United States Politics Thread 46

[Travis B.]

Let's take another similar slogan: "All Lives Matter". I don't think this was necessarily created by trolls, but definitely trolls took it and ran with it. Leftists "took the bait" (according to your analysis) by opposing this slogan[*]. And what, ultimately, has been the result? Did they come out worse for it?

I don't think they did. I rarely hear this slogan any more. I guess trolls have tired of it. But also a lot of those using it ignorantly because they didn't understand how it was problematic have had that explained to them and have stop using it as a result. This would never have happened if leftists had "just ignored it".

[*] Those I would argue that the ones who really took the bait were the centrists who ended up adopting it--something which also happened with "It's okay to be white".

About "All Lives Matter", I would say the difference is that it was an obvious negation of "Black Lives Matter". Opposing it was the right thing to do, because it specifically denied the all issues faced by Black people here in America which were summed up by "Black Lives Matter" - the statement essentially said that Black people in America did not face any issues different from any other Americans, something that is obviously untrue.

That said, I think "All Lives Matter" fizzled out precisely because it was such an obvious, and rhetorically empty, attempt to negate "Black Lives Matter" that the only people who would really use it would be the right themselves, yet it would have little propagandistic value in and of itself even for the right. The phrase has no meaningful content of its own outside of said negation.

Of course, you could say the same thing about "it's okay to be white", but the difference is that that is not an obvious negation of anything else, and its only really relevant in terms of those who are spreading the phrase. One can negate "All Lives Matter" specifically because it itself is an obvious negation of "Black Lives Matter" - doing so obviously does not mean that one believes that "No Lives Matter" (except to Cthulhu-worshippers) - but negating "it's okay to be white" is easily construed by certain kinds of people as saying "it's not okay to be white", which is precisely what the people using the phrase want to hear from you.

[zompist]

it's not that complicated. yes they are bad. bad bad. very bad. BAD. also, why people do the things they do is interesting, and "they do bad because they are bad" is not a good why. you seem to think i'm seeking to justifying them, or minimize the bad, or whatever: I'm not, I'm just asking further questions: why are they bad, why bad in this specific way, why at that time, why that particular species of bad, what made them do that bad, etc etc. to want to cease the inquiry at "they were bad" is valid, but, to some, not particularly interesting.

This is entirely strawmanning. "Bad" is your invention, "cease the inquiry" is your invention.

As for why they're this way, I don't think you've provided anything that actually helps-- frankly I think you chose the wrong example for the point you wanted to make. You possibly forgot what the gamergaters actually did, and remembered them as "just kind of mildly mad at leftist discourse" or something. Wouldn't you react the same way if I told you that the Pinochetistas were just a bunch of moderates who wanted to improve Chilean living standards? Or that, you know, they didn't hate the left, because they only imprisoned 0.3% of the population?

You can investigate why things like misogyny or pogroms or fascism exist. Lots of people have!

But you have to recognize these things for what they are first. You actually expressed this well yourself above!

I don't know, man. if "don't feed the trolls" is true then we better not think of fascists as trolls: if those guys are left -as indeed they too often are- to just build up their base of support, mobilize, campaign, and convince through their various histerics, lies and pipelines to recruit and recruit and organize and... I shudder to think what happens, but we all know it. even conceptually, "trolls", which to my mind prototypically mean something like "isolated people who enjoy being mean on the internet" I don't think includes "global movements for genocide".

Like, I'm all for suspending value judgements in order to dispassionately analyze and understand: but afterwards we mustn't forget to suspend the suspension and man the ramparts.

Gamergate was not a bunch of people like you were in the past, kinda upset with leftists. They were the workshop for QAnon, and 4chan and its offshoots these days are cheering on, or commiting, school shootings.

[Ares Land]

I've worked in tech for, oh god, 17 years now. One of the perks of the field (not) is having to work with the occasional gamergater lite.

To me it feels like there is a continuum from disgruntled, unhappy, sort of misogynist dudes to alt-rights insane trolls to full-on fascist organizing coups and shootings.

The kind of misogynist disgruntled devs I have to deal with are not going to start a coup or send deaths threats to women, of course. You kinda feel the kinship though.
Not gamergaters... but you hear some weird stuff over the coffee break.
They can be sort of hurtful in their own ways. Tech isn't generally very friendly to women. I noticed a trend of women quitting more than men; I don't know exactly what happened of course (but I have a pretty good idea.)

I'm not sure what motivates them, but I suspect resentment plays a part. They seem to be people who feel they don't have the station in life they deserve;

[Raphael]

I'm not sure what motivates them, but I suspect resentment plays a part. They seem to be people who feel they don't have the station in life they deserve;

I everything ok? It looks a bit as if you stopped writing your post in mid-sentence. Good post, BTW.

[Ares Land]

Everything's fine, it's just a typo

[Linguoboy]

To me it feels like there is a continuum from disgruntled, unhappy, sort of misogynist dudes to alt-rights insane trolls to full-on fascist organizing coups and shootings.

The kind of misogynist disgruntled devs I have to deal with are not going to start a coup or send deaths threats to women, of course.

I wish I had your same confidence here. Women get a lot of abuse (including death threats) online. It's not just a hundred dudes from the *chans who are responsible for it all.

I'm not sure what motivates them, but I suspect resentment plays a part. They seem to be people who feel they don't have the station in life they deserve;

I think the loss dominance is a HUGE driving force. As the adage goes, "When you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression." Mediocre white guys used to not have to compete with talented women or POC for jobs and status; now they do, and they're not happy about it. They could face up to their own mediocrity and either come to terms with it or push themselves harder, but for many it's far more inviting to buy into a narrative that women and POC are getting unfair advantages these days due to a nefarious "woke agenda" pushed by nebulous "elites". And there is no shortage of grifters out there willing to sell them that narrative, since of course it's lucrative for them. Joe Rogan is worth $120 million. Tucker Carlson is worth $420 million and reportedly makes $35 million a year shilling misinformation for Fox.

For me, the most depressing expression of this trend is seeing it ensnare other cis white gay men. We've lived with general acceptance long enough that we're forgetting what it was like to be truly marginalised and now all some of us can see is how we're not getting all the privileges we thought we would when antigay discrimination went away. Just this morning I was reading about Bob Kunst, a gay activist who was of historic importance in opposing Anita Bryant and her "Save Our Children" crusade in the 70s. He's now gone full-on MAGA, writing unhinged rants that with very few edits could have come anyone at a Trump rally.

[Ares Land]

To me it feels like there is a continuum from disgruntled, unhappy, sort of misogynist dudes to alt-rights insane trolls to full-on fascist organizing coups and shootings.

The kind of misogynist disgruntled devs I have to deal with are not going to start a coup or send deaths threats to women, of course.

I wish I had your same confidence here. Women get a lot of abuse (including death threats) online. It's not just a hundred dudes from the *chans who are responsible for it all.

Yeah, on second thought... they could be sending death threats for all I know!

I'm not sure what motivates them, but I suspect resentment plays a part. They seem to be people who feel they don't have the station in life they deserve;
I think the loss dominance is a HUGE driving force. As the adage goes, "When you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression." Mediocre white guys used to not have to compete with talented women or POC for jobs and status; now they do, and they're not happy about it. They could face up to their own mediocrity and either come to terms with it or push themselves harder, but for many it's far more inviting to buy into a narrative that women and POC are getting unfair advantages these days due to a nefarious "woke agenda" pushed by nebulous "elites". And there is no shortage of grifters out there willing to sell them that narrative, since of course it's lucrative for them. Joe Rogan is worth $120 million. Tucker Carlson is worth $420 million and reportedly makes $35 million a year shilling misinformation for Fox.

Possibly. The question remains, do they even have to compete? I don't know how things are in the US, but here in France, mediocre white men don't have to compete much, or at all.

I think I'm a bit more up to date with American culture than the average Frenchman. One of the perks: seeing people blame the 'woke agenda' on 'Americanization'... 'Woke' being at this point almost entirely a creation of the American right

[Travis B.]

I think the loss dominance is a HUGE driving force. As the adage goes, "When you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression." Mediocre white guys used to not have to compete with talented women or POC for jobs and status; now they do, and they're not happy about it. They could face up to their own mediocrity and either come to terms with it or push themselves harder, but for many it's far more inviting to buy into a narrative that women and POC are getting unfair advantages these days due to a nefarious "woke agenda" pushed by nebulous "elites". And there is no shortage of grifters out there willing to sell them that narrative, since of course it's lucrative for them. Joe Rogan is worth $120 million. Tucker Carlson is worth $420 million and reportedly makes $35 million a year shilling misinformation for Fox.

I am quite sure this is very much it.

[Linguoboy]

Possibly. The question remains, do they even have to compete? I don't know how things are in the US, but here in France, mediocre white men don't have to compete much, or at all.

At lower levels, for sure. The higher they advance, the less this is true though. (I work in what is considered a "female-dominated field" and I've got all kinds of stories of men seemingly effortlessly ascending the ladder while equally or better qualified women are bypassed.)

But, again (as with the IT situation discussed in the other thread), the perception creates the reality. Whether white men are really losing out to women and POC in the workplace, many believe that they are and this drives their feelings of resentment and hostility.

[Raphael]

And resentment isn't limited to men who lost out in life, or even those who got stuck in mid-level positions.

Elon Musk is one of the richest people in the world, but still stews in his constant resentments of those whom he for some reason seems to see as the world's "elite".

People generally assume that the Trump family has a lot less money than they say they do, but they're still pretty rich, and at least as resentment-driven as Musk.

Moving to a different kind of high status and a bit into red-brown alliance territory, there's Glenn Greenwald. He spent years as perhaps the most famous and celebrated journalist in the world, and he's still as full of resentments of the supposed "ruling elite" of the world - which, in his world, somehow magically doesn't include any of those rich and powerful people whom he likes - as any minimum wage service sector incel.

[Ares Land]

Elon Musk always struck me as a very sad kind of person. He certainly seems deeply unhappy.
Come to think of it, Donald Trump registers as sort of depressed too.

I think the alt right, or far right, or whatever you call it isn't an ideology that's very conducive to happiness.
The current version is horrible, straight out of Philip K. Dick. If they actually believe what they say they believe... man, people constantly hunting you down to lock you in your neighbourhood, cut your dick off and force you to eat bugs. Nightmarish!

(Fascists these days are easy to identify: they'll always mention the bugs. Weird but true.)

[Raphael]

I think the alt right, or far right, or whatever you call it isn't an ideology that's very conducive to happiness.
The current version is horrible, straight out of Philip K. Dick. If they actually believe what they say they believe... man, people constantly hunting you down to lock you in your neighbourhood, cut your dick off and force you to eat bugs. Nightmarish!

Then again, this guy - a blogger whom I generally respect - speculates that right-wingers might be happier than the rest of us because for them, there's often some trumped up victory over the forces of liberalism to celebrate:

https://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2023/ ... s-are.html

[Linguoboy]

I think the alt right, or far right, or whatever you call it

I dislike the term "alt right" because it's always felt like an attempt by fascists to rebrand fascism as something cool and edgy.

I don't know about far right ideology specifically (as you say, it seems paranoid and that doesn't seem like it would promote happiness[*]), but studies have consistently found that US conservatives are happier than US liberals. Here's a recent summary of those findings:

https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2 ... 49615.html

This makes sense since, after all, conservatism is a status quo ideology: The world is basically okay, inequality of outcomes isn't a problem as long as there's equality of opportunity (which most believe in because they think racism, sexism, etc. aren't significant barriers any more), God has a plan for the world, etc.

[*] Though some studies of conspiracy theorists have found that there is satisfaction in having a coherent explanation for the world that gives the person in question a privileged place in it. Yes, society is controlled by child-killing lizard people, but at least I know The Truth unlike the rest of you hopeless sheeple. QAnon casts this is all in terms of a Biblical struggle between good and evil, so true believers can view themselves as essential warriors in battle that God will ultimately win, which has got to provide some compensation for losing your mind and destroying your personal relationships.)

[Travis B.]

I think the alt right, or far right, or whatever you call it

I dislike the term "alt right" because it's always felt like an attempt by fascists to rebrand fascism as something cool and edgy.

I don't know about far right ideology specifically (as you say, it seems paranoid and that doesn't seem like it would promote happiness[*]), but studies have consistently found that US conservatives are happier than US liberals. Here's a recent summary of those findings:

https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2 ... 49615.html

This makes sense since, after all, conservatism is a status quo ideology: The world is basically okay, inequality of outcomes isn't a problem as long as there's equality of opportunity (which most believe in because they think racism, sexism, etc. aren't significant barriers any more), God has a plan for the world, etc.

[*] Though some studies of conspiracy theorists have found that there is satisfaction in having a coherent explanation for the world that gives the person in question a privileged place in it. Yes, society is controlled by child-killing lizard people, but at least I know The Truth unlike the rest of you hopeless sheeple. QAnon casts this is all in terms of a Biblical struggle between good and evil, so true believers can view themselves as essential warriors in battle that God will ultimately win, which has got to provide some compensation for losing your mind and destroying your personal relationships.)

It should be remembered that right-wing ideologies very often promote a worldview that one is better than someone else and that one deserves to be in a better place than them - it leads to feeling better in feeling superior to someone else, regardless of one's own place in the world.

[alice]

It should be remembered that right-wing ideologies very often promote a worldview that one is better than someone else and that one deserves to be in a better place than them - it leads to feeling better in feeling superior to someone else, regardless of one's own place in the world.

It should also be remembered that this is not unique to the right; I got very much the same impression when reading^* Socialist Worker and Living Marxism in my younger days.

^* For amusement and lulz, I hasten to add.

[zompist]

studies have consistently found that US conservatives are happier than US liberals. Here's a recent summary of those findings:

https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2 ... 49615.html

This makes sense since, after all, conservatism is a status quo ideology: The world is basically okay, inequality of outcomes isn't a problem as long as there's equality of opportunity (which most believe in because they think racism, sexism, etc. aren't significant barriers any more), God has a plan for the world, etc.

I have so many methodological quibbles here...

* A lot of disprivileged people identify as "liberal"— they may be unhappy precisely because they're poorer or facing an uphill battle.
* As the article hints, conservatives may be more apt to say what they think they're supposed to.
* Conservatives cluster more in rural and suburban areas, which are generally calmer, or what city people would call boring.

Back when I was religious, I could look around my church and see a shitload of unhappy people. If a church is actually offering comfort and listnening ears, then a swarm of dysfunctional people will rush to it. As for the really upright churchgoers, either in those churches or in my extended family... those folks are really really good at denial. They have no framework for being unhapppy, for resolving marriage problems, for even recognizing mental health problems. When things explode for them, they explode big.

[Travis B.]

It should be remembered that right-wing ideologies very often promote a worldview that one is better than someone else and that one deserves to be in a better place than them - it leads to feeling better in feeling superior to someone else, regardless of one's own place in the world.

It should also be remembered that this is not unique to the right; I got very much the same impression when reading^* Socialist Worker and Living Marxism in my younger days.

^* For amusement and lulz, I hasten to add.

As an anarchist I more tended to either despise or have pity for people on the right - the former in the case of people the oppressors and especially those who benefitted from oppressing other people and convincing others to do the same, the latter in the case of people who had been deluded and conned into holding right-wing beliefs that did not benefit themselves, and in many cases hurt themselves and allowed themselves to be exploited, and who did not engage in oppressing others. To be completely honest, I have not changed much in this regard.

[Torco]

I don't properly remember the research, and it may have been debunked first, but I'm pretty sure I remember that in general, the right wing people are driven much more strongly by disgust. so, yeah, the bugs make sense: in my own country the proto-fascists tend to speak about 'lacras' to speak about... you know, bad people: either criminals, communists, whoever. lacra which is an intensely emotional word in chilean spanish, nominally meaning something like 'parasitic vermin', so yeah, disgust, revulsion. the good old ewwww reaction.

I'm more skeptical of the other thing: I very often hear right-wingers talk about *us* in much the same way: they progressives, i feel sorry for them: they're all sad, depressed, soy, bad posture, they all hate themselves and each other, blablabla. *hits blunt* maybe... I think that we're all sort of miserable in this fucking system, maaaaan. *passes blunt*

[hwhatting]

I think the alt right, or far right, or whatever you call it

I dislike the term "alt right" because it's always felt like an attempt by fascists to rebrand fascism as something cool and edgy.

The original fascism was cool and edgy back in the early 20th century. For me, "cool and edgy" are huge alrm bells on any political ideology and social movement; "cool and edgy" is fine in the arts, but should be applied to politics and society in general only in very, very, very, very small doses; best wait until the ideology has lost its coolness and edginess and can be evaluated with a calm eye and mind.

[Travis B.]

Am I the only person who is very uncomfortable with labeling groups in which membership is involuntary as "the Oppressor"? To me one should be solely judged for one's own voluntary commissions and omissions, and in particular one should not be held responsible for things one is born into or for the actions of others over whom one does not have control who are members of a group in which one's membership is involuntary. There are a wide range of groups, which I need not list here (you know what they are), where I see people indicate that the group is collectively "the Oppressor" and one is in effect responsible for the actions of other members of such groups simply by being born into them, and I really dislike this.