Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > The Future of the Supreme Court

The Future of the Supreme Court (Page 14)
Thread Tools
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2021, 02:02 PM
 
Subego,

Thorzdad and Laminar have responded to your question masterfully (especially the link to yet another brilliant article by Michael Harriot on The Root) and I really don’t have anything to add but this …

The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people
The game hasn’t changed at all except that the “anti war left” is now the “anti fascist left”. It is no coincidence that Fox News and other right wing media are constantly harping about ANTIFA and BLM and blaming them for everything under the sun including the dirt that members of their own audience have done. And they are doing it in 2021 for the exact same reasons that they did it in 1968.

OAW
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2021, 02:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
And if you look at that history, and how all of the political and social messaging has been purposely shaped and designed to lead us to this exact outcome, you almost can't blame Republican voters for not knowing any better. This article is fascinating:

https://www.theroot.com/we-found-the...619-1846832317

Most of these lawmakers (and others of their time) grew up learning a completely fabricated version of history, one that justified the social positions of white people above all others. No wonder they vehemently (and sometimes violently) reject the reality that disagrees with their illusion.
Thanks for the link. I hadn't understood why those Senators insisted on those positions. Interesting reading.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2021, 09:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The conventional wisdom is Democrats are better at that than Republicans.
I don’t think that’s true, quite the contrary. The GOP has spend decades to make sure certain communities (mostly older people) vote by mail, and that has included measures that fall under the moniker ballot harvesting. The only recent larg-ish scale election fraud I am aware of was a ballot harvesting affair in the clearly illegal sense. I strongly question what you consider the “conventional wisdom”, I think it just stems from the perception that Democrats won the last Presidential election because of mail-in ballots.

Edit: Just to be clear, I don’t object to making sure your voters turn out and do vote, if the measures aren’t fraudulent or coercive.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
My off-the-cuff analysis is it’s not minorities who need their wheels greased to vote, but it’s white people.

Minorities will certainly make use of available wheel grease, and tend to do well with it because they’re more politically organized, but that’s not the same as them requiring it.
I don’t think this is supported by the facts. Whites have the highest voter turnout in Presidential elections, with the recent exception of 2012 where non-Hispanic blacks edged them out. In 2020 Whites had 30 % higher turnout than Latinos and 13 % higher turnout than blacks.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2021, 09:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Are Republicans racist by default for being Republicans (i.e, they support the party of white dominance)? It seems like that’s part of the point, but I’m not sure.
You don’t need to be defensive about this.
The biggest fault is the acceptance or tolerance of open racism from the very top of the party, culminating in former President Trump’s many bon mots (“that Mexican judge”, “good people on both sides”, feel free to add to the list). It is the fault of the GOP of not removing Marjorie Taylor Greene from her committee positions and from the party (“Jewish space lasers”, WTF seriously?!?). GOP voters tacitly or openly accept or tolerate this this, perhaps as a necessary evil. And this isn’t a recent development, I think historically this has been growing and growing — Trump is the result of this development, not an aberration. Voter laws are targeting minorities “with pinpoint precision”.

To be fair, it is pushing out some Republican voters (middle class women, especially educated ones), so not every voter is accepting this slow and steady shift. But I think it is a reasonable question why Republican voters do not speak up against the racists in their ranks and push to remove them from power. How many decades did it take to get rid of Steve King?

Just to add something original to the discussion (Laminar did a great job in his post) concerning the recent projects to add another perspective to American history (the 1619 project and “critical race theory”). The history education concerning WW1 and 2 in Germany and the colonial period of Japan (1895/1905–1945) couldn’t be more different. Japan skips all uncomfortable parts and even extremely educated people have no clue about massacres and the millions and millions that died as a result of Japanese occupation, colonization and the War in the Pacific. In museums the period is skipped as well (e. g. the museum of gunkanjima, an underwater coal mine — sounds safe, doesn’t it — to my recollection did not include any mention of the forced laborers who had to work there, many died). That’s why many Japanese get upset when the Korean government still just doesn’t want to let go, Japan had apologized some years earlier and now the matter is settled, isn’t it?

Many Americans aren’t aware of what happened historically or understand how flying the Confederate Battle flag makes other people feel and what it stood for at the time. Or that rights for minorities aren’t just a settled affair after the various Civil Rights Laws were passed in the 1960s. Is that racist in the simplest, literal sense? Not necessarily. But it is unenlightened.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 10, 2021, 04:54 PM
 
Just wanted everyone to know I haven’t bailed, but I’ve been crushed with work and won’t be able to give a reply until after the weekend.

Sorry about that!
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2021, 10:49 PM
 
Sorry this took so long!

From what I can tell, the above replies reach their conclusions based on the premise conservatives are rational people.

The model I have for conservatives is they are highly irrational. For all intents and purposes, they’re schizophrenic.

While there’s no doubt some degree of conscious malice on the part of conservatives, it’s harder to gauge than it looks because we’re talking about crazy people.

I don’t want to absolve conservatives of malice, and to be clear, racism has easy footholds in the mind of an irrational schizophrenic, but being unshakably oblivious to the point of farce is also consistent with the pathology, no malice needed.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 12:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
From what I can tell, the above replies reach their conclusions based on the premise conservatives are rational people.
If you taken that from my posts at least, I'd be surprised.

I don't think it is rational to hang onto a conspiracy theory that isn't even logically coherent. (If Democrats went through the trouble of rigging the election, why did they only rig the Presidential election?!?) Also the measures might actually lower the turnout of Republican voters in some circumstances. That's why I think an actual legal analysis of these new voting laws is so hard: I'm sure in some instances best evidence is equivocal and could cost both parties votes. But the intent is to hamper the electoral success of one party over another, some of which by finding rules and regulations that are (wrongly?) designed to favor one racial group over another. That's what I think makes a legal proper analysis so hard, because you'd have to distinguish between intent and outcome.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I don’t want to absolve conservatives of malice, and to be clear, racism has easy footholds in the mind of an irrational schizophrenic, but being unshakably oblivious to the point of farce is also consistent with the pathology, no malice needed.
You don't need malice to have to accept a degree of responsibility: if you are open to racist ideas, or at least are willing to tolerate them if you get mundane things like the tax policy of your choosing, what does that say about you? Trump's racist remarks are out in the open. As are those of some of this supporters. And it seems voters are on board* with the GOP pushing out people whose conservative bona fides are beyond reproach (e. g. former Presidential candidates or Liz Cheney, daughter of former VP Dick Cheney), but don't want to go along with the Trumpist agenda. Which is kind of funny, because one of the new talking points seems to be cancel culture.


* The most benevolent interpretation I can think of is that many Congress people are afraid of their voters, i. e. they do not buy into the various conspiracy theories and Trumpism, but they think they'll be primaried by a Trumpist when time comes.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Jul 13, 2021 at 02:00 AM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 06:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
* The most benevolent interpretation I can think of is that many Congress people are afraid of their voters, i. e. they do not buy into the various conspiracy theories and Trumpism, but they think they'll be primaried by a Trumpist when time comes.
This ascribes the behavior to conscious malice. That’s not a benevolent interpretation.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 08:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
This ascribes the behavior to conscious malice. That’s not a benevolent interpretation.
In my book being motivated by fear is quite different from malice. Sure, elected officials should have a spine and stick to their core convictions, but lack of spine is a character flaw that is different from malice. You could (and probably should) counter that this is malfeasance and dereliction of duty — they swore an oath to protect the Constitution and the country, etc. I’d agree with that.

Clearly, there are cases that are in the malice category, e. g. Congress men who have law degrees from the most prestigious law schools in the US and have clerked for Supreme Court Justices, and yet rail about elites and give plainly false readings of the Constitution. And then there are people like Marjorie Taylor Greene where I suspect they may actually believe all this non-sense. Then the discussion becomes philosophical.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 11:02 AM
 
If I’m afraid of losing power, and I address it by lying like a mother****er, I have made a decision to solve my problem by way of conscious malice.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 11:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If I’m afraid of losing power, and I address it by lying like a mother****er, I have made a decision to solve my problem by way of conscious malice.
I'm pretty sure they would consider their actions as working to meet their constituents' demands. Which isn't exactly incorrect. Which is part of the problem.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 12:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Sorry this took so long!

From what I can tell, the above replies reach their conclusions based on the premise conservatives are rational people.

The model I have for conservatives is they are highly irrational. For all intents and purposes, they’re schizophrenic.
I don't think they're schizophrenic, I think they're reacting predictably to innate, primal instincts.

https://psmag.com/news/authoritarian...trump-triggers

There's a genetic component to preferring authoritarianism.

The conditions that significantly activate authoritarians, and greatly exacerbate the expression of their authoritarianism in manifestly intolerant attitudes and behaviors, are what I call "normative threats," (which are) threats to "oneness and sameness." In diverse, complex, modern societies not sharing a single racial/ethnic identity, the things that make "us" an "us"—that make us one and the same—are common authority, and shared values.

So the classic conditions that typically activate and aggravate authoritarians—rendering them more racially, morally, and politically intolerant—tend to be perceived loss of respect for/confidence in/obedience to leaders, authorities and institutions, or perceived value conflict and loss of societal consensus/shared beliefs, and/or erosion of racial/cultural/group identity. This is sometimes expressed as a loss of "who we are"/"our way of life."
They just spelled out Trump's entire platform. It was all specifically and purposely designed to trigger the primal need in some people for a strong, authoritarian leader. The conservative think tanks that write policy and direct campaigns all know this very well and they're using it to their advantage.

Saying they're schizophrenic implies that their actions are random or unpredictable. What we're learning about psychology shows that it is a VERY predictable response to certain triggers.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 12:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
I'm pretty sure they would consider their actions as working to meet their constituents' demands. Which isn't exactly incorrect. Which is part of the problem.
This is sorta what I was talking about with “rational”.

The rational Republican thinks their constituents are idiots and panders to them.

The actual Republican is just as much of an idiot as their constituents.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 12:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Saying they're schizophrenic implies that their actions are random or unpredictable. What we're learning about psychology shows that it is a VERY predictable response to certain triggers.
I’ll admit I’m not an expert in schizophrenia, but my understanding is a schizophrenic’s behavior isn’t random, but is instead consistent with their delusion. What makes it appear random to observers is the observers aren’t delusional.

The key difference I see between true schizophrenics and conservatives is schizophrenic delusions are highly idiosyncratic, whereas the conservative delusion is shared.

Overall though, I’d say we’re agreeing on the important point: conservatism is a biological process, not a reasoning process.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 01:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The key difference I see between true schizophrenics and conservatives is schizophrenic delusions are highly idiosyncratic, whereas the conservative delusion is shared.
Okay, thank you for clarifying this - I see what you're saying now.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 04:51 PM
 
Also, I want their next study to be the relationship between an affinity for authoritarianism and a love of flags. For an unrelated reason I Google Image Searched for "funny flag" and holy cow it was a dumpster fire.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 05:25 PM
 
I love flags.

Oh, shi…
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 06:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Okay, thank you for clarifying this - I see what you're saying now.
You are most welcome, and thank you for your reply to my original question (the one with the article on history in conservative schools). I was able to crystallize my schizophrenia analogy in attempting to explain how when it comes to conservatives, their good faith is… complicated.

If I can challenge that post a bit, I did not come away from it with a feeling you consider conservatives to be batshit, delusional slaves to their biology, but instead consider them consciously conniving and devious (which I fully admit is how it looks).

Honestly, I came away with the impression of only the latter, and none of the former.

Am I misreading?
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 06:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Also, I want their next study to be the relationship between an affinity for authoritarianism and a love of flags.
There’s a series on Netflix right now called How to Become a Tyrant. The first episode will explain the flag/symbol thing for you. The whole series is well worth watching.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 06:41 PM
 
The only thing which could make a thread where I get to pretend to be on the Supreme Court and talk about flags any better is one where I get to pretend to be on the Supreme Court and talk about flags and lecture people about game design.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 07:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If I’m afraid of losing power, and I address it by lying like a mother****er, I have made a decision to solve my problem by way of conscious malice.
Like I wrote, I only gave the most charitable interpretation, and a less charitable me agrees with you. You shouldn’t consciously lie about something that important, especially for someone in such an important position of power.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 07:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Like I wrote, I only gave the most charitable interpretation, and a less charitable me agrees with you. You shouldn’t consciously lie about something that important, especially for someone in such an important position of power.
I consider my theory to be more charitable.

A good number of them aren’t lying, their biology is making them unshakably delusional. I can blame someone for lying. Someone with delusions beyond their control is blameless for their delusions.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2021, 08:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I consider my theory to be more charitable.
A question for the philosophers.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
A good number of them aren’t lying, their biology is making them unshakably delusional. I can blame someone for lying. Someone with delusions beyond their control is blameless for their delusions.
I don’t claim to be able to peer into the hearts and minds of people, but I don’t think the majority of Republican Congress people is delusional in the way that Marjorie Tayler Greene is. The majority knows what they are doing. Perhaps some think they can straddle the divide and somewhat moderate the loony bin of the party (I think they are deluding themselves). But IMHO the majority knows full well what they are doing, but don’t want to give up power.

But I give you that I think more and more Republican Congress people will be part of the delusional camp as establishment Republicans are clocking out and are being replaced with people from the looney bin.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If I can challenge that post a bit, I did not come away from it with a feeling you consider conservatives to be batshit, delusional slaves to their biology, but instead consider them consciously conniving and devious (which I fully admit is how it looks).

Honestly, I came away with the impression of only the latter, and none of the former.

Am I misreading?
I'd put Republican lawmakers (congresspeople, think tanks, etc.) at 80% devious and conniving. Republican voters get a 10% devious, 90% delusional rating.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 09:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I love flags.

Oh, shi…
Have you discovered the Vexillology Circle Jerk subreddit? Nothing worth subscribing to, but worth scrolling through for a laugh.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 09:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
I'd put Republican lawmakers (congresspeople, think tanks, etc.) at 80% devious and conniving. Republican voters get a 10% devious, 90% delusional rating.
How do you account for the spread?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 09:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Have you discovered the Vexillology Circle Jerk subreddit? Nothing worth subscribing to, but worth scrolling through for a laugh.
Oooh… thank you! I was wondering if there was a flag circle jerk sub. The main sub can be pretty stupid and deserves to be made fun of.

This one isn’t bad.

     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 10:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
How do you account for the spread?
Education and information, mostly. The average Republican lawmaker has a much better education than the average Republican voter. They understand history, precedent, and how things actually work. They've been informed by their think tanks exactly what type of messaging elicits exactly what type of response in their constituents. In contrast, the average voter is being led by the nose from crisis to crisis by the media, which is, again, working in conjunction with conservative think tanks funded by conservative billionaires to push a very specific narrative.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...form-scrutiny/

https://www.prwatch.org/news/2020/01...eir-ideologies

From 1996:
https://fair.org/extra/the-medias-favorite-think-tank/

All of this has been decades in the making.

Conservative voters don't see the bar graphs and charts and strategies behind the scenes, they don't see the concerted effort to discredit higher education (which makes it easier to ignore scientists), they don't see the purposeful denigration of the news media (which makes it easier to ignore any reporting that's counter to the narrative that the conservative billionaires want to push). They see Tucker Carlson yelling about how our way of life is at risk due to immigrants, they see Bill O'Reilly shouting about how our daughters are in danger in their bathrooms due to trans women, they see the Facebook posts about how Muslim men marry 2 year old girls and then consummate the marriage.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 10:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
I'd put Republican lawmakers (congresspeople, think tanks, etc.) at 80% devious and conniving. Republican voters get a 10% devious, 90% delusional rating.
A fundamental mechanism the conservative delusion uses to maintain itself is it makes sufferers feel good when they maintain it.

Why would lawmakers want to break free of this?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Education and information, mostly. The average Republican lawmaker has a much better education than the average Republican voter.
I have both education and information. On top of it my entire life has been steeped in liberal values.

Punch the right button, that all goes out the window. I’ve had it happen. That’s what happened to me during the protests/riots.



Edit: I should also note I have zero faith in the news media, and while I like higher education, I think there is much to criticize.
( Last edited by subego; Jul 14, 2021 at 11:17 AM. )
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 01:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
A fundamental mechanism the conservative delusion uses to maintain itself is it makes sufferers feel good when they maintain it.

Why would lawmakers want to break free of this?
Because doing so would fulfill all of the values they pretend to espouse - valuing hard work, the sanctity of human life, a fair and just society, economic success for America. The conservative delusion stifles all of those things while pretending it's the only movement that supports them.

But we know that conservative lawmakers DON'T want those things, they want to concentrate power and wealth among the few, so they tell a story that conservative voters readily gobble up.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 01:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I have both education and information. On top of it my entire life has been steeped in liberal values.

Punch the right button, that all goes out the window. I’ve had it happen. That’s what happened to me during the protests/riots.
I think that was the point of the article I linked, right? There's a genetic predisposition to certain political bents, and that bent can make itself known given the right trigger. Conservative lawmakers and news outlets just sit there pulling that trigger all day.

Edit: I should also note I have zero faith in the news media,
I believe you when you say that. And having no faith or trust in a billionaire-owned for-profit news media means you take reporting with a grain of salt and fact check among different news sources.

When conservatives say that, though, they mean that they've been given a mechanism to disregard sources, stories, or narratives that don't fit what they want to believe. But they will accept without a whiff of self-awareness any narrative being pushed by conservative outlets, even the extreme ones like Daily Caller, Breitbart, and more.

and while I like higher education, I think there is much to criticize.
Again, a nuanced view. You don't go onto an extremely conservative website and unironically refer to colleges as "lib-turd echo chambers."
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2021, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
I think that was the point of the article I linked, right? There's a genetic predisposition to certain political bents, and that bent can make itself known given the right trigger. Conservative lawmakers and news outlets just sit there pulling that trigger all day.
I might be misunderstanding, but I read this as saying lawmakers pulling that trigger all day is evidence they’re not deluded. How would a deluded lawmaker behave differently?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 15, 2021, 03:17 AM
 
Okay, I think I get what you’re saying. Let me ruminate a bit.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 15, 2021, 09:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I might be misunderstanding, but I read this as saying lawmakers pulling that trigger all day is evidence they’re not deluded. How would a deluded lawmaker behave differently?
People like Majorie Taylor Greene or the highly religious (Pence maybe?) I'd consider "true believers," but I feel like those are in the minority.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 15, 2021, 06:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
A fundamental mechanism the conservative delusion uses to maintain itself is it makes sufferers feel good when they maintain it.

Why would lawmakers want to break free of this?
Because it makes your electorate a bunch of toxic individuals, it is not healthy. Just think of all the people in your life with a victim complex who enjoy being in the role of the victim, because it is their way to exert control over others?

There are other well-known, very effective mechanisms to exert control over others, addiction comes to mind. Should politicians start going down that route, too?
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I have both education and information. On top of it my entire life has been steeped in liberal values.

Punch the right button, that all goes out the window. I’ve had it happen. That’s what happened to me during the protests/riots.
Do you think you are your best self when someone hits your panic button? Do you think you are making the best decisions in that moment?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 15, 2021, 09:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Education and information, mostly. The average Republican lawmaker has a much better education than the average Republican voter. They understand history, precedent, and how things actually work. They've been informed by their think tanks exactly what type of messaging elicits exactly what type of response in their constituents.
You can clearly see a regular cycle, too. Gay marriage, being more and more accepted also amongst conservatives, no longer serves its role as topic du jour to instill fear and outrage. This has now been replaced by the supposed danger trans women pose to women in bathrooms and pro sports. Another one is “cancel culture” (applied selectively) and anti-conservative bias. An evergreen is abortion. It is an endless barrage of outrage material.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 06:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
You can clearly see a regular cycle, too. Gay marriage, being more and more accepted also amongst conservatives, no longer serves its role as topic du jour to instill fear and outrage. This has now been replaced by the supposed danger trans women pose to women in bathrooms and pro sports. Another one is “cancel culture” (applied selectively) and anti-conservative bias. An evergreen is abortion. It is an endless barrage of outrage material.
Don't forget critical race theory. That one's really taken-off on the conservative anger chart.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 07:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
Don't forget critical race theory. That one's really taken-off on the conservative anger chart.
That’s right, how could I forget that. Our children are being indoctrinated!
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 08:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
You can clearly see a regular cycle, too. Gay marriage, being more and more accepted also amongst conservatives, no longer serves its role as topic du jour to instill fear and outrage. This has now been replaced by the supposed danger trans women pose to women in bathrooms and pro sports.
I like searching the history of this forum, as it's kind of a historical barometer of what's happening at the time. Same-sex marriage was legalized in the US in June of 2016. The trans bathroom issue blew up in early 2016, led by posters that frequent the conservative fake news sites.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?p=4338441

Also, we can always count on Cap'n Tightpants to link The Daily Caller and complain about a "privileged" Yale "bitch" that "shrieked" at her professor.

These people don't realize that all of these controversies are being manufactured and amplified specifically to rile them up and enrage them.

Also LOL at Chongo's new signature.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 09:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Because it makes your electorate a bunch of toxic individuals, it is not healthy. Just think of all the people in your life with a victim complex who enjoy being in the role of the victim, because it is their way to exert control over others?

There are other well-known, very effective mechanisms to exert control over others, addiction comes to mind. Should politicians start going down that route, too?
The claim I was replying to is conservative lawmakers are not deluded like their constituents. That conservative lawmakers are in fact far more devious than deluded.

A devious lawmaker sees their behavior is morally reprehensible.

A deluded lawmaker sees the exact same behavior as morally virtuous.

The question is why would someone want to give up a position where they consider their actions virtuous for a position where doing the same thing means they’re a total dickbag?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 10:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Same-sex marriage was legalized in the US in June of 2016.
2015.

As an aside, all clustered together around that time we had Ferguson, Obergefell v. Hodges, and (yes, I feel like an idiot for saying it) Gamergate,

In other words, the ideal environment to spawn a “conservative revolution”.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 01:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
People like Majorie Taylor Greene or the highly religious (Pence maybe?) I'd consider "true believers," but I feel like those are in the minority.
That’s why I used myself as an example. I’m neither religious or certifiable, I’m not a true believer.

Let me break down the process as I see it in myself.

I’m genetically, or at least biologically predisposed towards authoritarianism. To phrase that unkindly, I am predisposed to having what are in part morally reprehensible impulses.

I am also biologically predisposed to rejecting morally reprehensible impulses.

These two predispositions are in conflict. I will reject my authoritarian impulses if I perceive them as morally reprehensible.

So, what my authoritarian impulses do is they disguise the payload. My authoritarian impulses have an endless supply of extremely seductive and convincing cognitive fallacies they use to throw me off the trail. They effectively succeed 100% of the time.

To put it another way, my paltry 50 years of education and information has nothing on the millennia of refinement my authoritarian impulses have had. They are way, way, way the **** smarter than I am.

I assume the same is occurring in the brains of conservative lawmakers. Their brains are literally built to excuse their morally reprehensible impulses. It happens for them naturally. No deviousness required.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 01:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
I like searching the history of this forum, as it's kind of a historical barometer of what's happening at the time. Same-sex marriage was legalized in the US in June of 2016. The trans bathroom issue blew up in early 2016, led by posters that frequent the conservative fake news sites.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?p=4338441

Also, we can always count on Cap'n Tightpants to link The Daily Caller and complain about a "privileged" Yale "bitch" that "shrieked" at her professor.

These people don't realize that all of these controversies are being manufactured and amplified specifically to rile them up and enrage them.

Also LOL at Chongo's new signature.
Wow that was a trip down memory lane! I definitely remember that “OAW vs CTP and BadKosh battle” and yet another “CTP tall tale”. What I find most notable is that the more things change the more they stay the same. Even when you bring plenty of receipts far-right conservative ideology is so delusional that it only causes its adherents to dig in even more despite the evidence. Whether it’s Trump winning and then losing the election, Voter Suppression, Critical Race Theory, Transgender Athletes, etc … the increasingly unhinged conservative pushback is an entirely foreseeable and reactionary response to the social and political upheaval the country has seen since Obama was elected POTUS.

OAW
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 03:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The claim I was replying to is conservative lawmakers are not deluded like their constituents. That conservative lawmakers are in fact far more devious than deluded.

A devious lawmaker sees their behavior is morally reprehensible.

A deluded lawmaker sees the exact same behavior as morally virtuous.

The question is why would someone want to give up a position where they consider their actions virtuous for a position where doing the same thing means they’re a total dickbag?
Because they use the delusions to justify the deviousness.

The delusion is that black people are genetically inferior to white people and a society where both exist on equal footing cannot flourish. So that drives deviousness in policy that pushes black people down and out.

The delusion is that the world as we know it cannot exist without fossil fuels. So that drives deviousness in policy where Exxon knows that man-made climate change is a real thing and that they're contributing to it, but they lobby against positive action and fund disinformation campaigns for 40 years.

The delusion is that trickle-down economics work and that it's beneficial to society to have money, power, and control focused in a few large corporations/individuals, so the deviousness is developing and marketing policy that gives advantages to corporations and the wealthy at the expense of the majority of the population.

So the lawmakers have some small delusion that drives policy. Voters see only the spin and marketing for the policy and exist in a higher state of delusion.

Also, never underestimate the drive to make a buck.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 10:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The claim I was replying to is conservative lawmakers are not deluded like their constituents. That conservative lawmakers are in fact far more devious than deluded.

A devious lawmaker sees their behavior is morally reprehensible.

A deluded lawmaker sees the exact same behavior as morally virtuous.
Agreed. As I said, I think seeing lawmakers as deluded is the more charitable interpretation, but I agree with you that most know exactly what they are doing. And that is indeed reprehensible. Although I don’t think I don’t want to claim I subscribe to the most charitable explanation, with few exceptions. Fanning outrage has a long history amongst the GOP, so rather than appealing to the better angels and try to explain their policy positions to their electorate, it is all about distrust and feelings.

Let me reiterate how unique American conservatives are when it comes to denying e. g. the efficacy of wearing masks or vaccines. That is a direct consequence of the GOP beating the drum that the media and the “elites” (that they are usually a part of) cannot be trusted. In other democracies that is not the case, skepticism towards vaccines are only a fringe position.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The question is why would someone want to give up a position where they consider their actions virtuous for a position where doing the same thing means they’re a total dickbag?
Wouldn’t it be the other way around, that cynical, devious lawmakers think that they are in danger of being primaried by true believers?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 16, 2021, 10:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
The delusion is that trickle-down economics work and that it's beneficial to society to have money, power, and control focused in a few large corporations/individuals, so the deviousness is developing and marketing policy that gives advantages to corporations and the wealthy at the expense of the majority of the population.
That is so frustrating: the evidence is in, it does not work, trickle down economics has greatly accelerated the gulf between rich and poor. What is more, even obvious relevant facts are not included in the discussion: when Reagan took over in the 1980s, tax rates in the US were significantly higher and the US was afraid of being overrun by Japanese businesses. So even if it did work in the 1980s, the situation we are in now four decades later is quite different.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2021, 08:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
The delusion is that black people are genetically inferior to white people and a society where both exist on equal footing cannot flourish. So that drives deviousness in policy that pushes black people down and out.
Oh… I was confused. I get it now. Sorry about that!

This delusion justifies racism by saying “racism is okay”

Conservatives have been progressively exchanging it for a delusion which justifies racism by saying “what I do is not racist”. I see this delusion as dominant.

If only because it’s much easier to hide racism from oneself rather than hide it from everybody else.

This is how we measure progress with conservatives.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2021, 12:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Conservatives have been progressively exchanging it for a delusion which justifies racism by saying “what I do is not racist”. I see this delusion as dominant.
The follow-on to this, which I see increasingly used, is something akin to "You telling me that what I believe is racist, is racist".
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 17, 2021, 01:12 PM
 
Also known as “you’re the real racist!”
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:16 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,