Pretty much like California then. In Georgia, I could walk in a shop and buy anything. Here in CA, I think the wait period is lover a week, and shops are all but non existent. In GA, there is legitimate hunting and need. CA is more for the paranoid, at least here in SoCal. Y’all also have a lot more police training, if memory serves. That makes a big difference in the numbers and risk/assessment.
Most real liberals I have ever met look more like conservative stereotypes, own guns, are reasonable, and do not get tangled with idealism. That is not to say, indifferent to egalitarian cause, but realize the greatest evils in the world are ignorance and indifference.
the greatest evils in the world are ignorance and indifference.
That is idealism.
There’s no amount of information or appealing to morality or being really good and smart that will cause US politicians to stop giving weapons to Israel; they wouldn’t be in positions of power if their ideology didn’t benefit the military-industrial complex that finances their campaigns.
It works both ways. There is no “they”. It is not organized. No one calls meetings where a collective shows up. It is not dichotomous. It is far far more complicated and ugly. It does not fit into a clean narrative. People selling their tribe are just as ignorant about the complexities. Your only real choice to care about everyone is to be liberal. I want to harm the fewest number of people possible. I want the smallest margin of harm on the periphery. That does not mean excuses for abuse. That does not mean inaction. It does not mean radical or conservative. It is the sense to say all authoritarianism causes great harm. Anyone selling their tribe is dangerous. I do not care about labels. I care about harming as few real people as possible. That is not at all idealism, it is blind justice. It is acknowledging my own limitations and avoiding the hubris of assuming I have all the answers or anyone else does.
In this context, idealism doesn’t mean naive or high-minded, it means coming from ideas, eg rooted in thought instead of material reality.
A materialist analysis would understand that the ideas that people in certain positions in power structures end up with comes from their material interests.
The liberal revolution in France didn’t cone around because some guy came up with the thought “the bourgeois shouldn’t be beholden to the whims of the aristocracy” and then everyone decided “this is a great idea let’s do it”, it came about because the bourgeois obtained power due to the means of production evolving, and so naturally an ideology that justified them having power was more appealing. Other ideologies and variants of liberalism existed, but didn’t reinforce the power structure as effectively.
Pretty much like California then. In Georgia, I could walk in a shop and buy anything. Here in CA, I think the wait period is lover a week, and shops are all but non existent. In GA, there is legitimate hunting and need. CA is more for the paranoid, at least here in SoCal. Y’all also have a lot more police training, if memory serves. That makes a big difference in the numbers and risk/assessment.
Most real liberals I have ever met look more like conservative stereotypes, own guns, are reasonable, and do not get tangled with idealism. That is not to say, indifferent to egalitarian cause, but realize the greatest evils in the world are ignorance and indifference.
That is idealism.
There’s no amount of information or appealing to morality or being really good and smart that will cause US politicians to stop giving weapons to Israel; they wouldn’t be in positions of power if their ideology didn’t benefit the military-industrial complex that finances their campaigns.
It works both ways. There is no “they”. It is not organized. No one calls meetings where a collective shows up. It is not dichotomous. It is far far more complicated and ugly. It does not fit into a clean narrative. People selling their tribe are just as ignorant about the complexities. Your only real choice to care about everyone is to be liberal. I want to harm the fewest number of people possible. I want the smallest margin of harm on the periphery. That does not mean excuses for abuse. That does not mean inaction. It does not mean radical or conservative. It is the sense to say all authoritarianism causes great harm. Anyone selling their tribe is dangerous. I do not care about labels. I care about harming as few real people as possible. That is not at all idealism, it is blind justice. It is acknowledging my own limitations and avoiding the hubris of assuming I have all the answers or anyone else does.
You misinterpreted what I said.
In this context, idealism doesn’t mean naive or high-minded, it means coming from ideas, eg rooted in thought instead of material reality.
A materialist analysis would understand that the ideas that people in certain positions in power structures end up with comes from their material interests.
The liberal revolution in France didn’t cone around because some guy came up with the thought “the bourgeois shouldn’t be beholden to the whims of the aristocracy” and then everyone decided “this is a great idea let’s do it”, it came about because the bourgeois obtained power due to the means of production evolving, and so naturally an ideology that justified them having power was more appealing. Other ideologies and variants of liberalism existed, but didn’t reinforce the power structure as effectively.