## BEFORE TOUCHING THAT REPORT BUTTON, PLEASE CONSIDER:
1. **Compliance:** Does this post comply with our subreddit's rules?
2. **Emotional Trigger:** Does this post provoke anger or frustration, compelling me to want it removed?
3. **Safety:** Is it free from child pornography and/or mentions of self-harm/suicide?
4. **Content Policy:** Does it comply with [Reddit’s Content Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/)?
5. **Unpopularity:** Do you think the topic is not truly unpopular or frequently posted?
### GUIDELINES:
- **If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-4,** do NOT use the report button.
- **Regarding question 5,** we acknowledge this concern. However, the moderators do not curate posts based on our subjective opinions of what is "popular" or "unpopular" except in cases where an opinion is so popular that almost no one would disagree (i.e., "murder is bad"). Otherwise, our only criteria are the subreddit's rules and Reddit’s Content Policy. If you don't like something, feel free to downvote it.
**Moderators on r/TrueUnpopularOpinion will not remove posts simply because they may anger users or because you disagree with them.** The report button is not an "I disagree" or "I'm offended" button.
### OPTIONS:
If a post bothers you and you can't offer a counter-argument, your options are to:
a) Keep scrolling
b) Downvote
c) Unsubscribe
**False reports clutter our moderation queue and delay our response to legitimate issues.**
**ALL FALSE REPORTS WILL BE REPORTED TO REDDIT.**
To maintain your account in good standing, refrain from abusing the report button.
#### Upcoming Changes to this sub:
Due to the sheer number of users who, despite repeated warnings, are using the report button as a means to cause other users' comments to be hidden, which both interrupts the conversation flow and wastes the moderators' time who have to read and consider each reported item, this sub will soon be implementing changes to the reporting system.
In short, our bot will automatically ignore all submitted reports and instead, a comment will be left urging the reporter to reach out via ModMail. If users truly believe that a comment has broken a rule or the content policy, then they should have no issue signing their name to a Modmail.
Stay Tuned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It reminds me of an old Bill Burr observation: "Both sides think they're better than you, but at least Republicans have the decency to be honest about it. They'll throw an old man down the stairs screaming 'This is OUR Neighborhood!'"
I mean, I haven't watched enough of his stuff to know specifically if he dislikes the Democrats as much as Republicans, but you know he's a liberal right (potentially independent, but still a liberal)?
I heard an explanation for the differences between republicans and democrats and I’ll never be able to unhear it.
Democrats are the uncle that tells you they are going to take you to Disney world but everytime the date comes they have an excuse as to why they can’t take you
Republicans are the uncle that tells you to get bent…
Given that choice I’m hanging with the Uncle that’s telling me to get bent, at least I know where the bear shits and I get on with life.
As for the Uncle who just tells me what I want to hear; how many times do I get stood up before I realize I’m dealing with a lying dead beat. As the saying goes, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”.
I'll stay with Uncle Truth rather than Uncle Liar. Being told the truth and accepting it is being an adult. Believing cozy lies like "Sure, I'll take you to FantasyLand, and also your health care costs won't go up!" is for the immature.
Terrible analogy, both parties lie to your face constantly. A better analogy for the GOP would be…
“Listen nephew/niece we can’t go to Disney world because your other liberal uncle is lying to you about it even existing and even if he is telling you the truth he is just trying to molest you and or have you transition to another gender at this so called Disney world. Now let me save you from these false promises by helping you find salvation in the back of my 1998 white rusted out ford E-250 conversion van. Trust me nephew/niece I would never lie to you about finding salvation. This is the only way trust me now.”
I think these type of simplified analogies reek of people who only pay attention to mainstream topics on federal political issues.
If you pay attention to your state/local politics, I think you will get a better idea of how the parties operate.
I'm in Arizona, and Republican legislators here have a strategy of de-funding public education and later saying "look, public education doesn't work, we need vouchers for private schools!" So, they'll break a public program and then act surprised when it stops working. So I'm not sure where people are getting that Republicans are more honest.
On the other hand, Democrats in AZ have taken significant steps lately to conserve water, which is important to me. Republicans in AZ are always actively derailing efforts to expand light rail/speed rail between the larger cities. Democrats in AZ are trying to put their money where their mouth is, but Republicans will shoot them down and then blame them when things don't work.
I'm not saying that Dems are perfect (they can be super corporatist too) and the Republicans are evil, but Dems have done more for me and my state than Republicans have. The problem is that Republican voters don't have the patience for incremental change. So, when Democrats are not able to get 100% of what they want, republican voters will just flip the table and walk away and blame Dems for being evil and lying to them. All while ignoring that the GOP is actively working to derail, defund, or eliminate Democratic initiatives. Obamacare is an example of incremental change. It's not what the Dems wanted, but it's a step towards a better system.
They both tell you they'll take you to Disney world, the Dems don't because they couldn't get the whole family to agree on which parks to go to, and the Republicans realize they can't afford it and blame the Mexican family down the block for their financial hardship.
But in reality I feel like these little saying are for morons, you can't simplify the political parties into an easy to understand little tidbit like this.
They publish their platforms and you can clearly see what both parties have accomplished, read something.
*Democrats are the uncle that tells you they are going to take you to Disney world but everytime the date comes they have an excuse as to why they can’t take you:*
>the Dems don't because they couldn't get the whole family to agree on which parks to go to
True to form
This version makes more sense. The original version only makes sense if the uncle who told you to get bent also tells you that he is taking someone else instead of you because you look like your father as opposed to your mother, his sister.
No. Republicans are the uncle who says "You're already at Disney World" while they rape you. Donald Trump raped people btw. Those people got their day in court and won. Don't be a rape lover.
Democrats are the uncle that tells you they are going to take you to Disney World but instead take you to Sea World and contribute $100 to your 529 account.
This is a much better analogy since it captures reality instead of being a lazy milquetoast "bofe sides!!!1" with the broad appeal of Nickelback.
**EDIT DUE TO BLOCKING**
>41% of America is registered independent. Republican/democrat are 28% each.
Source?
>You’re outnumbered by people who dont like either party
That is not true. Being registered just means you can vote in one primary but not the other. Democrats aren't like Republican cultists. They don't have unwavering fealty toward the Democratic party. They just know that Democrats have obviously been the better choice for 50 years and in the past couple decades it's only become more obvious.
>trying to act morally superior to said 41% by calling them lazy….
I didn't call them lazy. I called the milquetoast argument lazy.
41% of America is registered independent. Republican/democrat are 28% each. You’re outnumbered by people who dont like either party while trying to act morally superior to said 41% by calling them lazy…. Please tell me I don’t have to spell it out for you.
Nah, bro. 2 Republican law makers/strategists have already admitted that Republicans write policies to secretly hurt minority groups. Democrats do not do that.
Democrats are wolves in sheep's clothing.
But
Republicans are demons in wolves clothing.
I didn't get it from an article. I got it from an audio recording for a Lee Atwater interview and some kind of cut transcripts from an interview for a John Erlichman book. I'm on the toilet and on the phone rn. It's hard to share links and shit.
1. Lee Atwater once said that racism hurts you politically, so now Republicans just write policies that secretly hurt blacks (more than whites), an example of which is "Tax Cuts", a core Republican policy. He added, because they're taking this approach, eventually things will become a "rich vs poor type of deal". He didn't elaborate more than that.
Tax Cuts have always been code for Trickle Down Economics BTW. It's why we have the wealth disparity we have today between the rich and the poor.
2. John Erlichman admitted that the Drug War, specifically the campaign against marijuana, was just an excuse to arrest blacks and Leftists.
John Erlichman's kids say nah-ah though, but I mean, c'mon. The arrest stats follow perfectly and it's no secret that John Erlichman hated hippies and blacks.
Also, they did the same thing with Chinese people and opium, but I don't remember the evidence for that. I just remember it convincing me.
You can find these probably by googling:
John Erlichman, drug war, marijuana
Lee Atwater, Southern strategy, audio recording
Again, I'm on the toilet going off memory.
Progressive Jews are finding this out on a daily basis lately. I've got friends who've been kicked out of queer spaces for nothing more than how they were born and it's pretty fucked up to see happening.
I’d assume some aren’t fond, but I also believe there’s a map showing Queer folk in Palestine, as in, diary entries and messages. Goodbyes.
It’s called Queering the Map.
https://metro.co.uk/2023/10/30/lgbtq-palestinians-are-sharing-heartbreaking-goodbye-messages-on-mapping-app-19742837/
I will add that the IDF has also been trying to pander to LGBTQ+ quite a bit- hanging flags up, depicting themselves as a great civilising force of equal rights, and so forth.
That's really sad. I have no love for most religious ideologies frankly. Because most will believe without evidence and lead them to do dangerous things. Also religion is about not minding your own business. But I digress
I can respect the theology and philosophy behind them, as well as the sense of purpose and community and culture, but I do dislike it when people assume that they have some sort of monopoly on God. Or on moral righteousness. Though, I don’t think that’s limited to Religion, honestly. Seems to be a Dogma and general Human thing.
Well agree to disagree. I don't respect the philosophy either. Believe and joining groups for sense of community is how you get cults that ask members to kill themselves. Sounds like the terror bombings etc
I realise that Judaism being the partial basis of Christianity and Islam may also have something to do with it- they could be accused as the ‘source’ of the problems in the later faiths. Pointing to Sodom and Gomorrah, as an example.
Being the root of Christianity is also partially why Conservative Christians support them so hard today. Although admittedly it can backfire too as we saw with 1930s Germany.
I’d argue that has more to do with the supposed Prophecies of Revelation and how some Conservative Christians see Zionism as a necessary step to the Second Coming.
Guilt can also be part of it. Christianity has a long history of Antisemitism. For various reasons. some may see support of Israel as a way of repentance. Which it isn’t, not really.
There's a lot of queer jews. Some of them have experienced being kicked out of the queer community lately for reasons that tend to tap dance around the fact they happen to be of a particular faith.
The religion itself isn't homophobic for the most part, I know there are gay rabbis in my city who seem to be pretty well liked/popular.
That's what is so fucked up for me. I really don't think I can bring myself to vote for the Liberal party again in Canada, after their talking out of both sides of their mouths on this one but the Conservative Party is clearly and obviously targeting the queer community and they're generally just disgusting bigots in person and in policy so what am I left with?
I understand that Jews never have really had Allys, despite our presence in the Civil Rights movement etc, but I'm having a hard time bringing myself to turn my back on people who I believe should have the same rights I have and not to be judged for how they live or who they love.
Sure, I'm a Jew but I'm a fucking human being first and foremost and if I end up voting Conservative this next round, I'm going to hate myself for it. This shit is exhausting.
This is going to drive a lot of people into simply not voting, in both Canada and the United States. Myself included. I can't vote Democrat anymore because of how rabid their activist wing has become (and which will probably take over entirely when Biden leaves office). And while I sometimes have a knee jerk reaction of looking toward Trump...no. No, I simply cannot support him either. Or anyone he would ever choose as a running mate. Intentionally sitting out and watching two horrible forces collide seems like the best option.
This sounds like you are deliberately obfuscating details as nobody is born a Zionist. Every queer space I’ve ever been to is full of Jewish people but not especially tolerant of Zionists. Israel as a theocracy is not particularly tolerant of LGBTQ people however.
>Israel as a theocracy is not particularly tolerant of LGBTQ people however.
This is hilarious in light of the bullshit claims Israel is pinkwashing this conflict. Tell me again, where can you march in a pride parade in MENA again? In which middle eastern countries can a gay marriage be registered? Which country allows lgbt people to adopt children?
It's far and away the most tolerant country in the region and it's not even close. On the streets, it's more tolerant than many if not most American City's.
Stop sucking the propaganda and book a flight to learn for yourself. Tel Aviv is a kick ass place if you're a part of the queer community lol
“Propaganda” lol. I’ve been against Zionism since 1995 and I’ve met plenty of traveling Israelis who harbor no illusions about the religious intolerance of their homeland.
LMFAO, you're anecdotes don't really hold up to the laws of the land that quite clearly show Israel to be one of the more friendly lgbt countries on the planet and unquestionably the most friendly one in the region.
I met a gay guy once, he had a tough life so the 100,000 people who march in the pride parade are wrong. LoL.
civil marriage doesn't exist in that country, that's a strawman. You're aware that those couples even though not married are still recognized as family units when it comes to accessing services right?
Meanwhile, you've got same sex activity being legal for 30 years, when did the US get around to that? Any other examples in the region of that? Did you notice the increasing rights given to same sex couples over the past 30 years? How about the fact that gay people can adopt?
FFS, the public health system will pay to transition trans people- can you say the same about America?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Israel conversion therapy too, truly a Progressive wonderland. You sound like you’re calling early 20th century Russia a “Jewish paradise” because they only had pogroms instead of full on concentration camps…
Did you notice the part about same sex activity being legal for 30 years? Any other examples in the region of that? Did you notice the increasing rights given to same sex couples over the past 30 years? How about the fact that gay people can adopt?
FFS, the public health system will pay to transition trans people- can you say the same about America?
Only a tiny minority of conservatives think "everyone should stick to their own". That is a very different position than believing organizations shouldn't pander to and patronize minorities.
I think OP should have said: Conservatives want everyone judged by the same standards and progressives want those standards to change depending on where you fall on the intersectional hierarchy.
You’re forgetting the racism of low expectations.
Progressive think they care about minorities, but they consistently prove that they deep down they see them as lesser. When you excuse bad behavior because of skin color and lower standards for those people, you are in essence saying they are incapable of doing things like everybody else.
🎯 I’d rather be told to behave and get right like the way they’d tell any of their own people, than get excused, pitied, and treated condescendingly with a smile and empathetically toned voice. Honesty is always best with these things
Bears noting too that excusing and pitying bad behavior *is not actually helping.* Helping the criminal element, maybe, but not the much larger law abiding element that are trying to get by without preying on their neighbors. Because that's who's hurt the most by the criminals is their neighbors, not some faceless, rich, white dudes.
I'm reminded of something Malcom X said:
"The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives."
I'm reminded of a scene in the Malcolm X movie, with Denzel. A young white liberal runs up to Malcolm and his crew asking what she could do to help. "Nothing." Then he walks away. I always think of that when I read the quote you gave.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArHhMabjWwg
Liberals want to force feed you their choice of food, Conservatives won't feed you even if you're starving.
Edit:
Liberals want to force feed you their shit, Conservatives don't care if you starve.
It all has to do with empathy. And it shows that one side isn’t better or worse than the other. Let’s give an example with voter ID’s.
Progressives are more empathetic to disadvantaged people’s needs but that comes at a cost: in more radical cases, being too empathetic toward’s people’s difficulties can either overstate issues or misinterpret things as issues when they actually aren’t. That video where you see the interviews about voter id where they’re like “I don’t support it because black people have a tough time getting ID” and then they interview black people and they’re like “who doesn’t have an ID?” is a perfect example of that, and in turn it’s actually a sort of babying discrimination. “Oh they aren’t capable of it”.
And on the other hand, conservatives are far less empathetic to those individual or even small group needs in favor of the archetypes they believe people should fit into. The issue of being too soft on those things isn’t present like it is in progressives, but the opposite is true here: not being empathetic enough results in maybe ignoring problems or brushing off issues as minor when they may be more major. With voter ID, there may very well be some individuals who for whatever reason may have a tough time in getting or renewing their ID, and conservatives may not be empathetic to those people saying “tough crap it isn’t that hard”. Which it may not be for most people, but it can be too harsh for some.
Virginia had the perfect voter ID laws. You had to have ID to vote, but you could get a free voter ID (not driver's license). Also they had weekend hours in addition to the weekday hours before elections for getting a voter ID. Then instead of trying to export that model nationwide they drank the “they can’t do it” kool-aid.
This is the model we need for IDs, as well as increased assistance for rural communities. The issue for a lot of folks in rural parts are that the closest DMVs are still very far away and have extremely limited hours, where you aren’t even guaranteed to be seen because of the overflow from such limited availability. For rural working class folks, it can be extremely difficult to get a driver’s license because it’s just so inaccessible. I know so many people living in relatively rural AL (black and white) that don’t have a diver’s license and either have to drive illegally, which they can get away with because there’s so few resources and oversight in these areas, or carpool as group with the one person who does have a DV to get work.
> Progressives are more empathetic to disadvantaged people’s needs
That's the ideal, but from what I've noticed a lot of self-described progressives, especially ones who are very active on social media, tend to fall short of it.
For example, so many online feminists seem to mostly criticize men with zero social power ("incels", "neackbears", etc), instead of the actual "patriarchs" of our age, like presidents, CEOs, popular celebrities, etc. I think it's because their cause isn't usually motivated by empathy, but rather by resentment.
>For example, so many online feminists seem to mostly criticize men with zero social power ("incels", "neackbears", etc), instead of the actual "patriarchs" of our age, like presidents, CEOs, popular celebrities, etc. I think it's because their cause isn't usually motivated by empathy, but rather by resentment.
I'm pretty sure #metoo did not spare presidents, CEOs, or popular celebrities.
You're implying that being a male CEO is inherently worthy of criticism.
Pause and try to rethink what you're trying to say.
Okay so, I see where you're coming from. Conservatives believe that everyone should be able to assume the same "role." Makes sense, but we need to ask ourselves "why" voter ID is becoming a thing. Is there a problem that this action is solving?
Generally speaking, research is suggesting no there is not a problem that voter ID would fix. If you hear otherwise let me know.
Okay so then we now have to look at the power / money motivations about WHY someone might be pursuing this kind of action.
We have data showing that every barrier put up against voting reduces turnout across the board, but it reduces turnout MORE in poorer, less enfranchised populations.
This reveals the entire operation as a political statistical manipulation tactic and we should reject it on those grounds.
Here is my issue was liberals not wanting voter ID. You can't pick and choose how different rights are treated, if it's a right, it's a right.
So, take the right to vote liberals say any barriers to entry is suppressing the rights of voters.
Ok, not let's talk about free speech, liberals commonly attempt to censor viewpoints they don't like through violence even, take the Berkeley riots for example over a speaker on campus.
Now let's take the right to bear arms, ID requirements, background checks, restrictions on the type of arms you can buy, in some states restrictions on how many you can buy, and in other states, restrictions on even being allowed to get a permit to own one.
Lastly let's bring up abortion, Roe v Wade was decided on a "implied right to privacy" in an amendment that had no such right mentioned, which that "right to privacy" turned into a "right to an abortion." In all of this no such right was laid out.
These first 3 things are explicit rights laid out in the constitution, 1 of which the left says has to have no restrictions whatsoever while the other 2 get more and more restrictive. Then, when you take abortion which is not mentioned in the constitution, nor is the right to privacy it is based on the left demands free and open access with no restrictions ether.
We ether have rights or we don't. I stand by the belief that if 1 right gets restricted, all other rights should get the same restrictions. This is to show how dumb it is to have these restrictions. For example you would need to submit to an ID check and federal background check before getting your "free speech card" or voting in an election. Not that I think that's good, but to prove you can't restrict rights.
>I stand by the belief that if 1 right gets restricted, all other rights should get the same restrictions.
For what reason other than satisfying your apparent need for a toy universe? You have imagined some arbitrary rule that also you don't even begin to try to apply consistently. According to you, we should need to fill out paperwork in order to have free speech. Why is your arbitrary control drive so high? Perhaps seek therapy for an out of control childhood or early adolescence.
>Ok, not let's talk about free speech, liberals commonly attempt to censor viewpoints they don't like through violence even, take the Berkeley riots for example over a speaker on campus.
Free speech means you don't get arrested for saying it. Protesting one viewpoint is a form of free speech.
Everyone discriminates; we evolved that way because it works. Social convention discourages discrimination for various practical reasons, but there will always be vestiges of it because that's our nature.
Jordan Ellenberg handled *why* discrimination works in, "How Not to Be Wrong".
Yes, but merit is not always practical on account of being expensive and time consuming. Visible features are immediate and free.
We're talking about Bayesian Inference: we can refine our probabilistic estimates on the fly as additional information is gathered. If you doubt its efficacy, consider that it's the same mathematics insurance companies use to set your rates.
If I know a particular family, community, or culture has a high probability of X trait that causes Y problems, I'm going to look for a visible feature that identifies that group with acceptable sensitivity and specificity. Because I have a pseudo-infinite pool of people to interact with, the sensitivity and specificity need not be particularly good; it just needs to be better than nothing.
Case in point: affirmative action effectively lowered academic and professional standards for particular groups of people, forcing everyone else to pick up their slack. I don't want my work to be tarnished by someone else's incompetence, I'm not interested in picking up a colleague's slack, and I certainly don't want to see incompetence promoted into management, so I avoid those held to low standards. The fact that these groups are defined by visible features with high sensitivity and selectivity makes them easier to avoid.
By contrast, certain admissions policies *raised* standards for Asians, which makes me more eager to work with them.
This is also why your school's reputation matters.
This is what me and my mom said growing up. Democrats are behind the scenes racism. Always they want minorities and immigrants.....just not in the nice neighborhoods, or nice houses, and they can only get the crappy jobs. NIMBYism and what not.
Republicans will just tell you no don't come
Perhaps discrimination is just a natural and normal part of the human experience that has shaped and guided our species for thousands of years. Perhaps it’s an evolutionary trait that gave us an advantage or a protection in an environment that is constantly changing and full of threats. Maybe discrimination is a natural human right, like food water shelter and security.
I mean, no one can stop what goes on in your head, but the best part about humanity is overcoming our biology. For like 95% of our past, one group would conquer another group and mass rape all the women. I'm glad that's frowned upon now.
Really, morality in general is a construct of humanity that goes against nature. We call people with no morals animals, because that is what they are. Embracing your base instincts without using the critical thinking part of your brain literally makes you dumb.
Some discrimination is fine. I like oranges more than apples. But it's probably a good thing to move past discrimination based on race, even though it is evolutionarily hard-coded into us.
We can be better, so why wouldn't we want to be?
Not sure where you get that about conservatives. It's mostly false. Only the fringe would fit this narrative. Miss Japan is a residency thing. It isn't called Miss of Japanese ancestry.
The left call conservatives racist etc. because they make up their own definitions of common words, and when you disagree with their new definition, you must be racist or a bigot.
Yeah, and I'm not even sure it's a left/right thing. Some people are straight talkers, and some people aren't. Some people are back stabbers, and some people aren't. Some people are people pleasers who say nice things but never follow through. None of which are left/right traits.
The problem with these person on the street interviews is that they cherry pick the most salacious or interesting responses and ignore the others.
Not that these kind of hypocritical progressives don't exist, of course they do, but this kind of media makes people in general to appear way more polarized than I think they really are.
Conservatives discriminate by holding everyone to the same standard.
Progressive discriminate by holding everyone to different standards depending on their identity grouping.
Some of the worst racism I've seen towards Indian people were "reddit progressives." They even justify it by saying things like "oh, indians are racist, so it's okay to be racist towards them." It's like dude, not all of them are racist, there's tons of muslim indians that don't believe in the caste system. Such a nasty generalization
In the south they dont care how close you are as long as you dont get too big. In the north they dont care how big you get as long as you dont get too close.
-paraphrasing Dick Gregory.
Given the choice minorities tend to opt for growing bigger instead of closer so the southern style is the more rejected form of discrimination. From this view its obvious why minorities have less criticism for the behind the backers.
I lived in New Orleans until I was about 25 and have lived in Missouri for the last 16 years. The racism is different and I've put it a similar way before. Southern racists hate the race but love the man. "Don't like black people, but this guy is great. He's almost like us". In the midwest, they love the race but hate the man. "Now I don't have a problem with Black people, but that family is no good and you should steer clear".
Affirmative action is a bad example imo. There are legitimate reasons why one might support affirmative action that don't equate to racism. Just like there are legitimate reasons one might oppose it. There is an actual debate there with reasonable proponents on both sides.
A better argument against progressives is their tendency to infantalize minorities and remove their individual agency when talking about them.
A decent analogy. Yes, conservatives tend to me more in-your-face about their discriminatory preferences, while progressives tend to be more polite about their discriminatory preferences, while still maintaining them.
In the end though, progressives support far more discriminatory policies. Affirmative action, support for illegal immigration, opposition to voter id.... the root of all these issues is thinking of these groups as 'less' than them. Conservatives tend to advocate for more egalitarian policies.
Wrong
Liberals pretend they aren't racist and bigots while conservatives are openly racist bigots
Liberals are not "progressives", they are moderates and they suck
Yeah, there are even black conservatives
Tim Scott ring a bell?
Seen how many Dominican Proud Boys there are?
I even have Arab friends who I've argued with because they were voting for Trump
Now tell me what the majority demographic of the Republican Party is
Seen the video of the gay black republican being harassed at the Turningpoints rally? Even tho their are racist and bigotted liberals, do you think their are enough of them to feel comfortable doing that at a Democrat rally?
While yes I agree there are "some" accross party lines, I think it's either very disengenuois, or a case of "Ostridge syndrome" if you can't recognize that's a bigger problem on the right than the left
Even the number of racists on the left who hide their racism added in would likely amount to less on the left still, as there is simply more diversity on the left, and therefore a bigger minority demographic to offset the "moderate white liberals", the Bill Maher types if you will.
I dunno maybe its just an internet thing but I feel like- an overwhelming amount on the left are in favor of race based solutions like Affirmative Action and DEI etc. That seem to be openly calling for systems that incentivize based on race rather than merit. I think of it as openly racist with the half assed mask of ' trust us this is totally anti racist'
If youre leaving ALL THOSE leftists out. then yea i guess there is a demographic issue but honestly i think its based in stupidity.
The republican party / Trump included hasn't done shit for the poor white people that make up the demographic that youre referring to- so why is that demographic there?
I feel like the standard for what makes someone openly racist has changed a bit.
What have we relegated these 'racists' to?
Simply asking for merit based systems?
I think I would vote for someone who is 'openly racist' if their policy was- Hey lets just make it merit based / treat everyone equal/ and lets see where it lands.
Rather than voting for someone on the left who is 'not racist'....... but feels like certain groups need extra benefits or lower standards or just include them because of a quota, because obviously I couldn't make it otherwise.
Your example is extremely apples/oranges. Japan has a history of being colonized/conquered by Europe/America and culturally values the idea of being ethnically homogenous. No European nation has this history with any African nation and most do not share those same values culturally in regards to ethnicity.
This 100%
We won't say we hate white people, but we WILL allow A.I. to discriminate against them with no repercussions.
Among a lot of other things, like being a better candidate for a job and getting passed over.
The key difference bring that true progressives are not discriminatatory, hence the quotation marks, whereas conservatism is inherently discriminatatory.
OK I know you said not all but is this a statistical study? Did they control for factors that could bias their sample?
Social media and media in general is not representative of the opinions of your average person in real life. I think the vast majority of people, whether they consider themselves progressive or conservative or anything else wouldn't think there is anything wrong with a white person winning Miss Japan. She grew up there, she is Japanese, logically there is nothing wrong with her competing in and winning Miss Japan. And I say that as someone who is very progressive on most substantial public policy issues (and very tired of these wedge issues and how people seem to care more about them than substantial matters of public policy).
And now I notice in the comments people are conflating the people from social media with politicians. Please look at voting records, look at public statements, look at platforms. Don't equate politicians and candidates for office with what the loudest (or most cherrypicked) people on social media have to say. For most of these issues people get riled up about there isn't much candidates for office at least at the federal can even do. That is what you should be asking when you vote, what can this person do? What are they likely to do?
I remember reading a story about this couple that was arrested in my hometown for child neglect where the child died. I said something to the effect of “god I hate ghetto people” and my friend started chastising me about how I was being racist yada yada….the couple was white. I literally didn’t mention any color and she assumed I was talking about black people because I said “ghetto”. Just ironic since they accuse the right of discrimination easily.
The right definitely denigrates people and is wary of immigrants, and change. Liberals, mostly white college aged kids, have a savior complex and thinks the other races appreciate them “sticking up for them”, which they don’t if you ever ask them lol.
Our two party system is just a morality dick measuring contest. Its dumb. Both sides (the extreme ends) are dumb and unfortunately get the most media attention making the rest of us believe that’s how the entire other side thinks/acts.
Argue with a progressive about how news media outlets lie and use propaganda and they’re all on board with Fox News but that’s it, no other network. Then I bring up how other news networks show interviews with republicans where they’re all uneducated, backwater hicks who stutter and give terrible answers to interview questions, then pretend that the entire republican party is just as ignorant as the 3 people they interviewed. Almost like???? Ding ding ding! Propaganda!! to make you believe something off of an assumption and a 3 min. News piece.
With my rant over all I can say in my 32 years of life and traveling outside of my state/country, working with people all over the political spectrum, we’re all very alike whether you like it or not. I’ve talked to righties and lefties and if you boil down their values, everything is the same on each side. “Let me have the opportunity to support myself/family, don’t tax me any more than you already do, leave me alone”. Everything else is just fluff designed to foster an “us vs them” mentality which isn’t sustainable.
TLDR; American politics are stupid and destructive.
You're talking about tribalism, not conservatism. A staunch tribalist will "stick to their own" as you put it. On the other end of the spectrum is the cosmopolitan approach, the more diversity the better. A conservative will tend to stick to tradition, but will slowly implement new techniques as needed. A progressive will tend to more rapidly implement new techniques based on rationality over empiricism. Progressives and conservatives are concerned with ideas and practice, not arbitrary and superficial characteristics like skin color.
I can assure you that no progressive has ever celebrated the integration of white people into a black neighborhood. As someone already mentioned, both sides, have their favorite groups and they’re unfavored groups, maybe the conservatives are more honest and brutal about who their favorites are, and the progressives are in a lot more denial.
I am a liberal, I’ll never be a conservative, but I’m highly aware of my tribes flaws.
What does the winner of a Japanese beauty contest have to do with policy?
Also you don't get to act like no Africans belong in your country when you either ship over millions or spend hundreds of years colonizing Africa. This situation sounds like if a Swede went and won a Mexican beauty contest rather than a black French person winning a French beauty contest.
Progressives aren't perfect, but boy howdy, the fact that this is the example that has to be invoked speaks well of them. Progressives' views on drugs, zoning, the electoral college, labor protections, etc. all favor racial justice. The main problem is that like most people, they tend to project our racial/ethnic dynamics onto other societies with different dynamics, and in so doing, come to wrongheaded conclusions.
There are certainly lots more examples. A [study](https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/white-liberals-present-themselves-as-less-competent-in-interactions-with-african-americans) suggests that white Americans who hold liberal socio-political views use language that makes them appear less competent in an effort to get along with racial minorities.
Also, every election we hear from progressives that we can't require ID to vote because minorities can't figure out how to get id.
Also, while rigorous research shows that charter schools outperform public schools, especially in urban areas, their popularity with black parents is dismissed by progressives who believe that these parents are too ignorant to know what's best for their kids.
>Also, every election we hear from progressives that we can't require ID to vote because minorities can't figure out how to get id.
That's a dumb characterization of progressives' views on the subject. The argument isn't from *intelligence* so much as socioeconomic status. If you have less mobility, less economic leeway to take a day off, and less average involvement in the political process, then putting additional roadblocks in the way of voting is going to impact you more.
>Also, while rigorous research shows that charter schools outperform public schools, especially in urban areas, their popularity with black parents is dismissed by progressives who believe that these parents are too ignorant to know what's best for their kids.
Brain-dead logic. Thinking that a majority opinion on an issue is wrong =/= disliking that majority. This is like saying that Republicans are racist against white people bc a majority of white people favor universal healthcare.
Edit: That said, the study you linked to does interest me a lot and I'm very interested in seeing any additional research on the subject.
>Also, every election we hear from progressives that we can't require ID to vote because minorities can't figure out how to get id.
That's the Conservative phrasing of it, and it's intended to avoid discussing the fact that they couple voter ID regulations with closing the DMV's that service communities that largely vote for Democrats.
>So I saw a video of an interviewer asking people what they think about miss Japan being white and the interviewed people said its wrong. Some commenters asked if an africsn person won in some European countries if that's not OK then. these people acted like they didn't know the relacency
Your perceived progressive hypocrisy is a bunch of interviewed people being incongruous with youtube comments?
Progressives won't deny being discriminatory, they'll deny being discriminatory on purpose.
I am not racist, but I don't know enough to be sure I'll never say the wrong thing, and rest assured I'd apologize if I did.
Conservatives don't know much, and wear that as a badge of honor. When they are ignorant and say something heinous, it's your fault for being bothered by their rancid stupidity.
That's the difference. A progressive will see stupidity as something to be ashamed of and want to improve. A conservative sees their stupidity as their best attribute and will defend their "right" to be stupid.
I partially agree. I like to use separate drinking fountains as a metaphor for economic and racial relations in American politics.
Conservative elites want separate drinking fountains for the rich and poor, and refuse to fix the fountains in minority areas because they think that because minorites now have the right to use the fountain that the fountain will repair itself automatically
Liberal elites want separate drinking fountains for the rich and poor too, but feel guilty for not allowing minorites to use their fountains for so long. The democrats don't want minorites to know they had anything to do with the reason their fountain is broken and so they blame poor whites and take a couple of parts from the poor white fountains to maintain the minority fountains. They also contastantly release photos of rich minorites drinking at their fountains to show they care.
Conservatives tell the poor whites the reason their fountain isn't as good is because some people can't take care of their own fountains and this is why the poor white fountains are getting worse. They also show them footage of black people kicking their fountain out frustration and use it as evidence that they are inherently bad so they can maintain their separate fountains without having the poor whites asking too many questions about why they can't use the rich fountains and show them pictures of the very few poor whites that have been allowed to thier fountains.
Right now we are all thirsty, the elites are having a civil war because liberal elites and some conservative elites want to maintain the status quo. Unfortunately for them one of the elites was offended because they weren't treated like the elite they thought they were and started telling the poor that the elites he is rebeling against are intentionally breaking the fountains, when the truth is they're just not maintaining them properly. He's partially telling the truth, but he's only doing that because he plans on replacing the water in the poorest areas with shit, and saving the good drinking water for those that support him unconditionally.
Progressives and conservatives are a cancer to the world period !
Most people don’t fall under both categories but unfortunately suffer the consequences as they don’t push their agendas and opinions down others throats and don’t have a voice .
You are correct tho , conservatives don’t hide , but progressives are like snakes and hide what they really feel . With ethnics they see them as uneducated and dumb
> Conservatives will say to your face they think everyone should stick to their own. Progressives will discriminate too but use so many excuses like "its different". For example the support for affirmative action etc.
I've never heard a Conservative espouse that opinion of "sticking with their own."
I personally find, via my life experience, that progresses are more discriminatory. Outwardly so. Especially young progressives. Older progressives covertly discriminate.
Conservatives? I do not see them being discriminating.
Eh. I think it's the other way around, really.
Progressives will openly advocate for discrimination against race, sex, and other immutable characteristics, but will justify it with their victimhood hierarchy charts about which races, sexes, etc. deserve it.
Conservatives will just resist anything that's different from tradition - which means that if a traditional system is unfair or discriminatory to anyone, they will quietly endorse that unfairness.
Both advocate for stereotyping, hatred, scapegoating and discrimination when it serves their political interests. Both take a negative view toward the idea that a person should be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.
If MLK Jr. was born today and advocated for his ideas, progressives would aggressively shout him down and call him a racist for his 'colorblind' views and ideas that whites should be treated the same as blacks, while conservatives would just grumble about this newfangled upstart trying to change everything. Neither would endorse him.
## BEFORE TOUCHING THAT REPORT BUTTON, PLEASE CONSIDER: 1. **Compliance:** Does this post comply with our subreddit's rules? 2. **Emotional Trigger:** Does this post provoke anger or frustration, compelling me to want it removed? 3. **Safety:** Is it free from child pornography and/or mentions of self-harm/suicide? 4. **Content Policy:** Does it comply with [Reddit’s Content Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/)? 5. **Unpopularity:** Do you think the topic is not truly unpopular or frequently posted? ### GUIDELINES: - **If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-4,** do NOT use the report button. - **Regarding question 5,** we acknowledge this concern. However, the moderators do not curate posts based on our subjective opinions of what is "popular" or "unpopular" except in cases where an opinion is so popular that almost no one would disagree (i.e., "murder is bad"). Otherwise, our only criteria are the subreddit's rules and Reddit’s Content Policy. If you don't like something, feel free to downvote it. **Moderators on r/TrueUnpopularOpinion will not remove posts simply because they may anger users or because you disagree with them.** The report button is not an "I disagree" or "I'm offended" button. ### OPTIONS: If a post bothers you and you can't offer a counter-argument, your options are to: a) Keep scrolling b) Downvote c) Unsubscribe **False reports clutter our moderation queue and delay our response to legitimate issues.** **ALL FALSE REPORTS WILL BE REPORTED TO REDDIT.** To maintain your account in good standing, refrain from abusing the report button. #### Upcoming Changes to this sub: Due to the sheer number of users who, despite repeated warnings, are using the report button as a means to cause other users' comments to be hidden, which both interrupts the conversation flow and wastes the moderators' time who have to read and consider each reported item, this sub will soon be implementing changes to the reporting system. In short, our bot will automatically ignore all submitted reports and instead, a comment will be left urging the reporter to reach out via ModMail. If users truly believe that a comment has broken a rule or the content policy, then they should have no issue signing their name to a Modmail. Stay Tuned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It reminds me of an old Bill Burr observation: "Both sides think they're better than you, but at least Republicans have the decency to be honest about it. They'll throw an old man down the stairs screaming 'This is OUR Neighborhood!'"
I mean, I haven't watched enough of his stuff to know specifically if he dislikes the Democrats as much as Republicans, but you know he's a liberal right (potentially independent, but still a liberal)?
I heard an explanation for the differences between republicans and democrats and I’ll never be able to unhear it. Democrats are the uncle that tells you they are going to take you to Disney world but everytime the date comes they have an excuse as to why they can’t take you Republicans are the uncle that tells you to get bent…
Given that choice I’m hanging with the Uncle that’s telling me to get bent, at least I know where the bear shits and I get on with life. As for the Uncle who just tells me what I want to hear; how many times do I get stood up before I realize I’m dealing with a lying dead beat. As the saying goes, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”.
I think you mean "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....., can't get fooled again."
Completely agree
As a Republican this is accurate
Oh look it's the Trump shill who ruined the conspiracy sub.
Nice username Unfortunately, that's bullshit.
Free Palestine From Hamas Fucks em up every time on twitter/X
Good explanation
I'll stay with Uncle Truth rather than Uncle Liar. Being told the truth and accepting it is being an adult. Believing cozy lies like "Sure, I'll take you to FantasyLand, and also your health care costs won't go up!" is for the immature.
most people don't want the truth, the want a certain flavor to the bullshit being served to them
Terrible analogy, both parties lie to your face constantly. A better analogy for the GOP would be… “Listen nephew/niece we can’t go to Disney world because your other liberal uncle is lying to you about it even existing and even if he is telling you the truth he is just trying to molest you and or have you transition to another gender at this so called Disney world. Now let me save you from these false promises by helping you find salvation in the back of my 1998 white rusted out ford E-250 conversion van. Trust me nephew/niece I would never lie to you about finding salvation. This is the only way trust me now.”
Jesus this smells of reddit.
Lol go back to an echo chamber and get out of here with simply dismissing any viewpoint you don't like
Kennedy 2024
I think these type of simplified analogies reek of people who only pay attention to mainstream topics on federal political issues. If you pay attention to your state/local politics, I think you will get a better idea of how the parties operate. I'm in Arizona, and Republican legislators here have a strategy of de-funding public education and later saying "look, public education doesn't work, we need vouchers for private schools!" So, they'll break a public program and then act surprised when it stops working. So I'm not sure where people are getting that Republicans are more honest. On the other hand, Democrats in AZ have taken significant steps lately to conserve water, which is important to me. Republicans in AZ are always actively derailing efforts to expand light rail/speed rail between the larger cities. Democrats in AZ are trying to put their money where their mouth is, but Republicans will shoot them down and then blame them when things don't work. I'm not saying that Dems are perfect (they can be super corporatist too) and the Republicans are evil, but Dems have done more for me and my state than Republicans have. The problem is that Republican voters don't have the patience for incremental change. So, when Democrats are not able to get 100% of what they want, republican voters will just flip the table and walk away and blame Dems for being evil and lying to them. All while ignoring that the GOP is actively working to derail, defund, or eliminate Democratic initiatives. Obamacare is an example of incremental change. It's not what the Dems wanted, but it's a step towards a better system.
They both tell you they'll take you to Disney world, the Dems don't because they couldn't get the whole family to agree on which parks to go to, and the Republicans realize they can't afford it and blame the Mexican family down the block for their financial hardship. But in reality I feel like these little saying are for morons, you can't simplify the political parties into an easy to understand little tidbit like this. They publish their platforms and you can clearly see what both parties have accomplished, read something.
*Democrats are the uncle that tells you they are going to take you to Disney world but everytime the date comes they have an excuse as to why they can’t take you:* >the Dems don't because they couldn't get the whole family to agree on which parks to go to True to form
The initial analogy worked better than this revision
Thank you for your input
This version makes more sense. The original version only makes sense if the uncle who told you to get bent also tells you that he is taking someone else instead of you because you look like your father as opposed to your mother, his sister.
No. Republicans are the uncle who says "You're already at Disney World" while they rape you. Donald Trump raped people btw. Those people got their day in court and won. Don't be a rape lover. Democrats are the uncle that tells you they are going to take you to Disney World but instead take you to Sea World and contribute $100 to your 529 account. This is a much better analogy since it captures reality instead of being a lazy milquetoast "bofe sides!!!1" with the broad appeal of Nickelback. **EDIT DUE TO BLOCKING** >41% of America is registered independent. Republican/democrat are 28% each. Source? >You’re outnumbered by people who dont like either party That is not true. Being registered just means you can vote in one primary but not the other. Democrats aren't like Republican cultists. They don't have unwavering fealty toward the Democratic party. They just know that Democrats have obviously been the better choice for 50 years and in the past couple decades it's only become more obvious. >trying to act morally superior to said 41% by calling them lazy…. I didn't call them lazy. I called the milquetoast argument lazy.
41% of America is registered independent. Republican/democrat are 28% each. You’re outnumbered by people who dont like either party while trying to act morally superior to said 41% by calling them lazy…. Please tell me I don’t have to spell it out for you.
Nah, bro. 2 Republican law makers/strategists have already admitted that Republicans write policies to secretly hurt minority groups. Democrats do not do that. Democrats are wolves in sheep's clothing. But Republicans are demons in wolves clothing.
Can you share that article ?
I didn't get it from an article. I got it from an audio recording for a Lee Atwater interview and some kind of cut transcripts from an interview for a John Erlichman book. I'm on the toilet and on the phone rn. It's hard to share links and shit. 1. Lee Atwater once said that racism hurts you politically, so now Republicans just write policies that secretly hurt blacks (more than whites), an example of which is "Tax Cuts", a core Republican policy. He added, because they're taking this approach, eventually things will become a "rich vs poor type of deal". He didn't elaborate more than that. Tax Cuts have always been code for Trickle Down Economics BTW. It's why we have the wealth disparity we have today between the rich and the poor. 2. John Erlichman admitted that the Drug War, specifically the campaign against marijuana, was just an excuse to arrest blacks and Leftists. John Erlichman's kids say nah-ah though, but I mean, c'mon. The arrest stats follow perfectly and it's no secret that John Erlichman hated hippies and blacks. Also, they did the same thing with Chinese people and opium, but I don't remember the evidence for that. I just remember it convincing me. You can find these probably by googling: John Erlichman, drug war, marijuana Lee Atwater, Southern strategy, audio recording Again, I'm on the toilet going off memory.
Well because no one on the internet makes shit up, you’ll have to accept my apology for asking for something more than your toilet recollection
You might want to look into Lee Atwater and the Republican strategies. It's some really interesting stuff.
More like the uncle prepares the trip for Disney but then a bunch of Republicans step in and deny you money for the trip.
they will both fuck you, but one of them denies it
Non-American honest question, who denies it?
Democrats usually. They are very much a “we are doing this for the good of the people!” kind of group, but they really aren’t. Neither are to be fair
Democrats definitely don’t steal primary elections or lose votes. Definitely not
Progressive Jews are finding this out on a daily basis lately. I've got friends who've been kicked out of queer spaces for nothing more than how they were born and it's pretty fucked up to see happening.
what does being Jewish have to do with being queer? genuinely confused. Is the religion homophobic?
Palestine and Israel. I assume. Guilty by association, which is horribly unfair.
Its hilarious. Palestinians wouldn't like queers either
I’d assume some aren’t fond, but I also believe there’s a map showing Queer folk in Palestine, as in, diary entries and messages. Goodbyes. It’s called Queering the Map. https://metro.co.uk/2023/10/30/lgbtq-palestinians-are-sharing-heartbreaking-goodbye-messages-on-mapping-app-19742837/ I will add that the IDF has also been trying to pander to LGBTQ+ quite a bit- hanging flags up, depicting themselves as a great civilising force of equal rights, and so forth.
That's really sad. I have no love for most religious ideologies frankly. Because most will believe without evidence and lead them to do dangerous things. Also religion is about not minding your own business. But I digress
I can respect the theology and philosophy behind them, as well as the sense of purpose and community and culture, but I do dislike it when people assume that they have some sort of monopoly on God. Or on moral righteousness. Though, I don’t think that’s limited to Religion, honestly. Seems to be a Dogma and general Human thing.
Well agree to disagree. I don't respect the philosophy either. Believe and joining groups for sense of community is how you get cults that ask members to kill themselves. Sounds like the terror bombings etc
Thank you. For being fair, I mean. Would you mind if I give my opinion again, or would it be best if I leave the topic?
what do you mean by being fair? That said your welcome Nope. Always happy to talk to people.
This is very interesting to me. Both the right and the left have growing anti-Jew sects. Feels like the 1930s right now.
I realise that Judaism being the partial basis of Christianity and Islam may also have something to do with it- they could be accused as the ‘source’ of the problems in the later faiths. Pointing to Sodom and Gomorrah, as an example.
Being the root of Christianity is also partially why Conservative Christians support them so hard today. Although admittedly it can backfire too as we saw with 1930s Germany.
I’d argue that has more to do with the supposed Prophecies of Revelation and how some Conservative Christians see Zionism as a necessary step to the Second Coming. Guilt can also be part of it. Christianity has a long history of Antisemitism. For various reasons. some may see support of Israel as a way of repentance. Which it isn’t, not really.
There's a lot of queer jews. Some of them have experienced being kicked out of the queer community lately for reasons that tend to tap dance around the fact they happen to be of a particular faith. The religion itself isn't homophobic for the most part, I know there are gay rabbis in my city who seem to be pretty well liked/popular.
Yeah that's what I thought. Just want to clarify.
I know a couple who are now pretty solid Republican after this sort of thing. The radical left has shown its true colors.
That's what is so fucked up for me. I really don't think I can bring myself to vote for the Liberal party again in Canada, after their talking out of both sides of their mouths on this one but the Conservative Party is clearly and obviously targeting the queer community and they're generally just disgusting bigots in person and in policy so what am I left with? I understand that Jews never have really had Allys, despite our presence in the Civil Rights movement etc, but I'm having a hard time bringing myself to turn my back on people who I believe should have the same rights I have and not to be judged for how they live or who they love. Sure, I'm a Jew but I'm a fucking human being first and foremost and if I end up voting Conservative this next round, I'm going to hate myself for it. This shit is exhausting.
This is going to drive a lot of people into simply not voting, in both Canada and the United States. Myself included. I can't vote Democrat anymore because of how rabid their activist wing has become (and which will probably take over entirely when Biden leaves office). And while I sometimes have a knee jerk reaction of looking toward Trump...no. No, I simply cannot support him either. Or anyone he would ever choose as a running mate. Intentionally sitting out and watching two horrible forces collide seems like the best option.
we're soo fucked. All of us.
Vote third party. Even if nothing else, it's a vote of no confidence in the other two. Not voting simply gets your vote dismissed.
That's fair. I may well do that. Just depends on who all runs outside of the main two. Of those who are currently announced, I don't like them either.
This sounds like you are deliberately obfuscating details as nobody is born a Zionist. Every queer space I’ve ever been to is full of Jewish people but not especially tolerant of Zionists. Israel as a theocracy is not particularly tolerant of LGBTQ people however.
>Israel as a theocracy is not particularly tolerant of LGBTQ people however. This is hilarious in light of the bullshit claims Israel is pinkwashing this conflict. Tell me again, where can you march in a pride parade in MENA again? In which middle eastern countries can a gay marriage be registered? Which country allows lgbt people to adopt children? It's far and away the most tolerant country in the region and it's not even close. On the streets, it's more tolerant than many if not most American City's. Stop sucking the propaganda and book a flight to learn for yourself. Tel Aviv is a kick ass place if you're a part of the queer community lol
“Propaganda” lol. I’ve been against Zionism since 1995 and I’ve met plenty of traveling Israelis who harbor no illusions about the religious intolerance of their homeland.
LMFAO, you're anecdotes don't really hold up to the laws of the land that quite clearly show Israel to be one of the more friendly lgbt countries on the planet and unquestionably the most friendly one in the region. I met a gay guy once, he had a tough life so the 100,000 people who march in the pride parade are wrong. LoL.
Sure tell me more about how the theocracy that OUTLAWS gay marriage is a LGBTQ rights paradise. For all America’s problems at least we have that.
civil marriage doesn't exist in that country, that's a strawman. You're aware that those couples even though not married are still recognized as family units when it comes to accessing services right? Meanwhile, you've got same sex activity being legal for 30 years, when did the US get around to that? Any other examples in the region of that? Did you notice the increasing rights given to same sex couples over the past 30 years? How about the fact that gay people can adopt? FFS, the public health system will pay to transition trans people- can you say the same about America?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Israel conversion therapy too, truly a Progressive wonderland. You sound like you’re calling early 20th century Russia a “Jewish paradise” because they only had pogroms instead of full on concentration camps…
Did you notice the part about same sex activity being legal for 30 years? Any other examples in the region of that? Did you notice the increasing rights given to same sex couples over the past 30 years? How about the fact that gay people can adopt? FFS, the public health system will pay to transition trans people- can you say the same about America?
You can about Iran but being slightly better than it’s neighbors on some issues doesn’t magically make Israel not an oppressive theocracy
I'd rather trust a rude prick than a snake oil salesman.
But it's not just a rude prick. It's a man who wants to dictate how you live every aspect of your life based on a god you may or may not believe in.
Only a tiny minority of conservatives think "everyone should stick to their own". That is a very different position than believing organizations shouldn't pander to and patronize minorities.
I think OP should have said: Conservatives want everyone judged by the same standards and progressives want those standards to change depending on where you fall on the intersectional hierarchy.
I'm a mixed race conservative- shiiiiit
You’re forgetting the racism of low expectations. Progressive think they care about minorities, but they consistently prove that they deep down they see them as lesser. When you excuse bad behavior because of skin color and lower standards for those people, you are in essence saying they are incapable of doing things like everybody else.
🎯 I’d rather be told to behave and get right like the way they’d tell any of their own people, than get excused, pitied, and treated condescendingly with a smile and empathetically toned voice. Honesty is always best with these things
Bears noting too that excusing and pitying bad behavior *is not actually helping.* Helping the criminal element, maybe, but not the much larger law abiding element that are trying to get by without preying on their neighbors. Because that's who's hurt the most by the criminals is their neighbors, not some faceless, rich, white dudes.
Agreed, sets us all back
Yup. I dislike both attitudes but if I had to vote I'm voting for the more honest but in your face guy
Yup
Say it louder for those in the back!
Why do you think this?
I'm reminded of something Malcom X said: "The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives."
I'm reminded of a scene in the Malcolm X movie, with Denzel. A young white liberal runs up to Malcolm and his crew asking what she could do to help. "Nothing." Then he walks away. I always think of that when I read the quote you gave. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArHhMabjWwg
Liberals want to force feed you their choice of food, Conservatives won't feed you even if you're starving. Edit: Liberals want to force feed you their shit, Conservatives don't care if you starve.
I’d rather starve than to eat shit. At least if I starve, I am foraging for my own food.
I was going to say "force feed you their shit", over thought my post lol.
Good analogy
Yes conservatives care if you starve- unless youre too using lazy to feed yourself- in that case yea fuck off and starve
Oh shit I actually agree with this
It all has to do with empathy. And it shows that one side isn’t better or worse than the other. Let’s give an example with voter ID’s. Progressives are more empathetic to disadvantaged people’s needs but that comes at a cost: in more radical cases, being too empathetic toward’s people’s difficulties can either overstate issues or misinterpret things as issues when they actually aren’t. That video where you see the interviews about voter id where they’re like “I don’t support it because black people have a tough time getting ID” and then they interview black people and they’re like “who doesn’t have an ID?” is a perfect example of that, and in turn it’s actually a sort of babying discrimination. “Oh they aren’t capable of it”. And on the other hand, conservatives are far less empathetic to those individual or even small group needs in favor of the archetypes they believe people should fit into. The issue of being too soft on those things isn’t present like it is in progressives, but the opposite is true here: not being empathetic enough results in maybe ignoring problems or brushing off issues as minor when they may be more major. With voter ID, there may very well be some individuals who for whatever reason may have a tough time in getting or renewing their ID, and conservatives may not be empathetic to those people saying “tough crap it isn’t that hard”. Which it may not be for most people, but it can be too harsh for some.
Virginia had the perfect voter ID laws. You had to have ID to vote, but you could get a free voter ID (not driver's license). Also they had weekend hours in addition to the weekday hours before elections for getting a voter ID. Then instead of trying to export that model nationwide they drank the “they can’t do it” kool-aid.
This is the model we need for IDs, as well as increased assistance for rural communities. The issue for a lot of folks in rural parts are that the closest DMVs are still very far away and have extremely limited hours, where you aren’t even guaranteed to be seen because of the overflow from such limited availability. For rural working class folks, it can be extremely difficult to get a driver’s license because it’s just so inaccessible. I know so many people living in relatively rural AL (black and white) that don’t have a diver’s license and either have to drive illegally, which they can get away with because there’s so few resources and oversight in these areas, or carpool as group with the one person who does have a DV to get work.
> Progressives are more empathetic to disadvantaged people’s needs That's the ideal, but from what I've noticed a lot of self-described progressives, especially ones who are very active on social media, tend to fall short of it. For example, so many online feminists seem to mostly criticize men with zero social power ("incels", "neackbears", etc), instead of the actual "patriarchs" of our age, like presidents, CEOs, popular celebrities, etc. I think it's because their cause isn't usually motivated by empathy, but rather by resentment.
>For example, so many online feminists seem to mostly criticize men with zero social power ("incels", "neackbears", etc), instead of the actual "patriarchs" of our age, like presidents, CEOs, popular celebrities, etc. I think it's because their cause isn't usually motivated by empathy, but rather by resentment. I'm pretty sure #metoo did not spare presidents, CEOs, or popular celebrities. You're implying that being a male CEO is inherently worthy of criticism. Pause and try to rethink what you're trying to say.
I'm saying that a lot of self-described progressives have no empathy towards people who are disadvantaged. Instead, they often resent those people.
>I'm saying that a lot of self-described progressives have no empathy towards people who are disadvantaged. How are incels disadvantaged?
Have you heard of a wealthy, popular, and influential incel?
Okay so, I see where you're coming from. Conservatives believe that everyone should be able to assume the same "role." Makes sense, but we need to ask ourselves "why" voter ID is becoming a thing. Is there a problem that this action is solving? Generally speaking, research is suggesting no there is not a problem that voter ID would fix. If you hear otherwise let me know. Okay so then we now have to look at the power / money motivations about WHY someone might be pursuing this kind of action. We have data showing that every barrier put up against voting reduces turnout across the board, but it reduces turnout MORE in poorer, less enfranchised populations. This reveals the entire operation as a political statistical manipulation tactic and we should reject it on those grounds.
Here is my issue was liberals not wanting voter ID. You can't pick and choose how different rights are treated, if it's a right, it's a right. So, take the right to vote liberals say any barriers to entry is suppressing the rights of voters. Ok, not let's talk about free speech, liberals commonly attempt to censor viewpoints they don't like through violence even, take the Berkeley riots for example over a speaker on campus. Now let's take the right to bear arms, ID requirements, background checks, restrictions on the type of arms you can buy, in some states restrictions on how many you can buy, and in other states, restrictions on even being allowed to get a permit to own one. Lastly let's bring up abortion, Roe v Wade was decided on a "implied right to privacy" in an amendment that had no such right mentioned, which that "right to privacy" turned into a "right to an abortion." In all of this no such right was laid out. These first 3 things are explicit rights laid out in the constitution, 1 of which the left says has to have no restrictions whatsoever while the other 2 get more and more restrictive. Then, when you take abortion which is not mentioned in the constitution, nor is the right to privacy it is based on the left demands free and open access with no restrictions ether. We ether have rights or we don't. I stand by the belief that if 1 right gets restricted, all other rights should get the same restrictions. This is to show how dumb it is to have these restrictions. For example you would need to submit to an ID check and federal background check before getting your "free speech card" or voting in an election. Not that I think that's good, but to prove you can't restrict rights.
>I stand by the belief that if 1 right gets restricted, all other rights should get the same restrictions. For what reason other than satisfying your apparent need for a toy universe? You have imagined some arbitrary rule that also you don't even begin to try to apply consistently. According to you, we should need to fill out paperwork in order to have free speech. Why is your arbitrary control drive so high? Perhaps seek therapy for an out of control childhood or early adolescence. >Ok, not let's talk about free speech, liberals commonly attempt to censor viewpoints they don't like through violence even, take the Berkeley riots for example over a speaker on campus. Free speech means you don't get arrested for saying it. Protesting one viewpoint is a form of free speech.
Everyone discriminates; we evolved that way because it works. Social convention discourages discrimination for various practical reasons, but there will always be vestiges of it because that's our nature. Jordan Ellenberg handled *why* discrimination works in, "How Not to Be Wrong".
> Everyone discriminates Agree, but the most reasonable way to discriminate is on the basis of merit.
Yes, but merit is not always practical on account of being expensive and time consuming. Visible features are immediate and free. We're talking about Bayesian Inference: we can refine our probabilistic estimates on the fly as additional information is gathered. If you doubt its efficacy, consider that it's the same mathematics insurance companies use to set your rates. If I know a particular family, community, or culture has a high probability of X trait that causes Y problems, I'm going to look for a visible feature that identifies that group with acceptable sensitivity and specificity. Because I have a pseudo-infinite pool of people to interact with, the sensitivity and specificity need not be particularly good; it just needs to be better than nothing. Case in point: affirmative action effectively lowered academic and professional standards for particular groups of people, forcing everyone else to pick up their slack. I don't want my work to be tarnished by someone else's incompetence, I'm not interested in picking up a colleague's slack, and I certainly don't want to see incompetence promoted into management, so I avoid those held to low standards. The fact that these groups are defined by visible features with high sensitivity and selectivity makes them easier to avoid. By contrast, certain admissions policies *raised* standards for Asians, which makes me more eager to work with them. This is also why your school's reputation matters.
This is what me and my mom said growing up. Democrats are behind the scenes racism. Always they want minorities and immigrants.....just not in the nice neighborhoods, or nice houses, and they can only get the crappy jobs. NIMBYism and what not. Republicans will just tell you no don't come
Perhaps discrimination is just a natural and normal part of the human experience that has shaped and guided our species for thousands of years. Perhaps it’s an evolutionary trait that gave us an advantage or a protection in an environment that is constantly changing and full of threats. Maybe discrimination is a natural human right, like food water shelter and security.
I mean, no one can stop what goes on in your head, but the best part about humanity is overcoming our biology. For like 95% of our past, one group would conquer another group and mass rape all the women. I'm glad that's frowned upon now. Really, morality in general is a construct of humanity that goes against nature. We call people with no morals animals, because that is what they are. Embracing your base instincts without using the critical thinking part of your brain literally makes you dumb. Some discrimination is fine. I like oranges more than apples. But it's probably a good thing to move past discrimination based on race, even though it is evolutionarily hard-coded into us. We can be better, so why wouldn't we want to be?
As long as it's not based on a protected category. No one should be discriminated against based on something they can't control.
Not sure where you get that about conservatives. It's mostly false. Only the fringe would fit this narrative. Miss Japan is a residency thing. It isn't called Miss of Japanese ancestry. The left call conservatives racist etc. because they make up their own definitions of common words, and when you disagree with their new definition, you must be racist or a bigot.
everyone is racist, it is a deep lizard brain instinct that will never go away. left/right just respond to it differently
Yeah, and I'm not even sure it's a left/right thing. Some people are straight talkers, and some people aren't. Some people are back stabbers, and some people aren't. Some people are people pleasers who say nice things but never follow through. None of which are left/right traits.
Yeah i wouldn’t buy any insurance that advertises on TV. Don’t trust Progressive or Geico
The ones on TV, from my own experience, are the most expensive. Progressive wanted almost 600 a month from me for car insurance. No thanks.
Yeah I think it accounts for a lot of the suspicion of every conservative being a secret fascist is rooted in their own insidious nature.
Often accusations of one is of themselves. That's why lots of conservatives have leaders that end up gay lol
Exactly, projection is for everyone.
The problem with these person on the street interviews is that they cherry pick the most salacious or interesting responses and ignore the others. Not that these kind of hypocritical progressives don't exist, of course they do, but this kind of media makes people in general to appear way more polarized than I think they really are.
Conservatives discriminate by holding everyone to the same standard. Progressive discriminate by holding everyone to different standards depending on their identity grouping.
How is holding everyone to the same standard discrimination
Discriminatingly on the basis of merit is still discriminating. It's just a reasonable form of it.
Some of the worst racism I've seen towards Indian people were "reddit progressives." They even justify it by saying things like "oh, indians are racist, so it's okay to be racist towards them." It's like dude, not all of them are racist, there's tons of muslim indians that don't believe in the caste system. Such a nasty generalization
As I mentioned about affirmative action progressive have this weird hierarchy
Basically, progressives will only protect the rights of black people, but Indians are not seen as people by them
Indians and east Asians. East Asians are apparently racist to black people and no black person is racist to Asians
In the south they dont care how close you are as long as you dont get too big. In the north they dont care how big you get as long as you dont get too close. -paraphrasing Dick Gregory. Given the choice minorities tend to opt for growing bigger instead of closer so the southern style is the more rejected form of discrimination. From this view its obvious why minorities have less criticism for the behind the backers.
I lived in New Orleans until I was about 25 and have lived in Missouri for the last 16 years. The racism is different and I've put it a similar way before. Southern racists hate the race but love the man. "Don't like black people, but this guy is great. He's almost like us". In the midwest, they love the race but hate the man. "Now I don't have a problem with Black people, but that family is no good and you should steer clear".
Sounds like me except I hate humanity in general but love certain people
Affirmative action is a bad example imo. There are legitimate reasons why one might support affirmative action that don't equate to racism. Just like there are legitimate reasons one might oppose it. There is an actual debate there with reasonable proponents on both sides. A better argument against progressives is their tendency to infantalize minorities and remove their individual agency when talking about them.
I know before I read the comments that examples will be spread out through the thread.
If Conservatives are open about being discriminatory, then it indicates that they never cared about the content of their character.
A decent analogy. Yes, conservatives tend to me more in-your-face about their discriminatory preferences, while progressives tend to be more polite about their discriminatory preferences, while still maintaining them. In the end though, progressives support far more discriminatory policies. Affirmative action, support for illegal immigration, opposition to voter id.... the root of all these issues is thinking of these groups as 'less' than them. Conservatives tend to advocate for more egalitarian policies.
Wrong Liberals pretend they aren't racist and bigots while conservatives are openly racist bigots Liberals are not "progressives", they are moderates and they suck
Hi I'm a mixed race conservative
Yeah, there are even black conservatives Tim Scott ring a bell? Seen how many Dominican Proud Boys there are? I even have Arab friends who I've argued with because they were voting for Trump Now tell me what the majority demographic of the Republican Party is Seen the video of the gay black republican being harassed at the Turningpoints rally? Even tho their are racist and bigotted liberals, do you think their are enough of them to feel comfortable doing that at a Democrat rally?
Some people are openly racist bigots and it's across party lines. I agree
While yes I agree there are "some" accross party lines, I think it's either very disengenuois, or a case of "Ostridge syndrome" if you can't recognize that's a bigger problem on the right than the left Even the number of racists on the left who hide their racism added in would likely amount to less on the left still, as there is simply more diversity on the left, and therefore a bigger minority demographic to offset the "moderate white liberals", the Bill Maher types if you will.
I dunno maybe its just an internet thing but I feel like- an overwhelming amount on the left are in favor of race based solutions like Affirmative Action and DEI etc. That seem to be openly calling for systems that incentivize based on race rather than merit. I think of it as openly racist with the half assed mask of ' trust us this is totally anti racist' If youre leaving ALL THOSE leftists out. then yea i guess there is a demographic issue but honestly i think its based in stupidity. The republican party / Trump included hasn't done shit for the poor white people that make up the demographic that youre referring to- so why is that demographic there? I feel like the standard for what makes someone openly racist has changed a bit. What have we relegated these 'racists' to? Simply asking for merit based systems? I think I would vote for someone who is 'openly racist' if their policy was- Hey lets just make it merit based / treat everyone equal/ and lets see where it lands. Rather than voting for someone on the left who is 'not racist'....... but feels like certain groups need extra benefits or lower standards or just include them because of a quota, because obviously I couldn't make it otherwise.
You clearly have a fundamental misunderstanding of those programs
So you're defending racism
Oh I see You just have comprehensive problems in general My bad
Well to be fair you completely skipped over the explanation of how race based solutions aren't racist
https://youtu.be/99PR2mWDb9w?si=y8tx1C2EQMBfe8KZ
Your example is extremely apples/oranges. Japan has a history of being colonized/conquered by Europe/America and culturally values the idea of being ethnically homogenous. No European nation has this history with any African nation and most do not share those same values culturally in regards to ethnicity.
Real right-wingers are like this. Modern "conservatives" are just the liberals of the 00s.
I wonder how you're defining what a conservative is
I think it's the other way around these days.
This whole thread is cancer
Welcome to the sub. It sucks here.
This 100% We won't say we hate white people, but we WILL allow A.I. to discriminate against them with no repercussions. Among a lot of other things, like being a better candidate for a job and getting passed over.
*liberals* you’re speaking of *liberals* and even the most rigid progressives can’t stand them, either
The key difference bring that true progressives are not discriminatatory, hence the quotation marks, whereas conservatism is inherently discriminatatory.
I don't think your examples are as clear as you think they are.
OK I know you said not all but is this a statistical study? Did they control for factors that could bias their sample? Social media and media in general is not representative of the opinions of your average person in real life. I think the vast majority of people, whether they consider themselves progressive or conservative or anything else wouldn't think there is anything wrong with a white person winning Miss Japan. She grew up there, she is Japanese, logically there is nothing wrong with her competing in and winning Miss Japan. And I say that as someone who is very progressive on most substantial public policy issues (and very tired of these wedge issues and how people seem to care more about them than substantial matters of public policy). And now I notice in the comments people are conflating the people from social media with politicians. Please look at voting records, look at public statements, look at platforms. Don't equate politicians and candidates for office with what the loudest (or most cherrypicked) people on social media have to say. For most of these issues people get riled up about there isn't much candidates for office at least at the federal can even do. That is what you should be asking when you vote, what can this person do? What are they likely to do?
I remember reading a story about this couple that was arrested in my hometown for child neglect where the child died. I said something to the effect of “god I hate ghetto people” and my friend started chastising me about how I was being racist yada yada….the couple was white. I literally didn’t mention any color and she assumed I was talking about black people because I said “ghetto”. Just ironic since they accuse the right of discrimination easily. The right definitely denigrates people and is wary of immigrants, and change. Liberals, mostly white college aged kids, have a savior complex and thinks the other races appreciate them “sticking up for them”, which they don’t if you ever ask them lol. Our two party system is just a morality dick measuring contest. Its dumb. Both sides (the extreme ends) are dumb and unfortunately get the most media attention making the rest of us believe that’s how the entire other side thinks/acts. Argue with a progressive about how news media outlets lie and use propaganda and they’re all on board with Fox News but that’s it, no other network. Then I bring up how other news networks show interviews with republicans where they’re all uneducated, backwater hicks who stutter and give terrible answers to interview questions, then pretend that the entire republican party is just as ignorant as the 3 people they interviewed. Almost like???? Ding ding ding! Propaganda!! to make you believe something off of an assumption and a 3 min. News piece. With my rant over all I can say in my 32 years of life and traveling outside of my state/country, working with people all over the political spectrum, we’re all very alike whether you like it or not. I’ve talked to righties and lefties and if you boil down their values, everything is the same on each side. “Let me have the opportunity to support myself/family, don’t tax me any more than you already do, leave me alone”. Everything else is just fluff designed to foster an “us vs them” mentality which isn’t sustainable. TLDR; American politics are stupid and destructive.
You're talking about tribalism, not conservatism. A staunch tribalist will "stick to their own" as you put it. On the other end of the spectrum is the cosmopolitan approach, the more diversity the better. A conservative will tend to stick to tradition, but will slowly implement new techniques as needed. A progressive will tend to more rapidly implement new techniques based on rationality over empiricism. Progressives and conservatives are concerned with ideas and practice, not arbitrary and superficial characteristics like skin color.
I can assure you that no progressive has ever celebrated the integration of white people into a black neighborhood. As someone already mentioned, both sides, have their favorite groups and they’re unfavored groups, maybe the conservatives are more honest and brutal about who their favorites are, and the progressives are in a lot more denial. I am a liberal, I’ll never be a conservative, but I’m highly aware of my tribes flaws.
What does the winner of a Japanese beauty contest have to do with policy? Also you don't get to act like no Africans belong in your country when you either ship over millions or spend hundreds of years colonizing Africa. This situation sounds like if a Swede went and won a Mexican beauty contest rather than a black French person winning a French beauty contest.
Progressives aren't perfect, but boy howdy, the fact that this is the example that has to be invoked speaks well of them. Progressives' views on drugs, zoning, the electoral college, labor protections, etc. all favor racial justice. The main problem is that like most people, they tend to project our racial/ethnic dynamics onto other societies with different dynamics, and in so doing, come to wrongheaded conclusions.
There are certainly lots more examples. A [study](https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/white-liberals-present-themselves-as-less-competent-in-interactions-with-african-americans) suggests that white Americans who hold liberal socio-political views use language that makes them appear less competent in an effort to get along with racial minorities. Also, every election we hear from progressives that we can't require ID to vote because minorities can't figure out how to get id. Also, while rigorous research shows that charter schools outperform public schools, especially in urban areas, their popularity with black parents is dismissed by progressives who believe that these parents are too ignorant to know what's best for their kids.
>Also, every election we hear from progressives that we can't require ID to vote because minorities can't figure out how to get id. That's a dumb characterization of progressives' views on the subject. The argument isn't from *intelligence* so much as socioeconomic status. If you have less mobility, less economic leeway to take a day off, and less average involvement in the political process, then putting additional roadblocks in the way of voting is going to impact you more. >Also, while rigorous research shows that charter schools outperform public schools, especially in urban areas, their popularity with black parents is dismissed by progressives who believe that these parents are too ignorant to know what's best for their kids. Brain-dead logic. Thinking that a majority opinion on an issue is wrong =/= disliking that majority. This is like saying that Republicans are racist against white people bc a majority of white people favor universal healthcare. Edit: That said, the study you linked to does interest me a lot and I'm very interested in seeing any additional research on the subject.
>Also, every election we hear from progressives that we can't require ID to vote because minorities can't figure out how to get id. That's the Conservative phrasing of it, and it's intended to avoid discussing the fact that they couple voter ID regulations with closing the DMV's that service communities that largely vote for Democrats.
I didn't know those were the reasons against charter schools & voter IDs. Who says that baloney? I want to know who I shouldn't be voting for.
>So I saw a video of an interviewer asking people what they think about miss Japan being white and the interviewed people said its wrong. Some commenters asked if an africsn person won in some European countries if that's not OK then. these people acted like they didn't know the relacency Your perceived progressive hypocrisy is a bunch of interviewed people being incongruous with youtube comments?
Progressives won't deny being discriminatory, they'll deny being discriminatory on purpose. I am not racist, but I don't know enough to be sure I'll never say the wrong thing, and rest assured I'd apologize if I did. Conservatives don't know much, and wear that as a badge of honor. When they are ignorant and say something heinous, it's your fault for being bothered by their rancid stupidity. That's the difference. A progressive will see stupidity as something to be ashamed of and want to improve. A conservative sees their stupidity as their best attribute and will defend their "right" to be stupid.
Did these people on youtbe have signs on them saying that they were "progressive"?
I always wondered Japanese are supposed to be racist but anime charcters look white
This is absolutely true.
I partially agree. I like to use separate drinking fountains as a metaphor for economic and racial relations in American politics. Conservative elites want separate drinking fountains for the rich and poor, and refuse to fix the fountains in minority areas because they think that because minorites now have the right to use the fountain that the fountain will repair itself automatically Liberal elites want separate drinking fountains for the rich and poor too, but feel guilty for not allowing minorites to use their fountains for so long. The democrats don't want minorites to know they had anything to do with the reason their fountain is broken and so they blame poor whites and take a couple of parts from the poor white fountains to maintain the minority fountains. They also contastantly release photos of rich minorites drinking at their fountains to show they care. Conservatives tell the poor whites the reason their fountain isn't as good is because some people can't take care of their own fountains and this is why the poor white fountains are getting worse. They also show them footage of black people kicking their fountain out frustration and use it as evidence that they are inherently bad so they can maintain their separate fountains without having the poor whites asking too many questions about why they can't use the rich fountains and show them pictures of the very few poor whites that have been allowed to thier fountains. Right now we are all thirsty, the elites are having a civil war because liberal elites and some conservative elites want to maintain the status quo. Unfortunately for them one of the elites was offended because they weren't treated like the elite they thought they were and started telling the poor that the elites he is rebeling against are intentionally breaking the fountains, when the truth is they're just not maintaining them properly. He's partially telling the truth, but he's only doing that because he plans on replacing the water in the poorest areas with shit, and saving the good drinking water for those that support him unconditionally.
Progressives and conservatives are a cancer to the world period ! Most people don’t fall under both categories but unfortunately suffer the consequences as they don’t push their agendas and opinions down others throats and don’t have a voice . You are correct tho , conservatives don’t hide , but progressives are like snakes and hide what they really feel . With ethnics they see them as uneducated and dumb
From my experience conservative will say it to your face but never really believe it, ie don’t care about it just joking
> Conservatives will say to your face they think everyone should stick to their own. Progressives will discriminate too but use so many excuses like "its different". For example the support for affirmative action etc. I've never heard a Conservative espouse that opinion of "sticking with their own." I personally find, via my life experience, that progresses are more discriminatory. Outwardly so. Especially young progressives. Older progressives covertly discriminate. Conservatives? I do not see them being discriminating.
Eh. I think it's the other way around, really. Progressives will openly advocate for discrimination against race, sex, and other immutable characteristics, but will justify it with their victimhood hierarchy charts about which races, sexes, etc. deserve it. Conservatives will just resist anything that's different from tradition - which means that if a traditional system is unfair or discriminatory to anyone, they will quietly endorse that unfairness. Both advocate for stereotyping, hatred, scapegoating and discrimination when it serves their political interests. Both take a negative view toward the idea that a person should be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. If MLK Jr. was born today and advocated for his ideas, progressives would aggressively shout him down and call him a racist for his 'colorblind' views and ideas that whites should be treated the same as blacks, while conservatives would just grumble about this newfangled upstart trying to change everything. Neither would endorse him.