4 ms·

The implication of the parent comment is that it's all the same - every movement, group, etc. are equally wrong or right. That's a common defense of propaganda,

The implication of the parent comment is that it's all the same - every movement, group, etc. are equally wrong or right. That's a common defense of propaganda, but it's not reality. Nobody is perfect; everyone is a bit ideological, but some are much more rational and empirical than others. All coders create bugs, but not all coders turn out equal quality code. Everyone is a bit violent, but we aren't all equally murderers. There are major differences, and the current conservative movement is heavily ideological; I think my hypothesis holds up very well.

ZenoArrow 10y ago
>"the current conservative movement is heavily ideological" The current Democratic establishment is also heavily ideological. Aside from a few outliers like Bernie Sanders, a lot of the Democratic rhetoric is built up around identity politics. You don't have to look far to find it, but to give you one example, listen to how much this DNC vice chair candidate hammers home the 'diversity' message: https://youtu.be/Jjs87Y2F_FA?t=5m19s https://youtu.be/Jjs87Y2F_FA?t=5m19s
- hackuser 10y ago
  Again, the argument is that everyone is the same. See my prior post.
  - dwaltrip 10y ago
    The fact that it is possible for things to be different doesn't imply that they are. Entropically speaking, it's unlikely for two populations to measure up equally by any particular scale. However, that alone doesn't tell us much. On another note, suppose both groups actually are quite similar in how ideological they are. One would be mistaken to then assume that the two groups have equally effective approaches for conducting affairs. Despite the fact that robustly measuring such effectiveness is currently far outside our grasp. Coming back to reality, I would guess that both parties are not equally ideological. However, I do think there are very large segments of both that are almost entirely ideological, and that, unfortunately, these subgroups often take most of the limelight.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      > The fact that it is possible for things to be different doesn't imply that they are Right, so let's stop talking of theoretical possibilities and look at concrete reality. I don't know of the last time a party embraced ideology as strongly as today's GOP; anyone who doesn't see that will never see ideology anywhere - it hardly could get more extreme. > I do think there are very large segments of both that are almost entirely ideological, and that, unfortunately, these subgroups often take most of the limelight. Again, a false equivalence IMHO. Which very large, limelight-stealing Democrat group are you referring to? Hillary Clinton supporters were the largest group; she's almost the opposite of ideological. Obama and his supporters are very non-ideological. The participants in last Saturday's marches were generally non-ideological, AFAICT.
      - dwaltrip 10y ago
        I agree with you that the Republicans are more ideological in recent years. It's late, so I don't have the best examples, but I have a vague impression that there has been an increase of single-dimension, with-us-or-against-us identity politics. Perhaps I'm mistaking noisy for large. Even still, many of these groups do have legitimate claims... Reflecting a bit, I suppose one main reason I posted was that I didn't like the implication that the mainstream left has become enlightened past the point of ideology. But perhaps that point is too much of a distraction in this conversation. Meh. Btw, not that it should matter, but I lean left and voted for both Obama and Hillary.
        hackuser 10y ago
        > I didn't like the implication that the mainstream left has become enlightened past the point of ideology I agree. It's not that the mainstream left is so great and above reproach, it's that their right-wing competition has embraced madness.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    Nope, that doesn't logically follow. Different ideologies have different impacts on the world. If you group people just by ideology alone you'll be missing the bigger picture.

ZenoArrow 10y ago

>"the current conservative movement is heavily ideological" The current Democratic establishment is also heavily ideological. Aside from a few outliers like Bernie Sanders, a lot of the Democratic rhetoric is built up around identity politics. You don't have to look far to find it, but to give you one example, listen to how much this DNC vice chair candidate hammers home the 'diversity' message: https://youtu.be/Jjs87Y2F_FA?t=5m19s https://youtu.be/Jjs87Y2F_FA?t=5m19s

hackuser 10y ago
Again, the argument is that everyone is the same. See my prior post.
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  The fact that it is possible for things to be different doesn't imply that they are. Entropically speaking, it's unlikely for two populations to measure up equally by any particular scale. However, that alone doesn't tell us much. On another note, suppose both groups actually are quite similar in how ideological they are. One would be mistaken to then assume that the two groups have equally effective approaches for conducting affairs. Despite the fact that robustly measuring such effectiveness is currently far outside our grasp. Coming back to reality, I would guess that both parties are not equally ideological. However, I do think there are very large segments of both that are almost entirely ideological, and that, unfortunately, these subgroups often take most of the limelight.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    > The fact that it is possible for things to be different doesn't imply that they are Right, so let's stop talking of theoretical possibilities and look at concrete reality. I don't know of the last time a party embraced ideology as strongly as today's GOP; anyone who doesn't see that will never see ideology anywhere - it hardly could get more extreme. > I do think there are very large segments of both that are almost entirely ideological, and that, unfortunately, these subgroups often take most of the limelight. Again, a false equivalence IMHO. Which very large, limelight-stealing Democrat group are you referring to? Hillary Clinton supporters were the largest group; she's almost the opposite of ideological. Obama and his supporters are very non-ideological. The participants in last Saturday's marches were generally non-ideological, AFAICT.
    - dwaltrip 10y ago
      I agree with you that the Republicans are more ideological in recent years. It's late, so I don't have the best examples, but I have a vague impression that there has been an increase of single-dimension, with-us-or-against-us identity politics. Perhaps I'm mistaking noisy for large. Even still, many of these groups do have legitimate claims... Reflecting a bit, I suppose one main reason I posted was that I didn't like the implication that the mainstream left has become enlightened past the point of ideology. But perhaps that point is too much of a distraction in this conversation. Meh. Btw, not that it should matter, but I lean left and voted for both Obama and Hillary.
      - hackuser 10y ago
        > I didn't like the implication that the mainstream left has become enlightened past the point of ideology I agree. It's not that the mainstream left is so great and above reproach, it's that their right-wing competition has embraced madness.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  Nope, that doesn't logically follow. Different ideologies have different impacts on the world. If you group people just by ideology alone you'll be missing the bigger picture.