worry I am guilty by association :(
The culture you were born into may very well be rotten, but don’t make the mistake of thinking that it’s the culture of “this landmass”. The USA is enormous, and contains a huge number of cultures and subcultures. I grew up here, too, and experienced nothing like what you describe.
Live the rest of your life abroad if you’d like, but don’t do so believing that everyone in the USA is from the same culture.
Joe Biden. Kamala Harris. What's your point?
[dead]
[dead]
The left are insane. The right are assholes. Still, he may not be wrong.
The right are insane assholes
[the middle of insanity is just right]
"Men can have babies. Communism will work this time. Etc". Seriously, anyone in the 70s/80s/90s (or asia today) would think left should be institutionalised. Problem is left call centrists right wing, and everyone right of Stalin Nazis. Which was the stazi playbook (berlin wall was freedom/anti Nazi wall, keeping everyone in.) Broken minds, like zombies.
Perhaps you should take a moment to understand what people on the left actually mean, instead of taking memes as sources of truth.
For instance, "men can have babies" is a simple result of politeness and observable reality. Transgender people exist, and can become pregnant and have babies. The polite, sympathetic and decent thing to do when interacting with a transgender person is to use their preferred gender terms. This is true whether you're a small-government, live-and-let-live libertarian conservative (you live your life, I'll live mine) or a Christian values social conservative (Jesus spent his entire life around lepers, beggars and prostitutes and washed their feet as an act of love and compassion).
Combine those two facts 1) you've got a person who had a baby at one point in their life and 2) who should be referred to as a man today, and the result is you get a man who had a baby. Nothing left-wing or liberal about it, just basic civility and politeness to another person, which are values we should all embrace.
if the goal is a population that is easy to control and overthrow, you want it to be full of a bunch of weak men who think they are women and a bunch of women who think they are soldiers
conveniently ignoring the fact that real western socialism and eastern larp have been different since day one of the establishment of the deformed worker's state known as "soviet union"
elaborate
the first comment says "no tolerance for anyone that doesn’t think, act, look, and live exactly like he does" which is quite funny when you think about the fact that if you disagree with any of aspect of the insanely pervasive liberal ideology, you are immediately ostracized based on the fact that you do not you don't "think, act, look, and live exactly like" and get inundated with a plethora of dumb shit using "phobic" and "ist" as a suffix
And if one dares to mention that this kind of dogmatism is pervasive across the political spectrum, and so that that first comment is quite literally correct then despite its irony, then that's a "both sides" thing, and therefore just cope.
It's entertaining sometimes, but man, is it ever depressing too. Good thing the speech is free though... (not that e.g. curtailing dogmatic speech wouldn't be just a treating of symptoms)
definitely is the case that that dogmatism does exist across the political spectrum, it just appears more frequently from one side as opposed to the other. like i stated in a different reply: "i might fundamentally disagree with what you say but i will defend your right to say it" which seems to only be echoed by one side
Your whole argument collapses when you notice the far right hates people for what they are and cant change, such as their sex or race, and the far left hates people for what they choose to be, such as racist, egoistical, violent...
"Hating women" and "hating people who hate women" are the same "hate" only if you are a shallow thinker who stays at the surface of things and takes words at their face value.
well clearly your hate is morally superior and thus you're justified in your hate opposed to another because you're a brilliant thinker, right? regardless you saying that those who are far right hate people for something they can't change is just as funny as that first comment in the article, because for example, phrases like 'assigned male at birth' which is literally someone born as male then cosplaying a female. how is that someone who is "what they are and cant change"? i can personally find that to be revolting but it doesn't change reality. here is a good way for your big brain to understand it, say a far left person wearing a bunch of pride badges gets attacked in public for no apparent reason, you will still see a far right person assist in defending the individual they fundamentally disagree. now reverse the roles and say a far right person wearing a MAGA hat gets attacked in public for no apparent reason, and you will see the far left person assist in the attack. i might not agree with what you say but i will defend your right to say it, but the same sentiment seems to be lost on the opposite side of the political isle, they would instead celebrate and advocate violence against the other side "for what they choose to be"
Yes. They are saying that hating people for what they choose to be is better than hating people for what they are. Your point being?
Being trans is what you are, it has never been an open choice like how I can choose to associate with a different political party. If people could freely choose what gender they felt like without any mental distress or anguish involved, nearly no one would be trans because it is a massively repressed and limiting position in society, where a good chunk of the world population displays the emotional stability of a rabid bulldog when thinking about them. I could feel your fists clench through the text, especially when you think about only MtFs - a sign of very rational and stable views about gender roles.
Your example is just "let me tell you how good I imagine my side is, and how bad I imagine your side is. Not feeling so smart now huh?". Most far-rightists have no qualms about suppressing the other side if you look at how their societies act, from hyper-religious dictatorships to corrupt populist democracies. It's the right that's the most easily united under hatred, while the left is infamous for infighting and constant drama because they disagree on the minutia of some idea. A lot of the right can accept anything from a theocracy to the death of democracy if what they think gets instated. They do not care about anyone's rights or wellbeing. Maybe some on the regular right would disagree with some of these things, but not anyone who's deep into extreme ideology.
Conflating the underlying types of hate is not my intention (nor is conflating the moral character and mental state required to hold either views), what I'm saying is that both of these far-off crowds are genuinely insufferable, damaging to public discourse, and that their justification for being insufferable only goes so far.
You may find their justification to wash one of these sides, but that doesn't collapse jack about my "argument", we just disagree then. Sorry to hear this makes me a shallow thinker in your opinion, unfortunately, gonna have to disagree about that one too.
I did not put forward any arguments by the way, I stated opinions and an anecdote.
I really don't understand people who put being polite and cordial before everything. And honestly, it reeks of "I am not directly affected by it, therefore I don't want to engage with it". "Why can't we be nice with people who call liberal women pestilence that will end civilization?" Clearly you're not a women in the military whose career (or basic safety from sexual assault) may be affected by these guys. But let's not be "insufferable" here, right?