slug.com slug.com

13 3

Sorry I don't have the eloquent intellectual words to describe it.

But when did the conversation change in politics to where 'If you don't agree with me, I hate you and want you dead.' ?

militantMom 6 Mar 11
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

13 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Democrats want to be in power. There had been a trend towards Republicans, particularly with state legislatures and governorships. They thought they would maintain power at the executive level.
The legacy media sells a majority of its content in largely Democrat urban areas.
Put these two forces together and what happens. We end up with a parroting echo chamber of misinformation, slanted news, false narratives, cherry picked data, less context in stories, mangling of opponents motives, political virtue signaling, identity group/class warfare, falatious argumentation, double standards, economic illiteracy, etc. The Democrat party is now filled with brainwashed voters who have bought into a massive laberenth of false narrative within an extrodinary virtual reality.
Universities are indoctrinating students with a one-sided, context-lacking history of the United States. Politicians, the media, and universities have convinced an entire generation of students that differences in life outcomes for people are caused by the hierarchical and unjust aspects particular to American society—not by choices people make and by the simply fact that people are different and “results may vary.”
Republican voters are pissed because the stereotyping, presumptuousness, political intolerance, and arrogance of so many who vote Democrat—including 9 out of 10 “journalists”.
Racism is being vastly overstated for political gain. I’m still trying to find one genuinely racist thing Trump has done.
We welcome one million legal new immigrants a year but too many advocate for effectively open borders. Democrat politicians cynically want only new voters. But a nation state is obligated to control its immigration to the benefit of immigrant AND citizen. Downward wage pressure for our most vulnerable workers, the huge net costs of illegal aliens, and the negative impact on the number of legal immigrants we have capacity for are major problems. Yet when we attempt to express this we’re called xenophobic, which feels a little ironic when we’re hanging out with our Hispanic friends.
We wonder—what happened to “content of character” and “equal opportunity”? Now it’s easy to feel like Democrats, activists, and the legacy media want to stack the deck of the meritocracy and mandate equal results.
Democrats talk about Social Democracy without understanding a wit about how it’s applied in Scandinavia. A few years ago The Economists featured an outstanding examination of Socialism in these countries. Find it, read it, and understand why it could never work here.
Well, there are just a few reasons everyone is so pissed and why we are already in a low level civil war. Democrats continue to attemp a coup on the president—even after the Deep State has failed.
Meanwhile real problems go unsolved. Generational poverty, national debt, repairing finances of unsustainable programs like Social Security and Medicare, a dysfunctional and failing public education system, and the need for the right market mechanisms to insure that the 15 percent of the population who doesn’t have access to the best medical care in the world the other 85 percent have can get it.
Progress has been made. Tax reform and a backing off of hyper-regulation regimes resulted in the best employment and worker participation numbers in many years—particularly for minorities. We’ve been super tough on Russia (Ironic!) and are making a genuine effort for peace on the Korean Peninsula. Fewer people are using food stamps because they have jobs.
But all this gets mischaracterized or ignored because it doesn’t fit the false narratives required for Democrats to return to power.

0

Politics actually affects peoples lives. If you're voting for a party that wants dismantle the welfare state, that is going seriously harm a lot of people. It's not just an abstract debate about how we would hypothetically make a better world. It makes sense that people are angry.

If you're asking why people are specifically angry now, it's because the last 10 years of politics have put a lot of people in a very precarious position. Bailing out the banks financially ruined the entire working class. People are stressed.

No, it doesn't make sense. Debate is how we got these programs in the first place. If you believe strongly in something, like you do about welfare, get informed, and help others who are being misled, to understand it's importance

@GerryBeaudoin Some social progress has been made through debate. Some has been made through protests and riots. Both are valid forms of participating in democracy.

I never said that anger is a good rhetorical tactic, just that it's an understandable reaction to the last few years of politics.

0

It worsened when Trump got elected. It showed the powers that be, (Main stream media, "MSM" Oligarchs, and the Military industrial complex) that people are becoming "woke" their bs policies, and unneccesary wars.
Trump is an unknown phenomenon. An un-politician. Doesn't need their . Does want end wars, but doesn't know how go about it.

All of this then, gets media attention, which translates those who only understand the former life of statism. Mimetic behavior follows then. Mimetic contagion, (mob mentality) "duplication" spreads.

We seen it as early as the tearing down of statues. It didn't matter who or what the statue was, just as long as the mob feeding frenzy spreads, the MSM powers spread.

Do a comparison between Fox's Tucker Carlson and anyone on CNN. There is no semblance whatsoever. The left wallow in their drool. That then translates out their viewership, those that must have victim statist.

1

Since postmodernism began. It has critiques the Western motif of the "logos" which is central part of reasoning and rationality, and without that then there simply is no debate..

1

Politics has always been like this..... however..... social media has created a feeding frenzy for the fringes and using group psychology and hypnotic principles have brainwashed a generation and you were there watching and didn't realize it .... or you did realize it and wonder how to change it....

politics was not always like this. people could disagree publically and not get branded racist-bigoted-Xphobe. such thinking existed on the fringes ... now it is a mainstream feature of the left

1

Because two sides hate each other...it's as simple as sunshine.

It's not all about hate. I don't hate people who hold contrary opinions.

3

About a minute after "participation trophies" became mandatory in children's sports.

0

Or impeached, banned from social media, off my plane and falsely accused of rape.

2

About twenty or so years ago when progressive politics started to gain traction...

Actually, when regressive leftists started claiming that their policies were "progressive".

2

I would say it's an ad hominem argument, where political discourse descends into personal insults, or I have found that when people are more interested in feelings, and look to distort facts to fit their narrative, you find that they normally go down this road of just trying to argue that you're a terrible person.

People on the left are more likely to be utopian, and I have always found that there is a certain intolerance to utopian ism, because they generally believe they know better.

It's like when authoritarian or religious regimes believe ends justify the means. Because ultimately they feel they are doing the right thing.

3

It deteriorated rapidly lately, but it's been going on for a long time and has multiple causes. I think this video is a helpful discussion about how it happened on the universities. It's very long, but I hope you find it helpful to understand how they became closed off to free speech and true diversity of opinion.

Great discussion. Very informative.

0
3

Pretty sure it worsened greatly largely during the Obama administration---although it has been around forever. The Clintons and Ayers did it years ago. Part of the reason is the change in MSM(MainStream Media) since 2012 NDAA was passed. The Smith-Mundt Act of 1948--- which had made illegal the use of national media by US Gov (and Deep State) for propaganda and manipulation purposes on the American people-- was effectively repealed with the signature of Obama. All MSM is attempting indoctrination/propaganda with nearly every political and social article or program.

I wish this was the type of thing that was reported on, unless I completely missed it.

@Dcorm1 The 2012 NDAA was over 1000 pages. I'm reasonably sure none of our representatives even read it.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:22257
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.