American Cultural Revolution

[MWBATL]

I am curious for some feedback from our liberal friends on this board.

A Chinese woman who emigrated to Canada to escape the ravages of the Cultural Revolution in China has written an article in the Wall Street Journal which compares that experience to what she sees happening now in North America...specifically the ongoing and increasing effort from the left to drum conservatives out of their jobs and professions because of their conservative stands. The examples such as Google having to shut down an advisory council after only one week simply because they appointed a conservative as a member, to efforts to get media pundits removed from the air, to trying to get anyone who served in the Trump Administration blacklisted (and the list goes on and on) convincingly persuade me that the hatred and intolerance of the left is now crossing lines of political disagreement into genuine Cultural Revolution territory, which costs people their livelihoods and seeks to eliminate opposition rather than tolerate diversity of opinion.

So, my question to the left is....do you approve of these actions? Is this a lunatic fringe on the left which is simply getting played up by conservative media to stoke the divisions amonsgt us, or is this a genuine movement which we should all fear? Do you support or oppose these actions by these groups on the left?

I genuinely would like to listen to your views on the liberal side of things...

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Your thoughts are a big reason the Mayor from South Bend is on the radar. He’s gay, but he eats at Chick-Fil-A and isn’t condescending to Christians or people that think differently than them.

With the advent of social media, the left has (unintentionally I think) gone full fascism. They see that they can bully people away they don’t agree with. It’s really ridiculous, and it comes from a weird place. I had a discussion with one of my more Liberal friends last week about climate change. I said “Why can’t I mostly agree with you on the science, but disagree with you on the public policy?” He really got it at that point. There’s this blind spot with a lot of them (in my opinion) that someone must agree with them on public policy, or else they’re denying the data or science. I can also want to reduce poverty, increase access to healthcare, but by getting there a different way. That does not compute with many of them. If you disagree with their policies, you’re evil. And someone who is evil should be bullied and driven from the public square.

 

[MidtownJacket]

Building further on this, I read a great article a few years ago on the Atlantic that proved to be fairly prescient : https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/

Both sides have broken down into fear-mongering and an "Us versus the Rest" mentality that affords no middle ground for compromise. We saw the same thing happen on the right with the advent of the tea party. The Left is experiencing it's own subversion now.

I think this all leads to a third party candidate becoming a reality in the next 5 - 10 years.

Your thoughts are a big reason the Mayor from South Bend is on the radar. He’s gay, but he eats at Chick-Fil-A and isn’t condescending to Christians or people that think differently than them.

With the advent of social media, the left has (unintentionally I think) gone full fascism. They see that they can bully people away they don’t agree with. It’s really ridiculous, and it comes from a weird place. I had a discussion with one of my more Liberal friends last week about climate change. I said “Why can’t I mostly agree with you on the science, but disagree with you on the public policy?” He really got it at that point. There’s this blind spot with a lot of them (in my opinion) that someone must agree with them on public policy, or else they’re denying the data or science. I can also want to reduce poverty, increase access to healthcare, but by getting there a different way. That does not compute with many of them. If you disagree with their policies, you’re evil. And someone who is evil should be bullied and driven from the public square.

 

[grandpa jacket]

Building further on this, I read a great article a few years ago on the Atlantic that proved to be fairly prescient : https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/

Both sides have broken down into fear-mongering and an "Us versus the Rest" mentality that affords no middle ground for compromise. We saw the same thing happen on the right with the advent of the tea party. The Left is experiencing it's own subversion now.

I think this all leads to a third party candidate becoming a reality in the next 5 - 10 years.

You are correct the tribalism is on both sides and it is going to get worse. The fear mongering and race baiting lies right at the feet of our current Prez.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I think this all leads to a third party candidate becoming a reality in the next 5 - 10 years.

One can only hope. If both parties disappeared tomorrow, I wouldn’t shed a tear.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

You are correct the tribalism is on both sides and it is going to get worse. The fear mongering and race baiting lies right at the feet of our current Prez.

That reminds me of another thing the left does - “RACIST!”

 

[Lotta Booze]

I am curious for some feedback from our liberal friends on this board.

A Chinese woman who emigrated to Canada to escape the ravages of the Cultural Revolution in China has written an article in the Wall Street Journal which compares that experience to what she sees happening now in North America...specifically the ongoing and increasing effort from the left to drum conservatives out of their jobs and professions because of their conservative stands. The examples such as Google having to shut down an advisory council after only one week simply because they appointed a conservative as a member, to efforts to get media pundits removed from the air, to trying to get anyone who served in the Trump Administration blacklisted (and the list goes on and on) convincingly persuade me that the hatred and intolerance of the left is now crossing lines of political disagreement into genuine Cultural Revolution territory, which costs people their livelihoods and seeks to eliminate opposition rather than tolerate diversity of opinion.

So, my question to the left is....do you approve of these actions? Is this a lunatic fringe on the left which is simply getting played up by conservative media to stoke the divisions amonsgt us, or is this a genuine movement which we should all fear? Do you support or oppose these actions by these groups on the left?

I genuinely would like to listen to your views on the liberal side of things...

In general I think it's exaggerated but in order to exaggerate something there has to be some truth in there as well. I find myself shaking my head and being frustrated with new/headlines/rhetoric I see online involving some radical leftists trying to police language or wield online outrage groups against their enemies. But then I have to remind myself that so much of it is just online and in my real life, day to day, I don't encounter anything near what is seen online. I run in some pretty liberal circles and believe it or not find a lot of common ground amongst other liberals with finding these actions extreme.

I think there is a lot of "virtue signaling" that people do to try and show how "woke" they are. People seem to be trying to score some social justice points if they can find things that are problematic with....virtually everything. Some of these arguments are more valid than others. Some things are problematic and warrant discussion/adjustment/condemnation if needed but many take it to an extreme and only view the world through that filter.

 

[Lotta Booze]

Your thoughts are a big reason the Mayor from South Bend is on the radar. He’s gay, but he eats at Chick-Fil-A and isn’t condescending to Christians or people that think differently than them.

With the advent of social media, the left has (unintentionally I think) gone full fascism. They see that they can bully people away they don’t agree with. It’s really ridiculous, and it comes from a weird place. I had a discussion with one of my more Liberal friends last week about climate change. I said “Why can’t I mostly agree with you on the science, but disagree with you on the public policy?” He really got it at that point. There’s this blind spot with a lot of them (in my opinion) that someone must agree with them on public policy, or else they’re denying the data or science. I can also want to reduce poverty, increase access to healthcare, but by getting there a different way. That does not compute with many of them. If you disagree with their policies, you’re evil. And someone who is evil should be bullied and driven from the public square.

From my experience it seems that this is the exception rather than the rule. Specifically with climate change at least. I think many on the right refuse to agree on the science and that's where a lot of the problem lies. Many take the view that "If the earth is getting warmer then it's not due to human activity", which is not a rational position to hold. That is the large hurdle that needs to be overcome in order to discuss policy on how to treat it. But the 2 sides can't seem to agree on the problem. That's step 1. Then you can discuss policy. I am curious to hear what your policy recommendations would be though.

As for healthcare and reducing poverty I'd really like to hear some good plans from the right because I haven't heard any. Trump ran on repealing and replacing Obamacare and has failed to do so. He recently started talking about it again but is punting until after the election. And reducing poverty? Definitely haven't heard any policy whatsoever from the right other than maybe some vague "rising tides lift all boats" rhetoric. I'm open to listening to policy to address problems but I don't hear anything serious thus far. Mostly just "LESS REGULATION!" applied to everything.

 

[Lotta Booze]

Building further on this, I read a great article a few years ago on the Atlantic that proved to be fairly prescient : https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/

Both sides have broken down into fear-mongering and an "Us versus the Rest" mentality that affords no middle ground for compromise. We saw the same thing happen on the right with the advent of the tea party. The Left is experiencing it's own subversion now.

I think this all leads to a third party candidate becoming a reality in the next 5 - 10 years.

I'd love the 2 party system to go by the wayside but until our voting procedures are changed I don't see a serious 3rd party happening any time soon.

 

[Technut1990]

You are correct the tribalism is on both sides and it is going to get worse. The fear mongering and race baiting lies right at the feet of our current Prez.

Statements like this absolutely and intentionally ignore the last 50 years of our history, Race has always played a roll in our nations politics, in the workplace, politics and society in general. Placing it at Trumps feet is laughable, everything that is done in this country has a liberal racial litmus test applied to it and has for a long time

 

[smathis30]

I'd love the 2 party system to go by the wayside but until our voting procedures are changed I don't see a serious 3rd party happening any time soon.

Not until ranked choice will this change

 

[Deleted member 2897]

From my experience it seems that this is the exception rather than the rule. Specifically with climate change at least. I think many on the right refuse to agree on the science and that's where a lot of the problem lies. Many take the view that "If the earth is getting warmer then it's not due to human activity", which is not a rational position to hold. That is the large hurdle that needs to be overcome in order to discuss policy on how to treat it. But the 2 sides can't seem to agree on the problem. That's step 1. Then you can discuss policy. I am curious to hear what your policy recommendations would be though.

As for healthcare and reducing poverty I'd really like to hear some good plans from the right because I haven't heard any. Trump ran on repealing and replacing Obamacare and has failed to do so. He recently started talking about it again but is punting until after the election. And reducing poverty? Definitely haven't heard any policy whatsoever from the right other than maybe some vague "rising tides lift all boats" rhetoric. I'm open to listening to policy to address problems but I don't hear anything serious thus far. Mostly just "LESS REGULATION!" applied to everything.

I forgot when I posted to add the caveat that many people on the right deserve the scorn they get on some of these issues because of their behavior.

Whaat I see the most is the people on the right are criticized because they don't agree TO THE SAME DEGREE on what the science says as the left. For example, I don't know anybody who thinks climate change is fake, that humans aren't polluting the planet. Where I see the disagreement is the interpretation of it - for example, the IPCC says that if we all instituted the changes they recommend, that we'd see a 0.2 degree reduction in temperatures. Well in my opinion, I don't think its worth taking on all the economic risk of those recommendations if all we think we're going to get is 0.2 degrees. Most of the scientists dramatically bias their own work for political purposes, which damages their credibility. How many times have you read about how much economic impact a hurricane had - Hurricane Michael was $25B - oh and how terrible and much more damage storms are doing now, blah blah blah. Well no big storm had hit that area in several decades. Not only was there 30x more housing built up there, but real estate values had grown by 30x as well. But including that context doesn't suit their purposes.

Anyway, so thats a big part of it.

On healthcare, part of the reason our system is so bad is because of how much the government has messed everything up. Jobs and regulation are important because they have a much higher correlation to successful outcomes on health insurance coverage than anything else. What has the ACA gotten us? Its helped what - 10 million people get on Medicaid? Have you googled "Medicaid Health Outcomes"? There are studies that show health outcomes are WORSE on Medicaid than having no insurance. There are others that show no difference. So yea, count me has not wanting to make healthcare worse for people.

So here is the thing - this entire conversation is great and healthy right? We have our own opinions, point to facts, and respect each other. Neither one of us are trying to bully the other out of existence because your policy preferences are different than mine. And that's the way it should be.

 

[Lotta Booze]

I forgot when I posted to add the caveat that many people on the right deserve the scorn they get on some of these issues because of their behavior.

Whaat I see the most is the people on the right are criticized because they don't agree TO THE SAME DEGREE on what the science says as the left. For example, I don't know anybody who thinks climate change is fake, that humans aren't polluting the planet. Where I see the disagreement is the interpretation of it - for example, the IPCC says that if we all instituted the changes they recommend, that we'd see a 0.2 degree reduction in temperatures. Well in my opinion, I don't think its worth taking on all the economic risk of those recommendations if all we think we're going to get is 0.2 degrees. Most of the scientists dramatically bias their own work for political purposes, which damages their credibility. How many times have you read about how much economic impact a hurricane had - Hurricane Michael was $25B - oh and how terrible and much more damage storms are doing now, blah blah blah. Well no big storm had hit that area in several decades. Not only was there 30x more housing built up there, but real estate values had grown by 30x as well. But including that context doesn't suit their purposes.

Anyway, so thats a big part of it.

I see that point and I think it's important to be clear what the possible outcomes are. A comparison of a 0.2 degree reduction in temperatures vs. continuing with the status quo doesn't seem like it's worth the risk but I don't think maintaining the status quo is the outcome we'll have by not taking action. Taking no action will likely lead to further increased temperatures and the consequences that come with that. So it could be a choice between 0.2 temp reduction vs. 2 degree increase temperature and the consequences that come with that.

On healthcare, part of the reason our system is so bad is because of how much the government has messed everything up. Jobs and regulation are important because they have a much higher correlation to successful outcomes on health insurance coverage than anything else. What has the ACA gotten us? Its helped what - 10 million people get on Medicaid? Have you googled "Medicaid Health Outcomes"? There are studies that show health outcomes are WORSE on Medicaid than having no insurance. There are others that show no difference. So yea, count me has not wanting to make healthcare worse for people.

So here is the thing - this entire conversation is great and healthy right? We have our own opinions, point to facts, and respect each other. Neither one of us are trying to bully the other out of existence because your policy preferences are different than mine. And that's the way it should be.

Hooray for discourse!

 

[MWBATL]

First let me thank those on the left who have responded in this thread. It generally gives me much more hope than when I started this thread. Even though I may not agree, I have not heard (seen) the extremism some media portrays, and I am delighted by that.

Thanks to all contributors, left and right, for discourse!

 

[Deleted member 2897]

First let me thank those on the left who have responded in this thread. It generally gives me much more hope than when I started this thread. Even though I may not agree, I have not heard (seen) the extremism some media portrays, and I am delighted by that.

Thanks to all contributors, left and right, for discourse!

Reminds me of my German Calculus TA at Tech: “You will fail discourse.”

 

[WreckinGT]

Building further on this, I read a great article a few years ago on the Atlantic that proved to be fairly prescient : https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/

Both sides have broken down into fear-mongering and an "Us versus the Rest" mentality that affords no middle ground for compromise. We saw the same thing happen on the right with the advent of the tea party. The Left is experiencing it's own subversion now.

I think this all leads to a third party candidate becoming a reality in the next 5 - 10 years.

I agree with most of this, except the third party candidate. Our country is pretty well setup to prevent a legitimate third party from ever happening. With a two party system and the rise of social media the divide is just going to continue to grow. The Democrats are currently moving further to the left just like the Tea Party movement moved Republicans to the right. After Democrats take control again, another Republican uprising will occur pushing them even further to the right, followed by another Liberal uprising pushing them further to the left. The days of either party moving back towards the center are long gone. We aren't headed for anything resembling a cultural evolution but we are headed for an environment where we can literally do nothing to progress as a nation and will lose ground on the world stage. Strong hatred will remain on both sides but I'm not sure that has any affect on anything other than boosting cable TV ratings.

 

[MWBATL]

I agree with most of this, except the third party candidate. Our country is pretty well setup to prevent a legitimate third party from ever happening. With a two party system and the rise of social media the divide is just going to continue to grow. The Democrats are currently moving further to the left just like the Tea Party movement moved Republicans to the right. After Democrats take control again, another Republican uprising will occur pushing them even further to the right, followed by another Liberal uprising pushing them further to the left. The days of either party moving back towards the center are long gone. We aren't headed for anything resembling a cultural evolution but we are headed for an environment where we can literally do nothing to progress as a nation and will lose ground on the world stage. Strong hatred will remain on both sides but I'm not sure that has any affect on anything other than boosting cable TV ratings.

Wow, this thread has even found a way for me to agree 100% with @WreckinGT !

You couldn’t be more correct, imho. If there is anything that will cause Pubs and Dems to unite, it would be a third party candidate.

Now, where’s that “high five” emoji?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Wow, this thread has even found a way for me to agree 100% with @WreckinGT !

You couldn’t be more correct, imho. If there is anything that will cause Pubs and Dems to unite, it would be a third party candidate.

Now, where’s that “high five” emoji?

Well part of the problem is that socialism has gone mainstream. Everything that is the complete antithesis of the founding principles of our country now inhabits most of the Democrat candidates. When you have 1 party that advocates for everything this country was founded to escape, you’re going to have conflict.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Well part of the problem is that socialism has gone mainstream. Everything that is the complete antithesis of the founding principles of our country now inhabits most of the Democrat candidates. When you have 1 party that advocates for everything this country was founded to escape, you’re going to have conflict.

When you seize and amass vast quantities of people’s money you have government sponsored graft & corruption leading to insurrections. When you steal people’s freedom and subjugate the population it leads to mass uprisings. In the face of lawlessness you have chaos and that foments rebellions.

Elites like to think people today are enlightened, but so did those hundreds of years ago comparing themselves to generations preceding them. Not much has changed in 200 years.

Our great Republic was founded by men who pledged their lives, fortunes and their sacred honor to confront the abuses of power of a government that did not represent them nor provide protection of their liberties endowed by their creator. It may not happen again in my lifetime but there will likely come again a time when another group of Patriots will need to carry on their legacy. God Bless America and protect her from the evil forces trying to destroy our great nation from within.

 

[Lotta Booze]

Well part of the problem is that socialism has gone mainstream. Everything that is the complete antithesis of the founding principles of our country now inhabits most of the Democrat candidates. When you have 1 party that advocates for everything this country was founded to escape, you’re going to have conflict.

Since we are in a thread championing discourse, question: Is this referencing single payer healthcare? That seems to be the common thread between candidates you're alluding to that would be deemed socialist by some. If so, how is that limiting freedom and the antithesis off the principles of the country?