I feel like most of your criticism of ideas/etc in this thread comes from the idea that the person making the argument is disingenuous and doesn't actually support the position they offer, or has some hidden motive, often sinister. Most people aren't like that.
Well, when your sole aim is to argue in bad faith, then yeah, you’re right.
I think the people who are trying to garner electoral power, gain capital, or actually implement policy are often like this, yes, because I have lived and seen it with my own eyes. Regular people I just think are misinformed and ignorant, which I don't really think is most people's fault, because the people mentioned in the first sentence also tend to be part of the media or ruling classes that can distort information.
That's pretty much how all big corporations are. Just like how companies such as Starbucks and Sony say they support BLM when they employ actual black slave labor in the creation of their products. Companies like these are known for abusing workers, especially children, and yet here they are claiming to care about things like BLM; additionally, you have companies like Amazon who purposefully promoted an inarticulate black man to head of the worker's union there in order to tarnish the look and reputation of the union so that they could continue to abuse their workers.
But how do see the two as seperate? I get what you mean, but isn't one's identity defined by their experience?
So everyone is misinformed and ignorant unless they are part of the elite class, in which case they are disingenuous power grabbers. With that level of cynicism, I can see how things you disagree with often morph into the sheep arguing for sake of the wolf. But just because a corrupt actor can support a position or that there's a corrupt motivation to support a position does not mean that every person with that position lacks the idealogical foundation to support it. You might as well just say, "people who hold this view are ignorant and naive", but that's not an argument that would affect any individual's view. While it's important to understand the context of ideology, it's more useful to be discussing the virtue of a view rather than the virtue of what led a person to have that view, particularly if you are trying to change someone's view.
Yes, but your race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation should not define your identity. The fact that I am white is most definitely the most boring and most irrelevant aspect about me. My experiences are significantly more different than those of the average white guy in America anyway. I believe the same is true for every black, latino, gay, trans, etc. person.
race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation are a list of things that DO define your identity. I understand that you think they shouldn't and in some cases it'd be awesome if it really didn't, but what you're stating is an opinion. That being said, if you're just saying that in your opinion they should not define your identity then disregard.
That doesn't make any sense, though. I see what you mean and what you're trying to say, but you shouldn't just deny those things and the parts of your makeup that seperate you from those average white men. Not saying you can't. It just usually doesn't end well.
It's actually the reverse. The US healthcare system is one of the most cost-inefficient in the world. I'm now sure where you got this bit of logic from, but the facts on the cost actually say the opposite.
Yeah, but the issue is not how much you earn -- it's what you earn vs. what you have to spend to live your life. Your true expendable income is what's left after you subtract all of your expenses; and in this country, that means subtracting health care, education, etc.
I am proud of my Croatian origin and my German upbringing just as much as I am proud of being an American citizen. You can equally embrace all aspects of yourself without overemphasizing, de-emphasizing, or circumventing any.
Many would like to do the same, but they cannot, as they are treated as political footballs just to score points. Trans rights have seen a rapid degradation under the Trump regime, to the point that there is a bill being passed around that would suggest homeless shelters can "inspect" women going into their shelters to see if they're biological women. They're also not allowed to participate in the military, and the government has already rolled back protections that would see trans people safe from discrimination by medical professionals.
That's fair. Thank you for making that make sense. Total agreement.
All of this, I also fully agree with.
This is where we were in 2016, though. Every poll had Hillary up; no sane person thought Donald "grab em by the pussy" Trump had a snowball's chance in hell. Then nobody showed up to vote and here we are. All these polls are making me nervous that people will get overconfident again and not vote because they assume he'll lose. We're also already seeing blatant voter suppression and election interference. The post office is now controlled by a Trump goon and unidentified agents are hauling away people in unmarked vans. This shit ain't over til it's over.
That's all facts.
Wait what??
Google "unmarked van" and you can find a ton of sources. Unidentified agents are straight kidnapping protestors in Portland and other locations. Here is an actual video of it happening:
Yup, shit is crazy. And they aren’t identifying themselves or saying anything. Just taking people away from what I’ve seen.
