3 ms·

Educating them of what, though?

by lj3 10y ago

AnimalMuppet 10y ago
What the middle of the country thinks (as opposed to what the liberal caricature of them thinks). What their problems are. What they care about. What it's actually like to live there.
- lj3 10y ago
  To what end?
  - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
    I'm not sure how far you want me to go in answering that question, but I'll give you a few layers of it. So that the media elites aren't out of touch with half the population, and 90% of the land area of the country. What good will that do? To some degree, it will make it so that we no longer have "two Americas", where one part feels completely alienated from the other part. What good will that do? Hopefully, politics becomes more sane, more connected with what people in the country actually need, and more able to actually solve problems. (Though if this election taught us anything, it ought to have taught us that hope isn't going to come from the government. And if you think hope would have come from the other side winning: Did you really expect hope from Hillary? Or just "not Trump"?)
    - lj3 10y ago
      > To some degree, it will make it so that we no longer have "two Americas", where one part feels completely alienated from the other part. I don't see how you got there. What about simply understanding the right's position magically brings the two sides together? Wouldn't both sides need to agree? That seems unlikely, considering BLM's motto these days is 'kill all whites'. I don't know about you, but as a white man, I find it unlikely that I would ever sympathize with a sentiment that means I no longer exist. > Hopefully, politics becomes more sane, more connected with what people in the country actually need, and more able to actually solve problems. Again, I don't understand how you got there. Let's say the right is exactly as racist, sexist and homophobic as the left currently thinks and that more than 50% of the American people actually, truly want a return to the days when homosexuality was outlawed, blacks were slaves and women were property. How does understanding that make politics more sane?
      - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        > I don't see how you got there. What about simply understanding the right's position magically brings the two sides together? Wouldn't both sides need to agree? That's why I said "to some degree". Let me state it in reverse: Knowing only a strawman version of the other side's views will make it less possible for the two sides to come together. There is some hope that, when you see your opponents as having a position that makes some sense, even though you don't agree with it, you can regard them as something other than ignorant hicks who are too stupid to understand how much smarter everyone else is. You can lose an election and not feel that ignorance and propaganda defeated the side of the right. You can stop hating. > Let's say the right is exactly as racist, sexist and homophobic as the left currently thinks and that more than 50% of the American people actually, truly want a return to the days when homosexuality was outlawed, blacks were slaves and women were property. How does understanding that make politics more sane? Let's not say that. Instead, let's say that someone could vote for Trump (or at least against Hillary) without being racist, sexist, and homophobic. Understanding why they voted for Trump might make politics more sane. (Or again, take the opposite - saying that they're all racist, sexist homophobes and therefore can be ignored and treated with contempt certainly does not make politics more sane.) > ... considering BLM's motto these days is 'kill all whites'. I don't know about you, but as a white man, I find it unlikely that I would ever sympathize with a sentiment that means I no longer exist. Obviously, no compromise is possible with such a position. But is that really BLM's motto these days? Can you document that it is? Because I've never heard that. But even if that is BLM's position, and you can't compromise with it, then what? Then you can't do anything but oppose BLM, and explain why as clearly as you can. The proper response, though, is not to say "Therefore clearly BLM has no legitimate grievances" or "Therefore all blacks are irrational killers".
        lj3 10y ago
        > Understanding why they voted for Trump might make politics more sane. How? This is the part where most of these conversations break down. Those on the left can't possibly fathom that those on the right don't consider being racist, sexist or homophobic to be a capital offense. The number of people who believe exactly as I suggested they do are far more than you're comfortable admitting, even in a hypothetical. And that's before we even get into the shifting definitions of those words since their introduction into American politics. > But is that really BLM's motto these days? Google "BLM kill all whites". I'd provide specific links, but HN doesn't really accommodate that very well. > Then you can't do anything but oppose BLM That's not the tactic most of the left are taking, though. They're still supporting BLM, even though they're inciting violence and calling for the death of white babies. Same with Antifa, who have attacked peaceful demonstrations. You seem like a reasonable person, but the people you're aligning yourself with are not, by your own definition.

Educating them of what, though?

by lj3 10y ago

Educating them of what, though?

What the middle of the country thinks (as opposed to what the liberal caricature of them thinks). What their problems are. What they care about. What it's actually like to live there.

lj3 10y ago
To what end?
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  I'm not sure how far you want me to go in answering that question, but I'll give you a few layers of it. So that the media elites aren't out of touch with half the population, and 90% of the land area of the country. What good will that do? To some degree, it will make it so that we no longer have "two Americas", where one part feels completely alienated from the other part. What good will that do? Hopefully, politics becomes more sane, more connected with what people in the country actually need, and more able to actually solve problems. (Though if this election taught us anything, it ought to have taught us that hope isn't going to come from the government. And if you think hope would have come from the other side winning: Did you really expect hope from Hillary? Or just "not Trump"?)
  - lj3 10y ago
    > To some degree, it will make it so that we no longer have "two Americas", where one part feels completely alienated from the other part. I don't see how you got there. What about simply understanding the right's position magically brings the two sides together? Wouldn't both sides need to agree? That seems unlikely, considering BLM's motto these days is 'kill all whites'. I don't know about you, but as a white man, I find it unlikely that I would ever sympathize with a sentiment that means I no longer exist. > Hopefully, politics becomes more sane, more connected with what people in the country actually need, and more able to actually solve problems. Again, I don't understand how you got there. Let's say the right is exactly as racist, sexist and homophobic as the left currently thinks and that more than 50% of the American people actually, truly want a return to the days when homosexuality was outlawed, blacks were slaves and women were property. How does understanding that make politics more sane?
    - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
      > I don't see how you got there. What about simply understanding the right's position magically brings the two sides together? Wouldn't both sides need to agree? That's why I said "to some degree". Let me state it in reverse: Knowing only a strawman version of the other side's views will make it less possible for the two sides to come together. There is some hope that, when you see your opponents as having a position that makes some sense, even though you don't agree with it, you can regard them as something other than ignorant hicks who are too stupid to understand how much smarter everyone else is. You can lose an election and not feel that ignorance and propaganda defeated the side of the right. You can stop hating. > Let's say the right is exactly as racist, sexist and homophobic as the left currently thinks and that more than 50% of the American people actually, truly want a return to the days when homosexuality was outlawed, blacks were slaves and women were property. How does understanding that make politics more sane? Let's not say that. Instead, let's say that someone could vote for Trump (or at least against Hillary) without being racist, sexist, and homophobic. Understanding why they voted for Trump might make politics more sane. (Or again, take the opposite - saying that they're all racist, sexist homophobes and therefore can be ignored and treated with contempt certainly does not make politics more sane.) > ... considering BLM's motto these days is 'kill all whites'. I don't know about you, but as a white man, I find it unlikely that I would ever sympathize with a sentiment that means I no longer exist. Obviously, no compromise is possible with such a position. But is that really BLM's motto these days? Can you document that it is? Because I've never heard that. But even if that is BLM's position, and you can't compromise with it, then what? Then you can't do anything but oppose BLM, and explain why as clearly as you can. The proper response, though, is not to say "Therefore clearly BLM has no legitimate grievances" or "Therefore all blacks are irrational killers".
      - lj3 10y ago
        > Understanding why they voted for Trump might make politics more sane. How? This is the part where most of these conversations break down. Those on the left can't possibly fathom that those on the right don't consider being racist, sexist or homophobic to be a capital offense. The number of people who believe exactly as I suggested they do are far more than you're comfortable admitting, even in a hypothetical. And that's before we even get into the shifting definitions of those words since their introduction into American politics. > But is that really BLM's motto these days? Google "BLM kill all whites". I'd provide specific links, but HN doesn't really accommodate that very well. > Then you can't do anything but oppose BLM That's not the tactic most of the left are taking, though. They're still supporting BLM, even though they're inciting violence and calling for the death of white babies. Same with Antifa, who have attacked peaceful demonstrations. You seem like a reasonable person, but the people you're aligning yourself with are not, by your own definition.