the fact is, an ounce of honesty cuts to the chase in these discussions, but obfuscation, half-truths, and deception show that there’s no room for compromise. fuck, if you’re a religious nut, just say so and I get it. If you’re a rich fucker that benefits from fucking the poor, just say it and I get it. If you’re a gun nut that thinks nothing else matters, just say so, I get it. etc. etc. If you are basing your beliefs on something you can’t stand behind, maybe you need to give yourself pause for reflection.
peterb
2922
I dunno, man. Maybe I’m conservative (see what I did there?) but I think there’s a real, fundamental, qualitative difference between “Those people are assholes who we should all hate” and “These people are insects who should be exterminated.” I’m not defending the assholes on the left. I’m saying they are not using eliminationist rhetoric as a matter of course, and I’m saying the assholes on the right are. And that difference is pretty important.
The appeal to ‘hunting terminology’ is weak, seriously. Ask yourself if you’d believe that line of bullshit if someone you disagreed with offered it up.
Timex
2923
Read my post again, Jason.
It doesn’t matter if you use violent imagery or not. That’s not what makes it damaging to our political environment.
What makes it damaging is all the other stuff I just listed.
If you demonize your political opponents, regardless of the specific phrasing you choose to use, you achieve the same ends. You prevent discourse and compromise. You make it such that communication breaks down, because “the others” are evil people who should be shunned.
You achieve the same effect by saying things like “all conservatives are idiots”, or that they hate poor people, or that they want to ruin the country. At that point, you have moved away from having any kind of meaningful discussion, and are now simply laying out why you can’t even be bothered to have a discussion. Instead of trying to explain why your ideas are better, you have moved to shouting down the opposition’s ideas, trying to make sure no one listens to them.
It’s not necessary, and it damages our society. It makes our political system into an ineffective mess, focused entirely on painting the other party in a maximally unflattering picture, rather than actually trying to do anything good. Because you only have to be remotely not-terrible in order to win against a monster.
And you would agree that this tactic is employed by both sides, right? That this is essentially the chief driving force behind the entire political system at this point in our history? It’s not only used by the right. The left engages in exactly the same type of demonization… because, frankly, it’s apparently effective.
Timex
2924
But the reality is, very few of those characters you describe actually exist… They’re just caricatures. Very few people are simple “a religious nut”. There are religious people… some are even EXTREMELY religious, to the point where they espouse intolerant beliefs which are terrible.
Even in those cases though, those people are still actually people. They’re more than that singular, offensive facet. Some people really are terrible, and exist solely to hurt others… but most people aren’t like that.
Most people, if you actually get to know them, even if they disagree with you on seemingly important things, are still generally trying to do good. Those religious people don’t hate gay people because they are sadistic, terrible human beings who like to cause pain in others (although some are). They hate them because they think God has made such a rule, and in their worldview, that’s important to them. But you know what the biggest reason that they’re able to “hate” gay people?
Because they don’t really know any gay people. To them, the “gay guy” is just like “the religious nut” in your statement. He’s not a real person, deserving of empathy. He’s a caricature. And it’s easy to discount the needs of a caricature. It’s easy to hate them, because you’re just hating the specific “bad” things… there is no real humanity there, that constitutes the majority of all of us.
People are more complex than those labels.
This is ridiculous. “Liberals are assholes” is not the same as “I wish all liberals would be executed”, for completely obvious reasons. I would note that just about every developed country has “damaging rhetoric” like “liberals are assholes”, but popular figures wishing for the death of their political opponents seems to be limited to the US GOP and Israel.
I’m going to presume that you are actually trying to have a discussion, which is a stretch really. Most people really are simple, they are typically selfish, and believe in what in what their environment taught them. Wow, people brought up in the States are Christian, people brought up in Japan are Buddhist, people brought on a farm believe in gun rights, etc.
What a coincidence. It only takes a modicum of introspection break out of the bubble of our environment, there are plenty of worldly perspectives available… especially in this day and age. Do people deserve to be defined by what they are? Does that make them caricatures? Does that countryboy that swears that “only way they’ll get me gun is if they pry it blah blah” deserve your empathy and respect?
Pity, perhaps. Are you one of them?
Smithers: “Tax returns that even Wesley Snipes would find suspicious?”
“He’s ignoring the Constitution, trying to become a dictator and make us dependent on the government,” he said. “I don’t think a good portion of America realizes what he’s doing — if they did he’d lose in a landslide.”.
VA supporter at a Romney rally.
“Socialism is socialism.”
NJ Tea Party member criticizing Chris Christie working with NJ state planning board to look at statewide land use policy.
You can fill a book just trolling the 'Net for similar (and far worse) comments from the Right, or even from the political leaders themselves.
The Left doesn’t demonize these people - they do that themselves.
Almost every Obama conspiracy theoryin one chart.
Warning: This link is Mother Jones, proceed with caution.
Alstein
2932
Romney winning by 20 in NC is complete fantasy. 10 maybe on a good day, but not 20. (I don’t think Obama wins here, but it’s going to be closer than the rest of the South)
Another example of money before principles in the Romney family:
Matt Romney is in Russia this weekend, looking for money.
WASHINGTON — Matt Romney, a son of the Republican presidential nominee, traveled to Moscow this week seeking Russian investors for his California-based real estate firm just days before his father is to wrap up a campaign in which he has vowed to take a tougher stance with the Kremlin.
Mr. Romney, the second-oldest son of Mitt Romney, met with Russians whom he hoped to convince to invest in his company, Excel Trust, which owns shopping centers across the United States, the firm said. Although the company’s focus has been solely domestic, it said it has begun exploring international opportunities to raise funds.
Mr. Romney’s trip a week before the presidential election underscored the complex relationship between his family’s business and the political campaign. Mitt Romney has criticized President Obama for being too soft on Russia, calling it “our No. 1 geopolitical foe” and promising to confront President Vladimir V. Putin’s government with “more backbone” if elected on Tuesday.
You have to respect the timing - on Tuesday either his father’s stock soars or is worthless. But this weekend - I imagine it would be tempting for Putin & Co. to get a foothold into the Romney family, if only as a hedge.
Hah, objective evidence that the chair-in-the-yard thing is not limited to just my neighborhood.
I guess I… feel better now?
WarrenM
2935
I get that and understand it, but I honestly don’t believe most of his true-blue listeners do. That’s what makes it vile. They think he’s for real and take his words at face value.
Timex
2936
Warren, do you really think so? That those millions of people actually think that they should murder liberals?
WarrenM
2937
I’ll turn that around - Do you really think that millions of people listen to his show because he’s playing a character? Yes, tons of people take him seriously. They don’t murder people (that’s obviously rhetoric to all but the most crazy of our citizens) but they do take his extreme views to heart and swallow every lie he puts out there about Obama.
My 93 year-old father in law sure takes him and others like him seriously. That’s hardly a scientific survey, but I suspect that the audience for Limbaugh et al is one part true believers, one part theater goers, and one part people trapped in buses, trucks, or vans with no way to change the channel on the radio.
Timex
2939
Yes, but folks listen to talking heads on the left too, and swallow everything that they put out.
It’s why you see people here posting stuff almost verbatim for what gets said on MSNBC.
Again, I’d never defend Limbaugh, and I don’t like listening to him. I’m specifically stating that the type of garbage he puts out is damaging to our society and our political system. But it’s not all one sided.
WarrenM
2940
You’re arguing with the wrong guy. Limbaugh is an idiot, sure, but I never said he was the only one. Simply that he’s one of the worst.
