71–80 of 316 posts
Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible. Guess which pole I’m at and tell me how I should meet the other pole in the middle.
Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible. Guess which pole I’m at and tell me how I should meet the other pole in the middle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They tried to change this in the UK. It eventually went to a public vote. The same guy that ran the Brexit campaign successfully convinced people that 'wasting' money on more democracy would lead to more dead babies and soldiers. Too many ironies there to list. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56435341.amp
Another reason why it lost was because a lot of proponents of PR saw it as a trap to get electoral reform off the agenda. Most people in the UK I know who supported PR voted against the change for that reason, and considered accepting it as part of the coalition agreements as a total betrayal by the Liberal Democrats.
I can imagine a large chunk of people were in the "would have preferred to vote for PR, but still voted Yes to AV" camp though.
One of the identity tricks that George W Bush used was being a yokel. The Democrats fell into the obvious trap of attacking his identity which immediately turned off tons of people. Then Bush kept going with identity politics. Like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_liberal
So then right after that, the democrats played the ultimate identity politics card with Obama. First black president! This is in context of Kanye West saying George W Bush doesn't care about black people during a hurricane for new orleans. Black identity was played hard.
The thing about identity politics is that it's not free. Bush's identity politics enabled and pushed the identity politics of Obama which created and enabled Trump. You'll notice that biden vs trump is old white dudes.
But more importantly, BLM for example seems like they are allied with Biden/Harris but who has so far done more for the black community? Trump. Biden and friends have passed and done nothing for BLM. Clinton described Trump’s supporters: “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it.
You might ask, when does it end? It really doesn't until something pretty big breaks it. Civil war? War with China? War with Canada? It will be something very bloody to stop this and reunite people.
It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…
Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible. Guess which pole I’m at and tell me how I should meet the other pole in the middle.
You inadvertently provide an excellent example of what is causing polarization in America: Highlight the worst possible examples from the side you oppose while assigning the most charitable intentions to the side you support.
Where was a single Democrat who stormed the Virginia capital when Republicans won the Governorship?
2 Republicans in Congress voted for an investigation of the insurrections, so there you go: charity.
Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible. Guess which pole I’m at and tell me how I should meet the other pole in the middle.
Yes, you seem to define the problem well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.
> why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading There's a loneliness epidemic (even before the *-demic words became used for something else...), my theory is that lonely people were looking for a tribe to feel a sense of belonging and found political tribes to be one. It also seems to me people take a lot of political positions not because they believe it, but because "the other side" takes the opposing view. Anyt…
It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…
It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…
I doubt that element of linguistics has any real importance. In Romance languages you'd say « I'm a left/right winger », « I'm a socialist » etc. and the social culture is very much less radicalized than in the US in that respect. Politics was a normal subject of conversation at the family table when I was a kid, and it's a normal one at the bar as an adult. If anything the inability to be able to talk about politics is taken as a sign of immaturity or poor education.
This being said, I do think your original point about identity stands and touches upon the core of the issue.