excelsiorlef
Member
I'd just not help them.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Judging people for political beliefs
- Thread starter smisk
- Start date
I'd just not help them.
Vincent Grayson
Member
Maybe I'm weird, but I would.
Like, I'm sure I wouldn't like them personally if they're the sort of person who would wear a MAGA hat, but I'm not going to be an asshole to them over it. If someone needs help, I help them. Their beliefs don't make them less human, just less enjoyable to be around long-term, and perhaps not a person I'd trust to make decisions.
But I'll still give them directions, or get something down off a high shelf or whatever other mundane thing regular people need sometimes.
Subpar Spatula
Banned
It's just directions.
One Eyed Willy
Member
Don't expect everyone to connect the dots lol
No amount of directions I could give a Trump supporter is going to stop them from being lost.
Frozenprince
Banned
I judge people for far less important things that speak to their character than politics.
If you're gonna judge somebody's character, politics is a good starting point.
If you're gonna judge somebody's character, politics is a good starting point.
GuessMyUserName
Member
GAF's a place you can judge people for which side their toilet paper faces on the roll but not for supporting the dehumanization of minorities.
Trigonometrize.
Member
Politics should be about making the world better for everyone, but getting there in different ways and the disagreements that result.
As soon as you realize someone is not in it for everyone (even though all people in a country doing well is good for all in a country), then that moves to a problem with character and not politics.
As soon as you realize someone is not in it for everyone (even though all people in a country doing well is good for all in a country), then that moves to a problem with character and not politics.
Psychoward
Banned
That's the stuff it is about.
You kidding?
Rightly or wrongly, this board dogpiles on anyone who even seems like they're on the right in political threads. I'm not saying I haven't participated in that too, but the response is pretty harsh and immediate.
Psychoward
Banned
I don't think he meant GAF as a whole is like that, just there are threads where people judge each other for how they wipe but others will think it's silly to judge someone for extremely careless and harmful "political" beliefs.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Someone with a MAGA hat probably isn't asking me for directions lol
Tragicomedy
Member
"Don't want none? Don't vote Trump!"
Admittedly a work in progress.
Admittedly a work in progress.
Honestly, setting "religion and politics" aside is how we got to this point; Not holding people accountable for having objectively horrible views when they do.
You say that as though seperation of church and state isn't the greatest fallacy in American history.
You say that as though seperation of church and state isn't the greatest fallacy in American history.
The 'I have the morally superior high ground' belief that seems to emanate from people who figuratively walk with their eyes closed is troubling. This isn't some Star Wars movie where Obi-Wan has the high ground against Anakin. I see this scenario played out often from the political left during arguments or echo chamber discussions.The vitriol being spewed by people because they honestly believe they're morally superior is extremely hilarious. Picking and choosing when to not follow your virtues and scorn others for doing the same is a life of fraud. If you do such, you're basically a charlatan pretending to extol the virtues of righteousness. I would re-evaluate my core understanding of life if I were you. Wake up.
GuessMyUserName
Member
Yeah, I'm not *actually* saying GAF's like that, but pointing out the absurdity of the "don't judge others by their political beliefs!" crowd is when we make judgments over cheese on bread.
It absolutely says something about a person's character if they talk up about cops being people too as a response to black men getting gunned down, while completely denying the systemic issues of the latter.
Platinumstorm
Member
I don't like to judge someone on their political affiliation, but I do have problems when people post faulty/hateful information, and then continually bearing down with faulty information.
I am in the medical field, so I have many private 1v1 interactions with others, and people end up sharing information with me surprisingly freely, and they value my opinion as well; obviously more on healthcare than other areas. If I disagree with their views I try to share my opinion in a way that I feel is non-offensive to them, and helps them see things through a little different lens. It is pretty clear to me that people have the ability to adapt on individual positions, depending on how information is presented to them, and who it is coming from, and it's more likely if it's in a situation where they are only subject to information in a non-confrontational manner.
I regularly discuss the current healthcare situation, and I talk to anti ACA/Obamacare people and usually swing them over into concern for how things are headed. Sometimes they end up asking for my opinion on single payer. While I don't outright support it to them because it's not my role to be political; I'm their provider, after all, I tell them that other countries have been able to make it work, and it depends on what we want to prioritize as a nation. What I find is that many people tend to look at that in terms of the overall buzzwords like socialism, and that turns them off more than the idea of what healthcare for all actually represents.
As a medical student, I lived with people in a variety of places, and of different political persuasions. One of the people I lived with was wary of me because of my home state; she had a preconception about my political persuasion from my home state. I also lived with a very lovely couple who were on complete opposite ends of the political spectrum, and I had to do political discussions in both directions with them; but what's important is that they loved each other despite those differences.
You're going to have preconceptions of others, and that's ok because everyone does. What's less ok is the idea that everyone is more like stone than clay.
I am in the medical field, so I have many private 1v1 interactions with others, and people end up sharing information with me surprisingly freely, and they value my opinion as well; obviously more on healthcare than other areas. If I disagree with their views I try to share my opinion in a way that I feel is non-offensive to them, and helps them see things through a little different lens. It is pretty clear to me that people have the ability to adapt on individual positions, depending on how information is presented to them, and who it is coming from, and it's more likely if it's in a situation where they are only subject to information in a non-confrontational manner.
I regularly discuss the current healthcare situation, and I talk to anti ACA/Obamacare people and usually swing them over into concern for how things are headed. Sometimes they end up asking for my opinion on single payer. While I don't outright support it to them because it's not my role to be political; I'm their provider, after all, I tell them that other countries have been able to make it work, and it depends on what we want to prioritize as a nation. What I find is that many people tend to look at that in terms of the overall buzzwords like socialism, and that turns them off more than the idea of what healthcare for all actually represents.
As a medical student, I lived with people in a variety of places, and of different political persuasions. One of the people I lived with was wary of me because of my home state; she had a preconception about my political persuasion from my home state. I also lived with a very lovely couple who were on complete opposite ends of the political spectrum, and I had to do political discussions in both directions with them; but what's important is that they loved each other despite those differences.
You're going to have preconceptions of others, and that's ok because everyone does. What's less ok is the idea that everyone is more like stone than clay.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
So judgemental
MrSaturn99
Member
I know I've never been able to see my right-wing family and friends the same way again.
Golden_Pigeon
Banned
I think it depend on the subject. Right and Left in the West tend to have transformed to be separated more and more by morals issues than economics or real politics. I mean, take Hollande and Chirac, it's hard to say that Hollande was better. The foreign policy of Chirac was way more balanced and independent.
So if you stay at the most basic level of politics, the politicians playing with the lowest and dirtiest aspect of the humans beings, of course the people who follow that are falling into a moral decay based on fear, egoism and bigotry, so their political option represent their own moral ugliness.
On the other side, you have people who take the Left as a tool for their own glorification, to constantly recall to everybody else that they are the worst vile creature crawling on the Earth for having a dissenting opinion. And they are not free from bigotry or racism either but use the Left as a shield to not look inside their own social or racial prejudices.
But you have people who are totally upright, who believe in solidarity, justice and fairness but are not convinced that the left have the best tools to get there. In France we have very famous rightist who fought alongside the International Brigade to save the Spanish Republic from Franco's troops.
So if you stay at the most basic level of politics, the politicians playing with the lowest and dirtiest aspect of the humans beings, of course the people who follow that are falling into a moral decay based on fear, egoism and bigotry, so their political option represent their own moral ugliness.
On the other side, you have people who take the Left as a tool for their own glorification, to constantly recall to everybody else that they are the worst vile creature crawling on the Earth for having a dissenting opinion. And they are not free from bigotry or racism either but use the Left as a shield to not look inside their own social or racial prejudices.
But you have people who are totally upright, who believe in solidarity, justice and fairness but are not convinced that the left have the best tools to get there. In France we have very famous rightist who fought alongside the International Brigade to save the Spanish Republic from Franco's troops.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
It's not a strawman. I'm pretty sure you said every right leaning person is ignorant, or misguided or all those other things. I don't know how you can be so sure that you're right and others are wrong.
And a flat tax isn't just about lowering taxes, it's also about getting rid of loopholes and tax credits where the government picks winners and losers and disrupts the free market. For the record, I don't support a flat tax, but I know the reasons people support it, and it's not because "I'm so evil, I want poor people to be miserable and for me to swim in money". I think if you took the time to listen to what people were saying, you would come to find why they believe what they do, and it's usually NOT because they're evil/ignorant/misguided. (Speaking strictly of non-hateful politics).
crackhead_bob
Member
.
crackhead_bob
Member
I think there needs to be a concerted effort to explain the difference between what counts as civilized debate and others that should never be up for debate. I think we tend to get caught up in this predicament before we realize it, and by the time we do, we're pretty much stuck arguing the merits of creationism as if it were a legitimate science. Things like these need to be shot down before they even have a chance to take hold. And we need to be able to do it in such a way that it's rendered impotent in any respectable forum. How that's accomplished is another story.
The one thing I've observed is how these people try to equate differences of opinions on women's rights or lgbt rights as being on the same benign level as harmless everyday arguments like Honda vs. Chevy, or whether The Godfather is the greatest film of all time. I'm not the best when it comes to articulating my thoughts here, so I'm hoping someone can elaborate my point better.
Impossible for me not to judge any Conservative Americans. Even the UK Conservatives come off as being ALOT more sane than the American ones.
I have no problem with people being right winged like libertarians. I have alot of Libertarian friends and they actually have many understandable beliefs. I might not agree with them on alot of things but atleast their beliefs can make sense. You can be right winged and not be crazy.
I can't think of anything that I like or can understand with US Conservatives. Especially the Poor ones. Atleast wealthy conservatives could get some benefits but the poor ones are just voting to fuck themselves out of the hope that minorities get more fucked.
RANT INCOMING:
I went to college (I transferred out of that garbage school) with sooooo many poor conservatives it was infuriating. These people though I was rich because I could upgrade my phone every 8ish months and go out every day. If you're that poor than you shouldn't even need to be told why voting for someone like Bernie Sanders (or literally anyone not conservative) would be better for you.
Yet they came up with a billion dumb excuses like " Obama was a Muslim and the Democrats supported a Muslim". WHAT??? What does that have to do with anything? His people tried to give your poor asses some health care so you don't have to be afraid to go to the hospital because "it costs too much".
Im so glad I transferred away from that school lol. The deep south was crazy
I have no problem with people being right winged like libertarians. I have alot of Libertarian friends and they actually have many understandable beliefs. I might not agree with them on alot of things but atleast their beliefs can make sense. You can be right winged and not be crazy.
I can't think of anything that I like or can understand with US Conservatives. Especially the Poor ones. Atleast wealthy conservatives could get some benefits but the poor ones are just voting to fuck themselves out of the hope that minorities get more fucked.
RANT INCOMING:
I went to college (I transferred out of that garbage school) with sooooo many poor conservatives it was infuriating. These people though I was rich because I could upgrade my phone every 8ish months and go out every day. If you're that poor than you shouldn't even need to be told why voting for someone like Bernie Sanders (or literally anyone not conservative) would be better for you.
Yet they came up with a billion dumb excuses like " Obama was a Muslim and the Democrats supported a Muslim". WHAT??? What does that have to do with anything? His people tried to give your poor asses some health care so you don't have to be afraid to go to the hospital because "it costs too much".
Im so glad I transferred away from that school lol. The deep south was crazy
Nastrodamous
Member
Yes, because im black.
To be honest I am probably more likely to judge you negatively if you dont judge people based on their political beliefs.
Politics often inform a persons morals and vis versa. If you have political beliefs that negatively impact others against their willnthen of course I am going to judge you for it.
I see no problem whatsoever. Especially as a biracial person/minority. These people with their right wing politics are literally evil in my view. Fuck them and anyone who enables them.
Politics often inform a persons morals and vis versa. If you have political beliefs that negatively impact others against their willnthen of course I am going to judge you for it.
I see no problem whatsoever. Especially as a biracial person/minority. These people with their right wing politics are literally evil in my view. Fuck them and anyone who enables them.
crackhead_bob
Member
Serious question, because I'm not the most eloquent when it comes to stating my views, but what's the best response to those who say, this is why liberals lost and will continue to lose, as if far-right reactionary views were somehow less ornery and offensive. I find it to be a disingenuous non sequitur given that they always deflect on some of the more repugnant things that have been uttered by luminaries from within their ranks.
Also, another thing I would like anyone to enlighten me on. Was the Final Solution ever proposed as a campaign promise, or was merely excluding the jewish population from civil and public life the order of the day, and it eventually snowballed into what it was, because I have the sense that many today who tolerate white supremacy in America do so under the privileged assumption that it would never reach the levels of depravity during the second world war. It's similar how (and this is my assumption only) homophobes like to tout the moral supremacy of their stance in merely discriminating against homosexuals as opposed to the extreme practices of Muslim extremists who throw gays off the top of buildings. Personally, I'm tired of how people are supposed to accept this premise without question, simply because the bodies haven't begun to pile up on the streets.
I think this is the moral framework that a lot of people who voted for Trump, who while maybe are aware of the mistake they made, can't come to grips with, or understand why there is the level of enmity against them by liberals. Are progressives being too harsh in their judgment? I don't know. That's a personal decision that each individual must make. For what it's worth, I do reserve a harsh opinion on Trump voters, and become quite perturbed by their indignance when they try to deflect their moral culpability in voting for this serial adulterer, con man, fuck up-in-chief as if their decision was ever grounded in notions of nobility.
Also, another thing I would like anyone to enlighten me on. Was the Final Solution ever proposed as a campaign promise, or was merely excluding the jewish population from civil and public life the order of the day, and it eventually snowballed into what it was, because I have the sense that many today who tolerate white supremacy in America do so under the privileged assumption that it would never reach the levels of depravity during the second world war. It's similar how (and this is my assumption only) homophobes like to tout the moral supremacy of their stance in merely discriminating against homosexuals as opposed to the extreme practices of Muslim extremists who throw gays off the top of buildings. Personally, I'm tired of how people are supposed to accept this premise without question, simply because the bodies haven't begun to pile up on the streets.
I think this is the moral framework that a lot of people who voted for Trump, who while maybe are aware of the mistake they made, can't come to grips with, or understand why there is the level of enmity against them by liberals. Are progressives being too harsh in their judgment? I don't know. That's a personal decision that each individual must make. For what it's worth, I do reserve a harsh opinion on Trump voters, and become quite perturbed by their indignance when they try to deflect their moral culpability in voting for this serial adulterer, con man, fuck up-in-chief as if their decision was ever grounded in notions of nobility.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Theres a single basis of moral and political life, and this supreme basis determines the right way to proceed. I have access to this supreme basis. When others dont agree with me, its because they have the wrong faith commitments or they arent analyzing things properly. Agreement with me is a prerequisite to solving our problems. Consequently, I have nothing to learn about these matters from those who disagree with me. Their participation is at best an irrelevant distraction and at worst an evil to be defeated. My diagnosis of the issue has precisely captured all that is morally or politically relevant. Its exhaustive, hence beyond revision and reformulation.
via Steven Fesmire
Similar threads
- Locked