So which of the policies should we engage with? Covid denial? Lock up Hillary? Keep seperating the kids from immigrants parents, allow trump to be president every other weekend? Perhaps making sure the bottom section of society shares in the gains of the top, and stopping fox news from lying about factual things would be a start to fixing things. But I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be viewed positively by them. It's a definite pickle isn't it. They're voting for the very things that have made them angry in the first place.
It is a pickle, but I feel that it is one worth trying to work out. What are our other choices? Ignoring, or sneering at, people who support them hasn't been working out too well.
But if you engage with them on their own terms, your just shifting the overton window in their direction, I think social media definitely hasn't helped the polarisation, perhaps getting something done about their eco chamber algorithms, as well as increase funding for education is one way to step away from the brink, the issue is, for the UK at least, the people who benefit from the situation, are the people still in charge.
The anti-Trump media aren't blameless. They profited from the sensational dross Trump was dishing out too. Trump controlled the media narrative, positive and negative. I haven't seen any attempt at a decent counter-narrative. It doesn't have to be on their terms, but it does have to be framed in a way that will get them to listen. I don't think there is sufficient incentive to produce critically-thinking citizens in a consumer society, outside of academia. Dumb people are easier to fleece. As long as media is profit-driven, it will aim at the lowest common denominator, and the owners will set the message. These seem natural consequences of our socioeconomic systems to me.
Well in all fairness, he sneers at all Americans, not just the MAGA ones (I'm a lifelong Democrat and diehard Kamala Harris fan)
That's a little unfair, I've been very clear about what I've said and haven't said even when you've widely misrepresented my statements, to the extent we had to consult the dictionary. But if that's what you feel that's what you feel. And I apologise if your feeling are hurt.
NPR are pretty good, but to be fair trump is that bad It got to the point where reporting the actual facts without spin got called out as being anti American, I wonder if the level of individualistic nationalism /patriotism that already exists in america made it easier or harder to tip some sections of the population over into the authoritarian nationalism you see on OAN / FOX etc. You can see it starting to occur here with brexit obviously, and Priti Patel's et als statements already.
NPR aren't profitable! NPR and the BBC are good examples of my point - public funding and donations lead to better journalism. And I wasn't talking about being accused of anti-Americanism or whatever, but the constant soap opera level of insider stories, all revolving around Trump's personality and relationships with his inner circle, rather than concentrating on the effects of policies of the administration as a whole.
Clickbait media makes money, thats the unfortunate reality of the situation. Perhaps a funding increase to PBS, and the curtailment of social media to spread obvious lies would help, but then again "freeze peach" grifters wouldn't like that! Republicans Can’t Believe Democrats Don’t Want to Work With Them Just Because of the Guns and the Death Threats and the Crackpot Conspiracy Theories Talking of social media, this just popped up on MySpace..... It's a good counter point, at what point do the other side need to also start taking responsibility for their actions. It also includes my new favourite conspiracy theory, the Jewish space lasers! GOP Congresswoman Blamed Wildfires on Secret Jewish Space Laser " REPUBLICANS CAN’T BELIEVE DEMOCRATS DON’T WANT TO WORK WITH THEM JUST BECAUSE OF THE GUNS AND THE DEATH THREATS AND THE CRACKPOT CONSPIRACY THEORIES"
I think you're "clear" on what you've said according to you and your ilk, not that you're "clear" using means of discussion normal people use. You know, the ones whose entire method of discussion isn't pointing the blame at other people you don't like, isn't full of "I don't know how we can go on from here with these heathens" lines of reasoning, and aim to be constructive and not "oh woe are we."
One of the most amusing things I find in discussions about Nationalism is how many people are against it, as if they are above it and it's a scourge on society. It is, it truly is for all of humanity but it's part of our growth and evolution as a species, clearly. I know, however, that there's a 99% chance that every person claiming to be against it, would be right on board with it as soon as it becomes safer and more convenient. I would go to 99.9% sure they would be die hard nationalists if somebody from another country came in and murdered their family in front of them. There are emotional wounds most people will never have the skillset to overcome, no matter how reasonable a person is. It's the certainty in which political/ideological enemies talk about each other and how evil or unreasonable the other side that is truly disgusting. You're not a saint. Your beliefs aren't right by default. We don't even have a grasp on what "reality" is to be honest, so throwing around the word with some kind of certainty in this day and age where we're changing the idea of God into Simulation Theory while thinking there's a difference between the two is amusing at best. We're in dangerous times. We're also in times where people are developing technology that merges with biological systems like Neurolink and are developing quantum computers. Who the hell knows man, we might be like the Kree and just download all our collective consciousnesses together in the comic books, and that a big talking head run things. We should call it Zordon.
The relativism goes deeper than that. Most English people who are ashamed of English nationalism have no problem with Welsh or Scottish nationalism. It's okay for underdogs to have national pride, but not oppressors. That makes sense to some people (generally more educated ones), but to others they can't look at their own nation any more objectively than they could the football team they support. That is down in part to tribalism and part propaganda. I think part of the culture war against academia is a reaction against looking objectively at our society and history, which usually runs counter to nationalistic narratives. You know; those communist professors are brainwashing our kids not to love our country.
I'm sorry you also have hurt feelings, you ex army arnt you? As someone who is ex forces, how do you feel about the insurection and the people who politically back them? How do you think the country should deal with them? Can you unify with people who want to overthrow the government via force without increasing the risk it will happen?
It's a bit like racism in that regard, black nationalism isn't viewed the same as white nationalism, and wierdly there's a big move in the right to view all race based identity politics as bad, which then leads it on to accepting class based politics as the only real politics, which would make Marx quite happy.
That's actually a damn fine point, nationalism is always subjective, it can't be objective, because objectively every country is a work in progress, and despite what people are lead to believe, even in the best countries in the world, theirs a lot that could be better. I don't think nationalism it always bad, it's good to have pride in your community, and to want to better the place you live, but it is bad if it ends up with countries losing their objectivity, and /or treating other countries worse because they view themselves as being exceptional. Look at the British empire, we did a lot of bad things to a lot of the world, but people in the UK who are on the right, tend to be more nationalistic, and also not want to know more about the bad things our country did, and conversely the left wingers can sometimes not acknowledge the good things empire brought, and the good characters such as Churchill did, which then upsets the right wingers. I would argue it's more patriotic to know the real objective history of your own country, good and bad, then it is to believe a parody airbrushed version of your history.
Navy, not army. The right's culture war is identity politics masquerading as a fight against identity politics. It's political theatre designed to keep people supporting policies that don't benefit them. Keep the peasants fighting over the crumbs while those in power keep the cake.
Problem = cognitive biases. Which we ALL suffer from. One of those biases = The illusion of Asymmetric Insight.
Sorry your ex navy or ero sennin is ex navy? Yep I totally agree, but to win the culture war, we need to use narratives that negate the rights. It's also not untrue that some racial differences in equality are also income related inequalities, complex narratives are never as accepted as simple ones though.
Good article, thanks, it's actually the opposite of what I misremembered about it. Illusion of asymmetric insight - Wikipedia
