Interesting ad wording and political discourse

Posted by: Couch_Surfer

I refuse to think of things as left or right anymore.  I want to hear ideas or policies designed to answer current day issues.  In that framing, the modern Republican Party does not have any substantive answers for any issues, or, if they do hold a position, it is generally a wildly unpopular one.

So they boil everything down to “right” vs “left” (which is meaningless if you put any thought into it) and gin up phony culture wars in place of doing the heavy lifting.  That’s what that ad is, pure distilled tribalism in the lead up to mid-terms to distract from things like Reproductive rights being stripped in the USA.

I agree that is better to think of issues when it comes to politics, but left/right or liberal/conservative ideologies are attached to more that just politics, they are attached to social values as well. When you start to look at social issues and values, there does tend to be noticeable divisions between the left and the right. Of course the closer you get to center the more blurred those distinctions become and the further you get to the extremes the more defined those distinctions become. There are always divisions based on one's ideology and various discussions/threads on this board offer good examples at times where assumptions get made without and real effort to understand where the opinions/questions are coming from.

Posted by: syncro

I agree that is better to think of issues when it comes to politics, but left/right or liberal/conservative ideologies are attached to more that just politics, they are attached to social values as well. When you start to look at social issues and values, there does tend to be noticeable divisions between the left and the right. Of course the closer you get to center the more blurred those distinctions become and the further you get to the extremes the more defined those distinctions become. There are always divisions based on one's ideology and various discussions/threads on this board offer good examples at times where assumptions get made without and real effort to understand where the opinions/questions are coming from.

I'm saying it's not helpful as a means of discussion and it's more and more meaningless as it's gets used as a conversational cudgel.

People on both the left and the right can believe in god. People on both the left and the right can be either pro-choice or anti-abortion. People on both the left and the right can be for gun control.

But for all of those items (and that list is not exhaustive), we would typically sort the left as 'atheist, pro-choice, anti-gun' and the right as 'christian, pro-life, gun freedom absolutists'. Throw in a social media machine that's tuned for outrage and it's a tribalism vicious circle.

Left vs Right is a very simplistic way of sorting the world and is not useful.

One of the first steps down the alt right algorithmic pipeline is becoming a logic-bro/critical thinking warrior. 

If you start threads about critical thinking skills it's no surprise your targeted ads start to look like this.

There is value in reading or listening to the right wing people as well as left wing and more centrist people. Respect each other’s political views other than racist, misogynist or otherwise intolerant views. We don’t have to agree but there needs to be more respect for different political viewpoints. This is versus them thing is bullshit put forth by bad politicians and media.

Thanks for adding nsmb.com to your ad blocker's allowlist. You don't actually have to read the ads, you know ;-)

Posted by: [email protected]

Thanks for adding nsmb.com to your ad blocker's allowlist. You don't actually have to read the ads, you know ;-)

I mostly come here for the ads as the articles are usually meh.

Posted by: Polymath

Posted by: Couch_Surfer

Also the daily wire is Ben Shapiro’s propaganda rag that is stoking the outrage machine so that he can grift off of it for every last dime.

https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-wire

Maybe.  Maybe he is just telling the truth and most today don't like it since it makes them face the reality that their ideology is flawed.

Ben Shapiro?  Master of the Gish Gallop?  Did you forget the /s?

Posted by: Couch_Surfer

Posted by: syncro

I agree that is better to think of issues when it comes to politics, but left/right or liberal/conservative ideologies are attached to more that just politics, they are attached to social values as well. When you start to look at social issues and values, there does tend to be noticeable divisions between the left and the right. Of course the closer you get to center the more blurred those distinctions become and the further you get to the extremes the more defined those distinctions become. There are always divisions based on one's ideology and various discussions/threads on this board offer good examples at times where assumptions get made without and real effort to understand where the opinions/questions are coming from.

I'm saying it's not helpful as a means of discussion and it's more and more meaningless as it's gets used as a conversational cudgel.

People on both the left and the right can believe in god. People on both the left and the right can be either pro-choice or anti-abortion. People on both the left and the right can be for gun control.

But for all of those items (and that list is not exhaustive), we would typically sort the left as 'atheist, pro-choice, anti-gun' and the right as 'christian, pro-life, gun freedom absolutists'. Throw in a social media machine that's tuned for outrage and it's a tribalism vicious circle.

Left vs Right is a very simplistic way of sorting the world and is not useful.

It is amazing how things have changed in the last decades, be it in North America or Europe. The notion of politicians being right-wing or left-wing (on the traditional seating plan of a parliament) once had core values and beliefs that have slowly been up to change and somehow eroded, as far as I can see it. Ideas which were definitely right-wing a few decades ago, are now often an established part of what is considered left-wing today, and vice versa. The question is, where does this come from? Does it come from a bigger "middle" thanks to pop culture and social media? No easy question nor thoughts for lunch break musings.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Mic

Here is the rub though, the people who support right-wing or outright fascist and autoritarian ideas think of themselves in such a way as well. They think that they help society as well. In their opinion, the idea of different people with various cultural backgrounds enriching any given society is wrong, and not good for society. Add some other issues and, voila, they have the justification for their ideology. Just check out why the French people, especially in the Southern and Northern parts, almost made a neo fascist the new President. Totally crazy.

It's the idea of losing culture and identity that scares people, the fear of the "other". I think that's part of what makes modern Canada fairly good and less impervious to these sorts of things. As we are a relatively young country made up of many diverse people we don't have a unique culture/identity that has been established for centuries so it is harder for us as a nation to "other" other groups. Identity and belonging are inherently important to humans, so people/ideas that pose a threat to that identity are easy to hate. Same for ideas that people do not understand or are very different from their established norms. People want to belong to a group that shares similar ideals and values - tribalism.

Lunch break musings.... 

As an outsider looking in, I have to agree with what you say about Canada, although I could seriously disagree when it comes to FN and how all of this is being dealt with.  

The last point is true as well, we all want to belong to a group, a tribe, and quite often have to show it by the way we dress, speak and all that. But since we are all oledr than the average pb user, I think you know what I mean. 

Depending on upbringing, level of education and social and emotional intelligence of an individual, this fear of the "other" can result in open-minded dialogue and exchange, or outright xenophobia (which originally comes from a person not offering shelter to strangers). We all have prejudices and biases, the point is to be aware of them and work on them as often and honest as possible. 

A life with as little fear as possible is definitely a more fulfilling and relaxed life, although some people might want to dispute that idea. There is of course that difference between self-awareness and self-perception than how my environment is seeing and experiencing me. And in my experience the people who are xenophobic can not understand or do not want to understand that point.