14 ms·

You do realize that what the great renaissance intellectuals created, the right wing in the united stated looks down upon and scoffs at, right? They hate anythi

You do realize that what the great renaissance intellectuals created, the right wing in the united stated looks down upon and scoffs at, right? They hate anything to do with art or culture unless it's their version of Christianity. This is the same attitude of Boko Haram. The left wing doesn't dismiss the great cultural achievements the west has created, but we try to create space for them within a nation known for accepting immigrants, rather than forcefully imposing our culture on them, which seems to have failed so brilliantly in places like France. The politicians trivialize this shit, because they pander to the voters. The left embraces other cultures because we're sick of getting Christianity shoved down our throats.

oldhermit 10y ago
Except the left pulls their classic double standard with stuff like being incredibly accepting of Muslim immigrants/refugees and their ideologies, yet not being anywhere near as tolerant of Christianity, when likely the two religions have more in common than the left wing does with the former. And as it turns out, people like being surrounded by others that share their values, speak their language, look like them, and enjoy the same activities as they do. There's no shame in wanting a group identity. The christian right wing is just tired of everybody else's identity being legitimized except for theirs.
- RandomInteger4 10y ago
  What you people don't seem to understand is that we have a first fucking amendment. The first amendment states that there is a freedom of religion. People are allowed to have their own religions. What you see on the left as being somehow more accepting of Muslims, is actually people on the left having empathy for a group that is constantly demonized, to the point that psychopathic racists murder and plot to murder sikhs because they're too fucking stupid to understand the differences between one brown person and another. Give me a fucking break with your bullshit. Let me guess as well, someone among you will report this fucking comment, while in another railing against PC fucking culture; fuck off!
  - muad 10y ago
    Triggered.
  - mschuster91 10y ago
    Thank you. I wish more people would realize this :(
- howdyado 10y ago
  I believe that the left is focused on a wider context and trying to ensure that the worst moments of human nature are not repeated. (preface: not saying this is going to occur or repeat etc but-) I believe everyone here would not want genocide, rape camps, slavery or other atrocities to exist (they may very well do so today, but we can also hopefully agree this is something that is to be avoided as much as possible). "The left" is fixated on this. The context of "how did I get here?". How is it that I am having dumplings delivered to my door while there is starvation still rampant in the world? These questions lead to the thread pulling of context and it's interplay with the current circumstances of the (left-leaning) individual. From here this leads to history, oppressive and forceful spreading of Christianity throughout the world through often violent and culturally dismissive means, exploitation, and the above atrocities. The left is predominantly concerned with not repeating these same mistakes. While they do suffer from some of the issues that affect "the right" voters - I would vouch on a general scale globally not really as much: The right usually work highly volatile positions which they are sold as (and rightfully so) adding to the prosperity of their nation and fulfilling of a duty, they feel (also rightfully so) like fodder used by their nation for economic gain and prosperity. The right voter base will react against any entity that is destabilizing this - it is unfortunate that they are treated as such with no opportunity for transition when the industries predominantly aligned with these groups are by their nature bound for a temporary life time. While the left does often experience the same hardships of economic immobility, job loss, they can abstract themselves from this with the often larger city centres offering alterntives to these downturns. The right is unable to do the same. I am of the opinion (emphasis on opinion in these very volatile areas that we have to apply utilitarian laws to) that Christianity/left-values are - as you said - group identifiers that allow a sense of belonging. I personally am left leaning so disagree with the assessment of "legitimization" of Christianity when there are several open cases of heinous instances where it hasn't afforded the same - and has resulted in a highlight reel of the worst humanity has to offer (not isolated of course to Christianity, but it is a hard case to sell that solidifying this group will result in net positives, especially when blatantly used as a tool by politicians to consolidate their own power). Along with this, certain issues regarding race, gender, and other imagined hostilities seem to be purported by 'the right' as concerns, when in reality we are simply serving to undermine the countries we all wish to be their best. We should be openly encouraging performance from skill and shaking our heads at those who would lower another's potential by a bizarre rubric. While there is much to be said for the benefits of community, there is simply too much castigation from the right to misdirected or non-existent perceived threats. As you said "there is no shame in wanting a group identity", I believe that this metric should then be used to not demonise females wanting to belong to "feminism", Latinos wanting to belong to a Latino identity, or the many other groups who have been - throughout history - actively suppressed either through violence, genocide, or structures in place that do not afford them the same opportunities being demanded now. To ask for legitimacy whilst ignoring past (extreme) grievances when the same was requested and then crying foul is remiss. However I believe that across the globe that left-leaning parties need to do much much more work at re-training, re-educating, and emphasising just what tremendous effort the blue collar - and often right-voting - people of their countries have sacrificed so that the left get their opportunity to learn and mobilize upwards. There is a need to bring them along as well or the country is just as doomed and suffering of citizens just as bad. We need to work together, support each other, and not be drawn in to crude openly-acknowledged-as-broken party systems. That being said - if Trump does not destabilize this system in the US and push the country toward a preferential system, he isn't worth the square inch of a used toilet paper. (one final left-leaning comment in there!) P.S. I genuinely hope he tries to "shake things up", however all rhetoric points to him being more fascinated with self-service - even above those issues of the hard workers in the centre of the US that supported him with their hopes on the line.
- humanrebar 10y ago
  It's more visceral than being tired of being left out. Christians are mapping the trajectory of the cosmopolitan left culture, see things like the Brendan Eich incident, and are genuinely afraid that there's a leftist fascism developing. Maybe they're jumping to conclusions, but that's what they think. Also, abortion is a really big deal. To some degree, the evangelical/conservative Christian vote was split this time around because Trump had a loud but not very reputable position against abortion. It's remarkable that Trump won despite that shortcoming.
- megablast 10y ago
  That is because you see them as Muslims, the left sees them as people.
  - stronsay 10y ago
    This is exactly the kind of thought terminating cliché that makes people despise the Left and vote Trump. Of course Muslims are people. So are Buddhists, murderers, mothers, Nazis, and so on. In fact, literally all people are people. A kindergartner can tell you as much, so how is this anything other than dismissive, empty rhetoric? The real issue is obviously not their humanity, but their beliefs. It makes total sense to see them foremost as Muslims given the importance of Islam to their identity. Acknowledging this doesn't mean you're dehumanizing these people, it simply means that you're not willfully blind to the fact that beliefs substantially influence how people behave. The real questions that should be asked and addressed revolve around the compatibility of that identity with the US society. Do US citizens like living among Muslims (i.e. people that are culturally quite distant from themselves)? Does it introduce ideological and social friction? Does it enhance society or not? Those are the questions that the liberal Left doesn't even attempt to answer, because they're completely fixated on abstract moral dogmas (-isms like racism, sexism), which coincidentally is a privilege often afforded by not having to suffer the actual social consequences of those dogmas.
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      How is it a thought terminating cliche? When you don't apply the same "people" standard to Muslim and Christians, when you want to strip one of those classes from free speech, from free entry into their country or their religious freedom, do not be surprised if "the left" ( but really, anyone) gathers that they are not being seen as people. The reasonable questions you are asking are not the questions your (I'm assuming) party is asking. The answers to those questions are also extremely different to the answers that same party is coming up with. You don't solve a cultural difference problem by removing the culturally different, that's just making it worse.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
rdtsc 10y ago
> This is the same attitude of Boko Haram. Interesting. You really think more than half of US citizens are just like Boko Haram?
- rbanffy 10y ago
  If we pause for a moment to contemplate how well educated, loving people end up building IEDs, blowing themselves up or operating large gas chambers, we realise this is not outside the realm of the possible. We are all human and we are all subject to the same primal forces. It's our job to fight it.
- majewsky 10y ago
  This is a strawman. "the same attitude as" is a much weaker statement than "just like".
exclusiv 10y ago
The left doesn't embrace freedom of speech for those that think differently from them though. The left is inclusive of all sorts of groups of people so long as they agree and ultimately vote their way. We have a major homeless problem but they are quick to offer taking in refugees because they're more enlightened. It's all for making themselves feel better. And the politicians so it for votes... All the while ignoring groups of people they supposedly champion for. Not sure how Christianity is shoved down your throat. Sounds like you don't like Christians because their beliefs don't line up with yours and are upset a primarily Christian nation is Christian in practice. That's not very tolerant. What are you afraid of? Christmas? Accidentally going to mass?
- Melk 10y ago
  You just won the election. I wonder when the right is going to stop playing the victim. I'm sure President Trump will be very accommodating to those who think differently from him.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - exclusiv 10y ago
    I didn't win anything lol. I'm third party and voted so but my wife and almost of my friends where I live are on the left. I was hoping for a 5% Libertarian victory for access to public funds (Presidential Election Campaign Fund’s grant). Competition is good. Anyway, from my group of primarily left friends: - I've heard some are moving out of the country. - Many are removing friends that voted Trump or were Anti-Hillary. This has been happening for some time. Some are even removing family members. - Even my wife told me she lost respect for me for voting third party. The left and the right from the major parties are both full of shit. But saying you are progressive when you don't tolerate other views and even lose respect for others that differ is on a whole other level of bullshit. And getting emotional and raging when you discover an opposing point is not progressive at all either. It probably just means you didn't learn to play in the sandbox with others. It's all sad but the worst part is how the majority of citizens treat others with different views.
exclusiv 10y ago
The left doesn't embrace freedom of speech for those that think differently from them though. The left is inclusive of all sorts of groups of people so long as they agree and ultimately vote their way. We have a major homeless problem but they are quick to offer taking in refugees because they're more enlightened. It's all for making themselves feel better. And the politicians so it for votes... All the while ignoring groups of people they supposedly champion for. Not sure how Christianity is shoved down your throat. Sounds like you don't like Christians because their beliefs don't line up with yours and are upset a primarily Christian nation is Christian in practice. That's not very tolerant. What are you afraid of? Christmas? Accidentally going to mass?
puranjay 10y ago
From what I've seen, they aren't specifically anti-art; they are anti-modernism. I'm yet to see anyone disparage a Michaleangelo, but I do see them question the validity of a Pollock. At some level, it is the fault of modern artists as well - a Pollock or even a Hirst isn't easy to "get"
- Helmet 10y ago
  I disagree - there is nothing complicated or difficult in Pollock's art; he himself states his vision clearly: "I am nature." Likewise, there's nothing complicated or difficult in Hirst's work either because, quite simply, he has nothing complicated, interesting, or difficult to say. To quote the late Bob Hughes: "his work is both simple-minded and sensationalist, just the ticket for newbie collectors who are, to put it mildly, connoisseurship-challenged and resonance-free. "

oldhermit 10y ago

Except the left pulls their classic double standard with stuff like being incredibly accepting of Muslim immigrants/refugees and their ideologies, yet not being anywhere near as tolerant of Christianity, when likely the two religions have more in common than the left wing does with the former. And as it turns out, people like being surrounded by others that share their values, speak their language, look like them, and enjoy the same activities as they do. There's no shame in wanting a group identity. The christian right wing is just tired of everybody else's identity being legitimized except for theirs.

RandomInteger4 10y ago
What you people don't seem to understand is that we have a first fucking amendment. The first amendment states that there is a freedom of religion. People are allowed to have their own religions. What you see on the left as being somehow more accepting of Muslims, is actually people on the left having empathy for a group that is constantly demonized, to the point that psychopathic racists murder and plot to murder sikhs because they're too fucking stupid to understand the differences between one brown person and another. Give me a fucking break with your bullshit. Let me guess as well, someone among you will report this fucking comment, while in another railing against PC fucking culture; fuck off!
- muad 10y ago
  Triggered.
- mschuster91 10y ago
  Thank you. I wish more people would realize this :(
howdyado 10y ago
I believe that the left is focused on a wider context and trying to ensure that the worst moments of human nature are not repeated. (preface: not saying this is going to occur or repeat etc but-) I believe everyone here would not want genocide, rape camps, slavery or other atrocities to exist (they may very well do so today, but we can also hopefully agree this is something that is to be avoided as much as possible). "The left" is fixated on this. The context of "how did I get here?". How is it that I am having dumplings delivered to my door while there is starvation still rampant in the world? These questions lead to the thread pulling of context and it's interplay with the current circumstances of the (left-leaning) individual. From here this leads to history, oppressive and forceful spreading of Christianity throughout the world through often violent and culturally dismissive means, exploitation, and the above atrocities. The left is predominantly concerned with not repeating these same mistakes. While they do suffer from some of the issues that affect "the right" voters - I would vouch on a general scale globally not really as much: The right usually work highly volatile positions which they are sold as (and rightfully so) adding to the prosperity of their nation and fulfilling of a duty, they feel (also rightfully so) like fodder used by their nation for economic gain and prosperity. The right voter base will react against any entity that is destabilizing this - it is unfortunate that they are treated as such with no opportunity for transition when the industries predominantly aligned with these groups are by their nature bound for a temporary life time. While the left does often experience the same hardships of economic immobility, job loss, they can abstract themselves from this with the often larger city centres offering alterntives to these downturns. The right is unable to do the same. I am of the opinion (emphasis on opinion in these very volatile areas that we have to apply utilitarian laws to) that Christianity/left-values are - as you said - group identifiers that allow a sense of belonging. I personally am left leaning so disagree with the assessment of "legitimization" of Christianity when there are several open cases of heinous instances where it hasn't afforded the same - and has resulted in a highlight reel of the worst humanity has to offer (not isolated of course to Christianity, but it is a hard case to sell that solidifying this group will result in net positives, especially when blatantly used as a tool by politicians to consolidate their own power). Along with this, certain issues regarding race, gender, and other imagined hostilities seem to be purported by 'the right' as concerns, when in reality we are simply serving to undermine the countries we all wish to be their best. We should be openly encouraging performance from skill and shaking our heads at those who would lower another's potential by a bizarre rubric. While there is much to be said for the benefits of community, there is simply too much castigation from the right to misdirected or non-existent perceived threats. As you said "there is no shame in wanting a group identity", I believe that this metric should then be used to not demonise females wanting to belong to "feminism", Latinos wanting to belong to a Latino identity, or the many other groups who have been - throughout history - actively suppressed either through violence, genocide, or structures in place that do not afford them the same opportunities being demanded now. To ask for legitimacy whilst ignoring past (extreme) grievances when the same was requested and then crying foul is remiss. However I believe that across the globe that left-leaning parties need to do much much more work at re-training, re-educating, and emphasising just what tremendous effort the blue collar - and often right-voting - people of their countries have sacrificed so that the left get their opportunity to learn and mobilize upwards. There is a need to bring them along as well or the country is just as doomed and suffering of citizens just as bad. We need to work together, support each other, and not be drawn in to crude openly-acknowledged-as-broken party systems. That being said - if Trump does not destabilize this system in the US and push the country toward a preferential system, he isn't worth the square inch of a used toilet paper. (one final left-leaning comment in there!) P.S. I genuinely hope he tries to "shake things up", however all rhetoric points to him being more fascinated with self-service - even above those issues of the hard workers in the centre of the US that supported him with their hopes on the line.
humanrebar 10y ago
It's more visceral than being tired of being left out. Christians are mapping the trajectory of the cosmopolitan left culture, see things like the Brendan Eich incident, and are genuinely afraid that there's a leftist fascism developing. Maybe they're jumping to conclusions, but that's what they think. Also, abortion is a really big deal. To some degree, the evangelical/conservative Christian vote was split this time around because Trump had a loud but not very reputable position against abortion. It's remarkable that Trump won despite that shortcoming.
megablast 10y ago
That is because you see them as Muslims, the left sees them as people.
- stronsay 10y ago
  This is exactly the kind of thought terminating cliché that makes people despise the Left and vote Trump. Of course Muslims are people. So are Buddhists, murderers, mothers, Nazis, and so on. In fact, literally all people are people. A kindergartner can tell you as much, so how is this anything other than dismissive, empty rhetoric? The real issue is obviously not their humanity, but their beliefs. It makes total sense to see them foremost as Muslims given the importance of Islam to their identity. Acknowledging this doesn't mean you're dehumanizing these people, it simply means that you're not willfully blind to the fact that beliefs substantially influence how people behave. The real questions that should be asked and addressed revolve around the compatibility of that identity with the US society. Do US citizens like living among Muslims (i.e. people that are culturally quite distant from themselves)? Does it introduce ideological and social friction? Does it enhance society or not? Those are the questions that the liberal Left doesn't even attempt to answer, because they're completely fixated on abstract moral dogmas (-isms like racism, sexism), which coincidentally is a privilege often afforded by not having to suffer the actual social consequences of those dogmas.
  - scrollaway 10y ago
    How is it a thought terminating cliche? When you don't apply the same "people" standard to Muslim and Christians, when you want to strip one of those classes from free speech, from free entry into their country or their religious freedom, do not be surprised if "the left" ( but really, anyone) gathers that they are not being seen as people. The reasonable questions you are asking are not the questions your (I'm assuming) party is asking. The answers to those questions are also extremely different to the answers that same party is coming up with. You don't solve a cultural difference problem by removing the culturally different, that's just making it worse.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

rdtsc 10y ago

> This is the same attitude of Boko Haram. Interesting. You really think more than half of US citizens are just like Boko Haram?

rbanffy 10y ago
If we pause for a moment to contemplate how well educated, loving people end up building IEDs, blowing themselves up or operating large gas chambers, we realise this is not outside the realm of the possible. We are all human and we are all subject to the same primal forces. It's our job to fight it.
majewsky 10y ago
This is a strawman. "the same attitude as" is a much weaker statement than "just like".

exclusiv 10y ago

The left doesn't embrace freedom of speech for those that think differently from them though. The left is inclusive of all sorts of groups of people so long as they agree and ultimately vote their way. We have a major homeless problem but they are quick to offer taking in refugees because they're more enlightened. It's all for making themselves feel better. And the politicians so it for votes... All the while ignoring groups of people they supposedly champion for. Not sure how Christianity is shoved down your throat. Sounds like you don't like Christians because their beliefs don't line up with yours and are upset a primarily Christian nation is Christian in practice. That's not very tolerant. What are you afraid of? Christmas? Accidentally going to mass?

Melk 10y ago
You just won the election. I wonder when the right is going to stop playing the victim. I'm sure President Trump will be very accommodating to those who think differently from him.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- exclusiv 10y ago
  I didn't win anything lol. I'm third party and voted so but my wife and almost of my friends where I live are on the left. I was hoping for a 5% Libertarian victory for access to public funds (Presidential Election Campaign Fund’s grant). Competition is good. Anyway, from my group of primarily left friends: - I've heard some are moving out of the country. - Many are removing friends that voted Trump or were Anti-Hillary. This has been happening for some time. Some are even removing family members. - Even my wife told me she lost respect for me for voting third party. The left and the right from the major parties are both full of shit. But saying you are progressive when you don't tolerate other views and even lose respect for others that differ is on a whole other level of bullshit. And getting emotional and raging when you discover an opposing point is not progressive at all either. It probably just means you didn't learn to play in the sandbox with others. It's all sad but the worst part is how the majority of citizens treat others with different views.

exclusiv 10y ago

puranjay 10y ago

From what I've seen, they aren't specifically anti-art; they are anti-modernism. I'm yet to see anyone disparage a Michaleangelo, but I do see them question the validity of a Pollock. At some level, it is the fault of modern artists as well - a Pollock or even a Hirst isn't easy to "get"

Helmet 10y ago
I disagree - there is nothing complicated or difficult in Pollock's art; he himself states his vision clearly: "I am nature." Likewise, there's nothing complicated or difficult in Hirst's work either because, quite simply, he has nothing complicated, interesting, or difficult to say. To quote the late Bob Hughes: "his work is both simple-minded and sensationalist, just the ticket for newbie collectors who are, to put it mildly, connoisseurship-challenged and resonance-free. "