Sotuanduso @ Sotuanduso @lemm.ee

Posts

2

Comments

1,122

Joined

2 yr. ago

Dear Dark Brandon,

Not memes.

Sincerely,
Sotuanduso

Yeah, you're right. We are all victims, the people in power too. And most of us involved in politics are aggressors, and are to blame for it. I try my best not to be, because I'm a disciple of love, and my real enemy is hatred, of which political hatred seems to be the most prevalent these days. I still push back against other forms of hatred when I run into them, to be clear.

It's not a game of survival against aggressors, or at least not nearly as much as it seems to be. The propaganda tells you conservatives want to kill minorities, but most of them (discounting the leaders and the crazies) wouldn't dream of it. A lot of them are conservatives mostly because the propaganda tells them that liberals want to kill babies.

The actual minority-haters do fall into the conservative bucket, yes, but that's because it's the closest bucket to their position. The leaders take advantage of it to boost their numbers, but I don't think it's exactly fair to blame the rest of them for it when there are only two buckets.

Most conservatives are people with souls and morals if you'll get to know them. You don't have to cave to their position, I'm just asking you to put aside your differences and try to understand them. If you try to understand one and learn that they're a disciple of hatred trying to slowly drag the world back to the 1700s so they can own slaves, that's a yike, but don't paint the rest of them with that same brush until you've taken a fair sampling.

I thought it was the conservative Christians who hate MTG...

This, minus that last sentence.

Not memes.

I'm involved in a few projects that are organized over private Discord servers. No mod abuse or Nazis involved.

Pal, buddy, why are you bringing such politics into this?

At a certain point, a useful idiot still becomes an enemy combatant.

Perhaps, but since this is a war of manipulation, you always have to consider: are you fighting those responsible for turning us against each other, or are you fighting who they want you to fight?

I'm not saying to let the cops off the hook. That depends on the answer to the question. I'm speaking more generally here.

The elites are cultivating an us vs them culture, but the cops aren't masterminding it.

I do like sugar more than chocolate, and I do like vinegar more than cucumbers.

The other guy said men can't have man-only spaces, referring to Boy Scouts in contrast to Girl Scouts, and you said that Boy Scouts isn't supposed to be a safe space to explore gender identity or emotions. If Girl Scouts isn't that kind of thing either, then that sounds like you think men only get to have that kind of man-only space, while women can have whatever.

As a man, if the only man-only spaces available were about gender identity or emotions, I'd probably go to neither. The former because I'm fully comfortable as a man (and the use of the term "gender identity" there implies it's more for trans people,) and the latter because I don't have significant issues with my emotions. Frankly, I don't really mind that most of the clubs and events that interest me are co-ed, but if there was a recurring women-only Minecraft party or something and there was never one for men, I'd be upset about that.

Wish we had some of these fun bots on Lemmy.

For the record, I'm not a conservative. I just did some research and drew on personal experience from interacting with them.

In general principle, conservatism is resistance to change, which has its place when some liberals want change that isn't actually a good thing.

They tend to be small-government, in favor of low-tax low-spending economic policies that, while they don't help much with the class problems we're facing, do make commonfolk feel less robbed by the government. Whose bright idea was it to put "this is how much you'd make without taxes" on the paychecks anyways? If you ask me, you should get paid the negotiated salary and then taxes are an extra expense on top of that.

Conservatives often concern themselves with the national debt, which I don't often hear talked about on the left. It's kinda like how the left cares about global warming which the right often ignores. If it goes too far out of control, it could hit a breaking point, and both sides will tell you their respective issue is already out of control and the breaking point isn't too far off.

They like the first amendment. I know liberals often do too, but conservatives are stronger supporters of it. It lets hate speech through, but it also helps to prevent 1984.

They like the second amendment. Yeehaw, guns, which are responsible for a lot of big-headline crises these days. But the reason they support the right to bear arms is so that we can have a revolution if the government goes too far. I'm almost surprised liberals aren't the pro-gun party with all the eat-the-rich rhetoric.

Where liberals went ACAB, conservatives supported the police. Yes, the police system has major issues that need a rework, but if everyone went ACAB when it began, there would be a crime spree while we struggle to come up with a new system that isn't just going to have the same issues again.

While liberals are on the forefront of making things better for marginalized minorities, conservatives focus on making sure majorities aren't left behind. When it isn't straight-up fighting liberals' efforts for equality, that is. The most prominent of these that comes to mind is Affirmative Action, especially in college admissions, which didn't just make it easier for most minorities to make it into college. It also made it harder for white and asian students to get in.

And lastly, conservatives, being the enemy of liberals, are going to think more critically about any liberal policies or messages. If they can help it, they're not going to let you be blinded by your ideals into pushing a law that's actually going to cause major problems, nor be whipped up into a frenzy by a story that manipulates the facts. Since they already consider you enemies, they're in a position to make this kind of criticism much more freely, because they don't feel the threat of being alienated by their party for going against the narrative. And you do the same for them. It's a shame the rebuttals have such a hard time crossing the gap, though.

Is that the goal of girl scouts, though?

Chocolate milk does not sound like a good jam to go in a sandwich.

I thought so at first until I saw the reflections.

At some point between conception and birth, range inclusive.

I don't know. I'm not an expert, and the only experience I had with it was before I can remember.

They do think abortion is killing babies, just unborn babies. That's what half the argument comes down to. One side thinks it's "should it be legal to kill unborn babies?" and the other side thinks it's "should it be legal to end your pregnancy before it's a baby?" And it's hard to find a middle ground because the former thinks they're babies as soon as they're conceived and the latter thinks it's a good way later down the road.

Hold your arm out like you're summoning the bird.

Okay. That wasn't really what I was talking about, but carry on. I'm not stepping in to defend a misunderstanding of the Bible.