do the right wing guys think it’s like a draco malfoy thing where they’re a good guy underneath?

like when it’s like a lady and a cop and the lady seems like a normal sorta boring suburban lady

do you know what i mean. this is one of the things where if you try to ask an AI bot it yells at you

  • MenKlash
    10•1 year ago

    The problem is that they fall in a false dilemma.

    Evaluating the world and the people around you with labels so generic as “left wing” or “right wing” is not useful at all. Another problem is being too politicized, as I think it can damage your relationships with others.

      • darq
        31•1 year ago

        The real issue is an inability to agree to disagree.

        That’s not a fair representation of the people you are talking about. We can agree to disagree about a lot of things. But not about the humanity, dignity, and freedom of people.

        We will never agree to disagree about other people’s humanity. Being willing to do so would make us monsters.

        • MenKlash
          -10•1 year ago

          But not about the humanity, dignity, and freedom of people.

          Are you referring to the recognition of the problems involving those concepts or the solutions proposed to fix them?

          We can have different approaches and views about a variety of problems, but the concepts would be the same.

          It doesn’t mean we should always make an agreement about how to solve them, but the idea of treating others who don’t think like me as “monsters” just because they are different is populist and dishonest.

          Hating ideas is not the same as hating people.

          • darq
            25•1 year ago

            My entire life, for pretty much every progressive issue, has been filled with people saying “We agree with your cause but not the way you are going about it.” literally no matter what “going about it” looks like.

            Every effective proposition is shot down. There is no “solution” that is ever acceptable. Because changing the status quo is always interpreted as too radical.

            So… I’m not keen on playing these kinds of stupid games?

              • darq
                7•1 year ago

                Police violence, particularly against people of colour. Protests? Too disruptive! Literally just kneeling? Too disrespectful!

                Even MLK Jr. mentioned this in his letter from a Birmingham jail:

                First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

          • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️English
            16•1 year ago

            Hating ideas is not the same as hating people.

            Show me a person who hates the idea of homosexuality that doesn’t also use it as an excuse to treat homosexual people as less than human.

              • @FeathercrownEnglish
                3•1 year ago

                It’s interesting that people don’t believe you can be this way. Many democrats dislike religion yet don’t treat most religious people badly; there’s no fundamental difference between that and any other trait or belief that would prevent someone from ignoring it while interacting with someone who has it.

                • darq
                  2•1 year ago

                  Because many of us understand that there isn’t a meaningful difference between personal interaction and political action.

                  The above person treats the gay people he meets with civility when he interacts with them personally. He also votes for political movements who want to dissolve their marriage and want to treat being gay as something to be hidden from public view.

                  That is not respecting gay people. That is not treating them as equals. It does not matter how nice and polite you are to someone’s face if you vote against them being able to live fulfilling lives.

          • darq
            18•1 year ago

            And that’s precisely the attitude that prevents people from having a civil debate. By manipulating definitions and using them to represent your opponent as an inhuman villain (or, in your own words, monsters), you’re the one trying to remove someone’s humanity.

            Ironic. By representing a differing view as “manipulating definitions” like this, you pretend I’m engaging in the conversation maliciously, and completely ignore what I’m saying. You aren’t going to get closer to understanding other people unless you engage in good faith.

            In the eyes of progressives, conservative politicians undermine the dignity of minorities. You might not agree with that, you might not care about that, you might simply value other things more.

            And cut the hyperbole. I haven’t tried to remove your humanity. Do you really not know what that is like?

            • @[email protected]
              -6•1 year ago

              Calling someone a monster definitely dehumanizes them. Calling someone a monster for impersonal reasons simply because of their membership in a particular group, even moreso.

              • darq
                18•1 year ago

                So you value you personal wealth ad comfort more than the ability of minorities to live their lives free of discrimination.

                I don’t get why you get so insulted when people point this out?

                • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️English
                  -7•1 year ago

                  He said he wants to accumulate wealth for retirement.

                  Somehow you heard “and fuck the minorities, too” despite not having said that or even remotely implied that. If he’s insulted, it’s because you’re putting words in their mouth.

                  • darq
                    14•1 year ago

                    He said that he values those more than dignity of minorities. Like, not implied it, directly said it.

                    So no. I’m not putting a single word in his mouth.

                  • darq
                    16•1 year ago

                    Literally how?
                    You enumerated your priorities, and to quote you: “If a policy helps that cause, I’m in favor of it. If it doesn’t, I’m probably opposed to it.”
                    Eliminating discrimination is not among the priorities you listed.

              • @FeathercrownEnglish
                5•1 year ago

                So to clarify, you don’t support policies that help other people achieve those goals for themselves (assuming they’re neutral for you)?

          • darq
            12•1 year ago

            It’s not about “winning” a debate. Like ??? We don’t conceptualise “debate” that way.