this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2023
11 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10176 readers
79 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Depends on what we call "right wing".
I keep asking, and have probably asked more than fifty times over the last 4 years, what right-wing Americans stand for other than the "culture war". Why would someone call themselves a conservative/Republican if they are opposed to the Republicans' stances on minorities, stances on LGBT+, stances on gestures broadly at Florida, etc. What's left of the ideology when you take those things out, especially considering that the right has pretty demonstrably dropped their support for "fiscal responsibility", "small government", "anti-judicial activism", and "opposing the influence of Russia".
Most of the time, that question just gets ghosted. Like, over 90% of the times I've asked it, it's just been a conversation-ender. The rest of the time, the answers boil down to "my bigotry is more fine-grained than that". They're good friends with Mexicans and Asians and African-Americans, but hate Muslims. Or they're fine with gay people, but feel transgender people shouldn't exist. Or they love gay people and minorities, as long as they're all Christian whether they want to be or not. These folks call themselves Republicans not because they hate everyone the Republican party hates, but because they hate one (or a few) groups that the Republicans hate.
Your comment is a pretty good attack on what the GOP has become. My criticism is that the GOP doesn't represent all of right-wing political ideology. I think most people, or at least people like me, aren't dogmatically locked into any party or ideological label. I have some views which conservatives would agree with and plenty that they wouldn't. Overall, I think that most conservative-oriented communities are narrow-minded at best, and openly racist and authoritarian at worst. But the left-leaning communities aren't great either. They (justifiably) want to insulate themselves from the hateful parts of the right. Unfortunately, this often devolves into an echo-chamber without real discussion. I'm hoping Lemmy as a whole doesn't devolve down either path.
I haven't seen a discussion about the merits of different tax policies (and no, "cut all the taxes!" isn't a policy), or the role of local/state/federal government, or social service policy (and no, "stop all poor people spending!" is not a policy), or the appropriate division of power between executive/legislative/judicial, or anything like that, in decades. W was president the last time I saw any form of media having a real discussion about those things.
Before 2015 or so, there were a handful of people in my circle who identified as conservative that could have a real, nuanced, complex conversation about public policy with; people who I thought were incorrect, but who could articulate their points well enough that I could kind of see where they were coming from, and we could come out of a discussion with a better understanding of each other, and maybe one or the other of us might even have softened on a given position in the process. It was possible to find basic, fundamental points on which we agreed, and use those as a foundation for a broader discussion.
Since 2016, all of those people, to a man, have become Q-anon deep-state groomers-coming-for-our-kids frazzledrip climate-hoax hunter's-laptop gays-have-it-too-good morons. Not a single one of them still believes in any of the fundamental points of agreement we used to have, from which a productive discussion could be based. They have entirely left reality behind in favor of Jewish space lasers and (the latest talking point) "every father thinks about his daughter that way!".
I have not met someone who identifies as a conservative or a Republican who isn't on that same train for a very long time.
This has been exactly my experience as well, and why I am increasingly comfortable with skepticism of unqualified conservative voices as a default.
I have been having good faith debates over real policy with conservatives for three decades. Since Carter more or less. I know what that debate looks like. But since 2016, I know two types of former conservative - the reformed, who were awakened to the monstrosity that Trump created. And those who openly embraced fascism like a parasite embraces dog shit.
Every person. Every single one so far, who has been equivocal on this topic has turned out to be quietly the latter. The ones belonging to the former group are very open about feeling dumb and misled, even victimized. They express loudly and often the nature of their reform to anyone who will listen.
That's fine, but then there is a burden to both understand why your adjacency to this evil force makes people uncomfortable, and to rhetorically separate yourself from it as needed. This is just the unfortunate reality of how deranged mainstream conservatism has become.
I consider myself pretty libertarian in the grand scheme of things, but I am fine with an echo chamber where basic human rights are respected. I believe that my vision of society has no place for bigots or theocrats and that such people should be treated legally the same as fraudsters or thieves. And I think it's absolutely insane that this would be considered controversial in a good faith conservative circle. The real conservatives I know would understand that an inclusive, well represented society is a productive and ideologically secure society.