Forums

[sebastian_dangerfield]

I'm going to set aside the issue of why your beliefs about beliefs are sad and empty. You're confused about what polarization is. People have different beliefs. This is part of the human condition. People have always had them and always will. We have laws and politics in part so that we can figure out how to live together, notwithstanding their different beliefs. "Polarization" is a phenomenon in which the semi-random distribution of beliefs increasingly clusters around opposing poles. It's perfectly possible to have a complex society with a wide distribution of different beliefs, but no polarization. We do seem to be getting more polarized lately, but it's not because people have different beliefs.

This sounds intelligent, as does Malcolm Gladwell, but upon further inspection is helium.

I think what you say about polarization and climate change is not right. There is no progress on climate change because polarization among conservatives have increasingly caused that significant minority of the country to disregard the science of climate change and to oppose the government doing anything about it.

I disagree. I think a lot of conservatives would get behind climate change initiatives. Maybe not the Green New Deal, but something. But when you mix those into a platform including the rest of what the Democrats are selling, they say, "yeah, fuck that."

In my view, often expressed here, polarization in this country is driven by conservatives, who form their views in reaction to a mainstream that they see as hostile.

This is helium. Your helium. I get the idea behind it, but it results from you thinking too much and thinking you've a high minded explanation for things that you don't. You're right a bit here, as to some conservatives, but nowhere near as much as you think.

Again and again, conservatives reject mainstream institutions as biased against them, and create their own crappy, politicized alternatives.

Huh? I think most of the institutions that count, where people have power and money, trend conservative. When I'm around conservatives with coin, or power, as I'm sure you'd agree, they don't feel ostracized. They feel sort of embarrassed that a bunch of silly loons like the Squad and people who think similarly really believe they can make a difference. They laugh at people like you, people like me even, and they really laugh at the Trumpkins and the rank and file Democrats who think they'll see a revolution. Those are the real conservatives that matter. Conservatives without power are just whiners, like progressives who never have power.

The Washington Post begets the Washington Times. Harvard begets Liberty University. CNN begets Fox News. There simply are no left-wing alternative institutions of the sort, which means that liberals are in the mainstream institutions, which means that the conservative rejection of the mainstream institutions has its own vicious cycle feeding it.

That's true. But again, that's for the infantry. And the Washington Times? Really? Who are the ten people who read that? You also have the chicken before the egg. Fox, and I know this pretty well, was created to service a demographic. It's a business entity, nothing more. The crazy right wing didn't create Fox - they created its success, after Ailes brilliantly fed it to them. MSNBC and CNN are doing the same thing right now. The media's a silly fuck show of products aimed at credulous audiences filled with "beleifs" and "values."

On the other side of the aisle, the left used to be subordinate to centrists, who favored bipartisan compromise, but since conservatives will no longer do bipartisan compromise, the centrist approach seems futile, which leads to secondary polarization on the left.

This is an excellent point. A super important point overlooked too often. Why is this? Because centrism fucked the Democratic base. It drove a lot of that base toward populism, which manifested itself in Trump.

Still want to have a dumb argument about which party is to blame? Anything my dumb Archie Bunker relatives can blame on Ds, I can argue was caused more by Rs. Anything your simple mind can see only as caused by Rs, I can historically link back to Ds as well. Stop being tribal. Start looking at issues as stand alones.

You are congenitally incapable of faulting conservatives for the way things are without finding equal fault on the left, so you're left to bemoan that our political system doesn't address climate change but unable to see or say that it's conservatives who are blocking progress.

I totally blame credulous conservatives for the majority of lack of effort on climate. I just stated earlier that Jimmy Carter had brilliantly warned on climate back in 1979. Was he a conservative?

Failure to address climate change is largely caused by misinformation peddlers playing to conservatives, and dumb conservatives who ought to know better than to buy the bullshit. The Democrats are much better on this issue than the Rs. I 100% agree.

BUT, you could get a lot of conservatives and moderates who'd like to do something about climate to do so if it were done by referendum. I want to do something about climate. But I also don't like a lot of the Democratic party's platform. Similarly, I'd also like to pay minimal taxes. But I can't vote for Donald Trump. Given me an a la carte menu of policies, however, and I guarantee I will vote for a mix that address climate, prison reform, cuts defense, reasonably enhances safety nets while eliminating administrative costs (UBI lite), but is also are business friendly, cuts not only regulation but eliminates many federal laws that make doing business costly, and is as revenue neutral as possible.

Yeah, that's a privilege, I guess. I want what I want. So do we all. The radical change away from parties and candidates and platforms, in favor of a al carte policy voting, needs to start somewhere. Think of me like Jesus, or Martin Luther.