WHY THE PAST 10 YEARS OF AMERICAN LIFE HAVE BEEN UNIQUELY STUPID

[vy65]

The stupefying process plays out differently on the right and the left because their activist wings subscribe to different narratives with different sacred values. The “Hidden Tribes” study tells us that the “devoted conservatives” score highest on beliefs related to authoritarianism. They share a narrative in which America is eternally under threat from enemies outside and subversives within; they see life as a battle between patriots and traitors. According to the political scientist Karen Stenner, whose work the “Hidden Tribes” study drew upon, they are psychologically different from the larger group of “traditional conservatives” (19 percent of the population), who emphasize order, decorum, and slow rather than radical change.

Only within the devoted conservatives’ narratives do Donald Trump’s speeches make sense, from his campaign’s ominous opening diatribe about Mexican “rapists” to his warning on January 6, 2021: “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

The traditional punishment for treason is death, hence the battle cry on January 6: “Hang Mike Pence.” Right-wing death threats, many delivered by anonymous accounts, are proving effective in cowing traditional conservatives, for example in driving out local election officials who failed to “stop the steal.” The wave of threats delivered to dissenting Republican members of Congress has similarly pushed many of the remaining moderates to quit or go silent, giving us a party ever more divorced from the conservative tradition, constitutional responsibility, and reality. We now have a Republican Party that describes a violent assault on the U.S. Capitol as “legitimate political discourse,” supported—or at least not contradicted—by an array of right-wing think tanks and media organizations.

The stupidity on the right is most visible in the many conspiracy theories spreading across right-wing media and now into Congress. “Pizzagate,” QAnon, the belief that vaccines contain microchips, the conviction that Donald Trump won reelection—it’s hard to imagine any of these ideas or belief systems reaching the levels that they have without Facebook and Twitter.

The Democrats have also been hit hard by structural stupidity, though in a different way. In the Democratic Party, the struggle between the progressive wing and the more moderate factions is open and ongoing, and often the moderates win. The problem is that the left controls the commanding heights of the culture: universities, news organizations, Hollywood, art museums, advertising, much of Silicon Valley, and the teachers’ unions and teaching colleges that shape K–12 education. And in many of those institutions, dissent has been stifled: When everyone was issued a dart gun in the early 2010s, many left-leaning institutions began shooting themselves in the brain. And unfortunately, those were the brains that inform, instruct, and entertain most of the country.

Liberals in the late 20th century shared a belief that the sociologist Christian Smith called the “liberal progress” narrative, in which America used to be horrifically unjust and repressive, but, thanks to the struggles of activists and heroes, has made (and continues to make) progress toward realizing the noble promise of its founding. This story easily supports liberal patriotism, and it was the animating narrative of Barack Obama’s presidency. It is also the view of the “traditional liberals” in the “Hidden Tribes” study (11 percent of the population), who have strong humanitarian values, are older than average, and are largely the people leading America’s cultural and intellectual institutions.

But when the newly viralized social-media platforms gave everyone a dart gun, it was younger progressive activists who did the most shooting, and they aimed a disproportionate number of their darts at these older liberal leaders. Confused and fearful, the leaders rarely challenged the activists or their nonliberal narrative in which life at every institution is an eternal battle among identity groups over a zero-sum pie, and the people on top got there by oppressing the people on the bottom. This new narrative is rigidly egalitarian––focused on equality of outcomes, not of rights or opportunities. It is unconcerned with individual rights.

The universal charge against people who disagree with this narrative is not “traitor”; it is “racist,” “transphobe,” “Karen,” or some related scarlet letter marking the perpetrator as one who hates or harms a marginalized group. The punishment that feels right for such crimes is not execution; it is public shaming and social death.

You can see the stupefaction process most clearly when a person on the left merely points to research that questions or contradicts a favored belief among progressive activists. Someone on Twitter will find a way to associate the dissenter with racism, and others will pile on. For example, in the first week of protests after the killing of George Floyd, some of which included violence, the progressive policy analyst David Shor, then employed by Civis Analytics, tweeted a link to a study showing that violent protests back in the 1960s led to electoral setbacks for the Democrats in nearby counties. Shor was clearly trying to be helpful, but in the ensuing outrage he was accused of “anti-Blackness” and was soon dismissed from his job. (Civis Analytics has denied that the tweet led to Shor’s firing.)

The Shor case became famous, but anyone on Twitter had already seen dozens of examples teaching the basic lesson: Don’t question your own side’s beliefs, policies, or actions. And when traditional liberals go silent, as so many did in the summer of 2020, the progressive activists’ more radical narrative takes over as the governing narrative of an organization. This is why so many epistemic institutions seemed to “go woke” in rapid succession that year and the next, beginning with a wave of controversies and resignations at The New York Times and other newspapers, and continuing on to social-justice pronouncements by groups of doctors and medical associations (one publication by the American Medical Association and the Association of American Medical Colleges, for instance, advised medical professionals to refer to neighborhoods and communities as “oppressed” or “systematically divested” instead of “vulnerable” or “poor”), and the hurried transformation of curricula at New York City’s most expensive private schools.

Tragically, we see stupefaction playing out on both sides in the COVID wars. The right has been so committed to minimizing the risks of COVID that it has turned the disease into one that preferentially kills Republicans. The progressive left is so committed to maximizing the dangers of COVID that it often embraces an equally maximalist, one-size-fits-all strategy for vaccines, masks, and social distancing—even as they pertain to children. Such policies are not as deadly as spreading fears and lies about vaccines, but many of them have been devastating for the mental health and education of children, who desperately need to play with one another and go to school; we have little clear evidence that school closures and masks for young children reduce deaths from COVID. Most notably for the story I’m telling here, progressive parents who argued against school closures were frequently savaged on social media and met with the ubiquitous leftist accusations of racism and white supremacy. Others in blue cities learned to keep quiet.

American politics is getting ever more ridiculous and dysfunctional not because Americans are getting less intelligent. The problem is structural. Thanks to enhanced-virality social media, dissent is punished within many of our institutions, which means that bad ideas get elevated into official policy.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/

[pgardn]

This following definitely caught my attention when encountering such freakish behavior on this board. Isolation leads to weird consequences for evolutionarily built social structures.
We were made to interact face to face, and looking at body language etc... Fortunately I still get to do this as well as a lot of exercise outside with and without other people. So I completely dont get using purposely incorrect information to make decisions because where I work this is absolutely the worst thing you can do to accomplish a task.

Once social-media platforms had trained users to spend more time performing and less time connecting, the stage was set for the major transformation, which began in 2009: the intensification of viral dynamics.

[Thread]

Please. 1 event and 1 event only changed everything. And you know what it was without me stating it, but I will nonetheless...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

[baseline bum]

The left controlling news organizations and Silicon Valley :lmao

[baseline bum]

Must be why MSNBC, NY Times, and the Washington Post pushed Bernie so hard over Clinton and Biden

[vy65]

The left controlling news organizations and Silicon Valley :lmao


Must be why MSNBC, NY Times, and the Washington Post pushed Bernie so hard over Clinton and Biden

Those news organizations are still left of center. Viewed from Bernie's perspective, they are more center-right leaning. However, that perspective is from a political edge, and not the center, which is one of the central things criticized.

[DMC]

The left has an identity crisis. They are run by old school dems but the liberals are more than willing to call them out for not throwing enough darts at their own group. This is what happens when blind inclusion results in electing enemies of the state.

[Spurminator]

This is what happens when blind inclusion results in electing enemies of the state.


The “Hidden Tribes” study tells us that the “devoted conservatives” score highest on beliefs related to authoritarianism. They share a narrative in which America is eternally under threat from enemies outside and subversives within; they see life as a battle between patriots and traitors.

[Spurminator]

The article has good insights but what the both-sidesing fails to acknowledge is that while the moderate Republicans are being driven out by the crazy wing of the party (with the approval of people who would still consider themselves moderate), the moderate-to-conservative Democrats still have firm control over their party. For better or worse.

[DMC]

Our research concludes that we have become a set of tribes, with different codes, values, and even facts. In our public debates, it seems that we no longer just disagree. We reject each other’s premises and doubt each other’s motives. We question each other’s character. We block our ears to diverse perspectives. At home, polarization is souring personal relationships, ruining Thanksgiving dinners, and driving families apart.

[DMC]

The article has good insights but what the both-sidesing fails to acknowledge is that while the moderate Republicans are being driven out by the crazy wing of the party (with the approval of people who would still consider themselves moderate), the moderate-to-conservative Democrats still have firm control over their party. For better or worse.

It's about personality and ability to win. Your stance means jack shit if you cannot win the office.

[baseline bum]

Those news organizations are still left of center. Viewed from Bernie's perspective, they are more center-right leaning. However, that perspective is from a political edge, and not the center, which is one of the central things criticized.

Not even close, those news organizations are pure 100% moderate Democrat mouthpieces, there is no opposition whatsoever to moderate Democrat agendas from these supposedly leftist news companies. Bernie is the centrist, more than half the country wants single payer healthcare instead of the current mess we have and that has been Sanders' main focus for the last decade. Sanders represents the majority but what the people want means jack shit in this nation.

[spurraider21]

Not even close, those news organizations are pure 100% moderate Democrat mouthpieces, there is no opposition whatsoever to moderate Democrat agendas from these supposedly leftist news companies. Bernie is the centrist, more than half the country wants single payer healthcare instead of the current mess we have and that has been Sanders' main focus for the last decade. Sanders represents the majority but what the people want means jack shit in this nation.
meh

"medicare for all" polls well

when people are actually polled on what that entails of (banning private health insurance), it performs much worse

[baseline bum]

meh

"medicare for all" polls well

when people are actually polled on what that entails of (banning private health insurance), it performs much worse

Yeah if you frame it like they're losing something, bureaucrats getting in between you and your doctor, etc

[RandomGuy]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/

Good article for the most part. :tu

Like any centrist that tries to sound unbiased, the author tries to "both sides" it a bit much. The right and the left are not by any means equally radicalized.

[RandomGuy]

meh

"medicare for all" polls well

when people are actually polled on what that entails of (banning private health insurance), it performs much worse

medicare for all doesn't have to ban private insurance. It can provide the same service at much lower costs, so many private insurers who have to pay big bucks to their shareholders at the policyholders expense will find it very hard to compete.

[spurraider21]

medicare for all doesn't have to ban private insurance. It can provide the same service at much lower costs, so many private insurers who have to pay big bucks to their shareholders at the policyholders expense will find it very hard to compete.
medicare for all, as proposed by bernie sanders, does

[vy65]

Good article for the most part. :tu

Like any centrist that tries to sound unbiased, the author tries to "both sides" it a bit much. The right and the left are not by any means equally radicalized.

I don't think that if you asked Haidt (certainly if you asked me) that he'd say that the left and the right are equal in shittiness. They're not, the right is worse.

What's more interesting to me is that yours, and BB's, and I suspect other's reactions to the article is: the left is better than the right. That seems to miss the overarching point of the article - both right and left are being hijacked by extremist elements that have weaponized social media. In that respect, I think left and right are equal.

[ChumpDumper]

The left has an identity crisis. They are run by old school dems but the liberals are more than willing to call them out for not throwing enough darts at their own group. This is what happens when blind inclusion results in electing enemies of the state.
:lol your party is the one committing and planning more treason.

[spurraider21]

I don't think that if you asked Haidt (certainly if you asked me) that he'd say that the left and the right are equal in shittiness. They're not, the right is worse.

What's more interesting to me is that yours, and BB's, and I suspect other's reactions to the article is: the left is better than the right. That seems to miss the overarching point of the article - both right and left are being hijacked by extremist elements that have weaponized social media. In that respect, I think left and right are equal.
i think this is disingenuous both-sides'ing

im not talking about twitter randos. if you look at the actual elected representatives between the parties, how many elected members of congress are "loony far left"... i mean for the sake of argument id grant the obvious Cori Bush, and then you can work through Omar, Tlaib, Pressley, AOC (thought i'd also argue AOC has tamed quite a bit). in the senate you have bernie (though he's much more measured than any of the others i mentioned).

so first, id ask who else you would consider part of the "extremist element" of the left that currently has power. second, i'd ask if this extremist wing actually is "hijacking" the party. are these people really the ones deciding which way the party goes? absolutely not.

otoh, you look at the right, and honestly you can just start and end with Trump. the guy who called Mo Brooks "woke" because Brooks said the 2020 election is over. Mo Brooks. Woke. trump is still by far the most influential voice on the right. the whole party, even those who dont openly support his election nonsense, are still trying to appease him by constantly centering all discussions around election integrity.

there's no comparison. and thats without even getting into the substance of policy.

[spurraider21]

its not really centrism if you are giving equal footing to disproportionate levels of craziness. its like saying "some people say bigfoot is real. others say he's fake. clearly both sides have a problem and cant compromise"

[spurraider21]

its not really centrism if you are giving equal footing to disproportionate levels of craziness. its like saying "some people say bigfoot is real. others say he's fake. clearly both sides have a problem and cant compromise"

[vy65]

i think this is disingenuous both-sides'ing

im not talking about twitter randos. if you look at the actual elected representatives between the parties, how many elected members of congress are "loony far left"... i mean for the sake of argument id grant the obvious Cori Bush, and then you can work through Omar, Tlaib, Pressley, AOC (thought i'd also argue AOC has tamed quite a bit). in the senate you have bernie (though he's much more measured than any of the others i mentioned).

so first, id ask who else you would consider part of the "extremist element" of the left that currently has power. second, i'd ask if this extremist wing actually is "hijacking" the party. are these people really the ones deciding which way the party goes? absolutely not.

otoh, you look at the right, and honestly you can just start and end with Trump. the guy who called Mo Brooks "woke" because Brooks said the 2020 election is over. Mo Brooks. Woke. trump is still by far the most influential voice on the right. the whole party, even those who dont openly support his election nonsense, are still trying to appease him by constantly centering all discussions around election integrity.

there's no comparison. and thats without even getting into the substance of policy.

I think you're narrowing the scope of the article and the issue with this caveat. Like I said, the right is worse. I think Haidt would agree with me too. What he and I would take issue though is that you're focusing on elected officials and, rightfully, saying those on the right are worse. We get it - they are. But there is a cultural dynamic that is going on that you're not appreciating/losing out on when you focus on elected officials in Washington.

What's being lost out are twitter randos, activists, academics, and other cultural outlets like actors, musicians, etc... The cultural institutions Haidt identifies have had and are having a profound effect on the way we talk and think about (from both perspectives) and the loudest voices in the room are coming from the extremes and not the center. While that may not be reflected in congress yet doesn't mean it's not happening.

[DarrinS]

Good article. :tu


Lol, all the complaints of "both-sides'ing".

[DMC]

Good article for the most part. :tu

Like any centrist that tries to sound unbiased, the author tries to "both sides" it a bit much. The right and the left are not by any means equally radicalized.

You're not properly calibrated to be a standard for that assessment.

[DMC]

its not really centrism if you are giving equal footing to disproportionate levels of craziness. its like saying "some people say bigfoot is real. others say he's fake. clearly both sides have a problem and cant compromise"

Your hyperbole aside, centrist is up to the beholder. In your case you seem to feel centrist is more left than I would consider it to be. So you'd have to take all the viewpoints equally and find the middle to find true centrist. It doesn't just mean the center beliefs you feel aren't crazy.

[DMC]

i think this is disingenuous both-sides'ing

im not talking about twitter randos. if you look at the actual elected representatives between the parties, how many elected members of congress are "loony far left"... i mean for the sake of argument id grant the obvious Cori Bush, and then you can work through Omar, Tlaib, Pressley, AOC (thought i'd also argue AOC has tamed quite a bit). in the senate you have bernie (though he's much more measured than any of the others i mentioned).

so first, id ask who else you would consider part of the "extremist element" of the left that currently has power. second, i'd ask if this extremist wing actually is "hijacking" the party. are these people really the ones deciding which way the party goes? absolutely not.

otoh, you look at the right, and honestly you can just start and end with Trump. the guy who called Mo Brooks "woke" because Brooks said the 2020 election is over. Mo Brooks. Woke. trump is still by far the most influential voice on the right. the whole party, even those who dont openly support his election nonsense, are still trying to appease him by constantly centering all discussions around election integrity.

there's no comparison. and thats without even getting into the substance of policy.

Social media isn't dominated by elected officials.

[Spurminator]

Good article. :tu


Lol, all the complaints of "both-sides'ing".

Another valuable contribution :tu Thank you for offering so much to intellectually stimulate us.

[Spurminator]

It's about personality and ability to win. Your stance means jack shit if you cannot win the office.

Maybe for Republicans. The types who elect Donald Trump to the Presidency and whoever else shouts the craziest things the loudest.

Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi don't continue to win elections on their "personality."

[baseline bum]

I don't think that if you asked Haidt (certainly if you asked me) that he'd say that the left and the right are equal in shittiness. They're not, the right is worse.

What's more interesting to me is that yours, and BB's, and I suspect other's reactions to the article is: the left is better than the right. That seems to miss the overarching point of the article - both right and left are being hijacked by extremist elements that have weaponized social media. In that respect, I think left and right are equal.

What do you even mean by the left? What exactly is the left in America? Bernie Sanders? Because it's really hard to argue the Democratic party is being hijacked by the left when their last two nominations were Clinton and Biden and when the party went all out to deny Sanders a primary win in 2020 by having everyone drop out and endorse Biden as soon as Bernie had momentum going. This is some bothsides crap. The left has no big media like Clear Channel, Fox News, or Sinclair pushing their agenda onto the Democratic party.

[DarrinS]

Another valuable contribution :tu Thank you for offering so much to intellectually stimulate us.


I can appreciate the argument made in the article without hurt feelings. You, and some others, had a different reaction.

[baseline bum]

I think you're narrowing the scope of the article and the issue with this caveat. Like I said, the right is worse. I think Haidt would agree with me too. What he and I would take issue though is that you're focusing on elected officials and, rightfully, saying those on the right are worse. We get it - they are. But there is a cultural dynamic that is going on that you're not appreciating/losing out on when you focus on elected officials in Washington.

What's being lost out are twitter randos, activists, academics, and other cultural outlets like actors, musicians, etc... The cultural institutions Haidt identifies have had and are having a profound effect on the way we talk and think about (from both perspectives) and the loudest voices in the room are coming from the extremes and not the center. While that may not be reflected in congress yet doesn't mean it's not happening.

Academics, actors, and musicians have been largely on the left for 50 years now, means nothing. None of them run the nation. The elected officials do. And again, the center is closer to Bernie than it is Biden or Romney much less Trump. We're the majority but we can't buy off politicians.

[DarrinS]

Academics, actors, and musicians have been largely on the left for 50 years now, means nothing. None of them run the nation. The elected officials do. And again, the center is closer to Bernie than it is Biden or Romney much less Trump. We're the majority but we can't buy off politicians.

Wut?

[ChumpDumper]

I can appreciate the argument made in the article without hurt feelings. You, and some others, had a different reaction.Your feelings are hurt by imaginary CRT and math problems.

[baseline bum]

Wut?

Bernie is the only one pushing for single payer healthcare and it's what he runs on.

[Blake]

Good article. :tu


Lol, all the complaints of "both-sides'ing".

I mean, conservatives want creation taught in school while liberals want evolution taught. There's GOTTA be common ground somewhere!

Or not.

[spurraider21]

I think you're narrowing the scope of the article and the issue with this caveat. Like I said, the right is worse. I think Haidt would agree with me too. What he and I would take issue though is that you're focusing on elected officials and, rightfully, saying those on the right are worse. We get it - they are. But there is a cultural dynamic that is going on that you're not appreciating/losing out on when you focus on elected officials in Washington.

What's being lost out are twitter randos, activists, academics, and other cultural outlets like actors, musicians, etc... The cultural institutions Haidt identifies have had and are having a profound effect on the way we talk and think about (from both perspectives) and the loudest voices in the room are coming from the extremes and not the center. While that may not be reflected in congress yet doesn't mean it's not happening.
because if you dont narrow it, its somewhat meaningless. how can you actually measure how prominent the "crazy left" is vs the "crazy right"? well i know the crazy right is actually represented at the highest levels of government, but ive seen some people get ratio'd on twitter so i guess both sides have a crazy problem. if you want to present to what extent each side has a problem, then you should be able to quantify it for us to have real takeaways. i'd say what faction of each side actually directs policy for that party or has significant power within the party is pretty important, as opposed to just claiming that both sides have some issues within their fringes.

if the loudest voices on the left were actually coming from the extremes, we'd see much more of those extremes being represented in legislative bodies. spoiler alert: we dont.

and this isnt me arguing substantively that the crazy left is "better" than the crazy right. i'm just saying what most people would consider the "crazy left" has almost no pull in national politics whereas what people would consider the "crazy right" basically has a strangehold on the entire GOP

[Thread]

I mean, conservatives want creation taught in school while liberals want evolution taught. There's GOTTA be common ground somewhere!

Or not.

Blake, acting like somebody, all the sudden.

Look at ya; you look like a million bucks, sweetheart.

[ElNono]

Hard to argue politics has taken a hard turn towards idiocracy, and social media, lacking any sort of depth, greatly contributes to that.

We can argue whether the left more, or the right more, but there should be relative consensus that this turn is a disservice to the nation.

[Blake]

Blake, acting like somebody, all the sudden.

Look at ya; you look like a million bucks, sweetheart.

Sorry I should have used the sarcastic colored font.

[ElNono]

It's like a race to the bottom too... like who can have the most attention whoring, untenable position...

[Thread]

Sorry I should have used the sarcastic colored font.

Or, the sourpuss you've been carrying around for 3 days straight.

[spurraider21]

Hard to argue politics has taken a hard turn towards idiocracy, and social media, lacking any sort of depth, greatly contributes to that.

We can argue whether the left more, or the right more, but there should be relative consensus that this turn is a disservice to the nation.
social media, and in particular, twitter, have been catastrophic when it comes to political discourse. it all comes down to a nice zinger in 280 characters, or a 90 second soundbite, as opposed to anything resembling an informed discussion or people actually articulating their positions.

its how morons like rand paul get so popular. oh here's a baller 90 second clip of me talking shit to fauci in his face and calling for him to resign. nevermind the fact that he responded and tore down every mistake i made in that clip, you dont get to see that!

and while i used rand as my example, id say that phenomenon isnt exclusive to the right... though again, i will always defer to the fact that the "loony right" has much more pull than the "loony left" so for every 1 democrat politician who pulls a stunt like that, there are 4-5 republicans doing the same. i'd say same with pundits. conservative pundits largely dominate social media.

[Thread]

social media, and in particular, twitter, have been catastrophic when it comes to political discourse. it all comes down to a nice zinger in 280 characters, or a 90 second soundbite, as opposed to anything resembling an informed discussion or people actually articulating their positions.

its how morons like rand paul get so popular. oh here's a baller 90 second clip of me talking shit to fauci in his face and calling for him to resign. nevermind the fact that he responded and tore down every mistake i made in that clip, you dont get to see that!

and while i used rand as my example, id say that phenomenon isnt exclusive to the right... though again, i will always defer to the fact that the "loony right" has much more pull than the "loony left" so for every 1 democrat politician who pulls a stunt like that, there are 4-5 republicans doing the same. i'd say same with pundits. conservative pundits largely dominate social media.

You have to figure a way to turn the clock back, 21.

Chop/chop!!!

[Spurminator]

I can appreciate the argument made in the article without hurt feelings. You, and some others, had a different reaction.

My feelings weren't hurt. I agree with pretty much everything the author said. I don't agree that the problem is equal on both sides.

[DMC]

Maybe for Republicans. The types who elect Donald Trump to the Presidency and whoever else shouts the craziest things the loudest.

Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi don't continue to win elections on their "personality."

Personality meaning who you run. Why didn't Bernie win, or Bootyjugs? You run who you think can win. Joe didn't win because of his stance. He won because he was Obama's VP and he wasn't Trump.

[DMC]

My feelings weren't hurt. I agree with pretty much everything the author said. I don't agree that the problem is equal on both sides.

Of course, you and RG do the full face paint, cheese head blue fan shit. Your side is never wrong.

[DMC]

Hard to argue politics has taken a hard turn towards idiocracy, and social media, lacking any sort of depth, greatly contributes to that.

We can argue whether the left more, or the right more, but there should be relative consensus that this turn is a disservice to the nation.

I disagree about social media. It's like saying rap contributes to gang violence. Social media is a by product of a failing society, it's not the cause.

[vy65]

because if you dont narrow it, its somewhat meaningless. how can you actually measure how prominent the "crazy left" is vs the "crazy right"? well i know the crazy right is actually represented at the highest levels of government, but ive seen some people get ratio'd on twitter so i guess both sides have a crazy problem. if you want to present to what extent each side has a problem, then you should be able to quantify it for us to have real takeaways. i'd say what faction of each side actually directs policy for that party or has significant power within the party is pretty important, as opposed to just claiming that both sides have some issues within their fringes.

if the loudest voices on the left were actually coming from the extremes, we'd see much more of those extremes being represented in legislative bodies. spoiler alert: we dont.

and this isnt me arguing substantively that the crazy left is "better" than the crazy right. i'm just saying what most people would consider the "crazy left" has almost no pull in national politics whereas what people would consider the "crazy right" basically has a strangehold on the entire GOP

Why is it meaningless? I’m sure if you and I cared enough, we could find a volume of social psychology research that tries to quantify/measure this shit on social media, but I don’t think that’s even necessary. The past 10 years (and especially the past 2, post Floyd) has seen a marked shift to the left in terms of pet political agendas like identity politics and on the right in terms of qanon retardation like stop the steal. It’d be nice if we could quantify it, but cultural/social psychology issues like this are always going to be more art than science and you’re trying to fit a round peg through a round hole by reducing the issue to what can be quantified, whether through elected representatives or otherwise.

[vy65]

I disagree about social media. It's like saying rap contributes to gang violence. Social media is a by product of a failing society, it's not the cause.

And the award for the laziest, offhand, and completely unsupported analogy (if you can even call it that) goes to …

[vy65]

social media, and in particular, twitter, have been catastrophic when it comes to political discourse. it all comes down to a nice zinger in 280 characters, or a 90 second soundbite, as opposed to anything resembling an informed discussion or people actually articulating their positions.

its how morons like rand paul get so popular. oh here's a baller 90 second clip of me talking shit to fauci in his face and calling for him to resign. nevermind the fact that he responded and tore down every mistake i made in that clip, you dont get to see that!

and while i used rand as my example, id say that phenomenon isnt exclusive to the right... though again, i will always defer to the fact that the "loony right" has much more pull than the "loony left" so for every 1 democrat politician who pulls a stunt like that, there are 4-5 republicans doing the same. i'd say same with pundits. conservative pundits largely dominate social media.

Agree with all of this and would add the mob mentality/burn the witch phenomenon compounds the problem

[DMC]

And the award for the laziest, offhand, and completely unsupported analogy (if you can even call it that) goes to …

You think giving people a voice and the ability to read and hear others leads to a failed society? Do you think there should be some arbiter of truth who ensures only that deemed to be truth gets disseminated to the masses? Come to Russia.

[vy65]

You think giving people a voice and the ability to read and hear others leads to a failed society? Do you think there should be some arbiter of truth who ensures only that deemed to be truth gets disseminated to the masses? Come to Russia.

I think that you offered nothing to support your lazy and stupid analogy other than asking me stupid rhetorical, non-sequitur questions rather than attempting to support said lazy and stupid analogy.

[DMC]

I think that you offered nothing to support your lazy and stupid analogy other than asking me stupid rhetorical, non-sequitur questions rather than attempting to support said lazy and stupid analogy.

Maybe I could just post an article like you, that's not lazy at all.

[daslicer]

What do you even mean by the left? What exactly is the left in America? Bernie Sanders? Because it's really hard to argue the Democratic party is being hijacked by the left when their last two nominations were Clinton and Biden and when the party went all out to deny Sanders a primary win in 2020 by having everyone drop out and endorse Biden as soon as Bernie had momentum going. This is some bothsides crap. The left has no big media like Clear Channel, Fox News, or Sinclair pushing their agenda onto the Democratic party.

People in general define what is left and right mainly by social issues. My definition goes away from the social issues and focuses on economic issue. If you believe the rich should pay more taxes, universal healthcare, green energy, corporations should be regulated, free college ,investments into new industries such as high speed rail then your to the left. If you believe the rich should continue to pay little to nothing, deregulation of corporations, support oil industry, increased military spending, support austerity and is for privatized health insurance then your on the right. Both the Democrats and Republicans support my economic definition of the right. The Democrats will pretend their on the left but they are truly not when it comes to the issues I have mentioned.

The real battle going on in America with both parties is based on nothing but social issues because both parties are truly right wing economically. Only way they can distinguish themselves from each other is through social issues and hence why the obsession with social issues. This is not anything new since it's really been this way for 60 years now since the civil rights era. It's gotten worse now because of social media magnifies the culture war 10000X.

The democrats haven't been hijacked by the left since they don't push left economic issues and tend to shout them down. They have been hijacked by rich elites who want them to push social issues because pushing any issues outside of social issues goes against their interests. The mainstream media won't report on this because they are owned by the same rich elites.

[DMC]

If you think everything should be free for you but cost others, you're probably on the left.

[Blake]

If you think everything should be free for you but cost others, you're probably on the left.

I think I saw this on a redneck's truck bumper

[Blake]

Maybe I could just post an article like you, that's not lazy at all.

Aww all the hard work you put in in building those text walls and you still look stupid.

[ElNono]

social media, and in particular, twitter, have been catastrophic when it comes to political discourse. it all comes down to a nice zinger in 280 characters, or a 90 second soundbite, as opposed to anything resembling an informed discussion or people actually articulating their positions.

its how morons like rand paul get so popular. oh here's a baller 90 second clip of me talking shit to fauci in his face and calling for him to resign. nevermind the fact that he responded and tore down every mistake i made in that clip, you dont get to see that!

and while i used rand as my example, id say that phenomenon isnt exclusive to the right... though again, i will always defer to the fact that the "loony right" has much more pull than the "loony left" so for every 1 democrat politician who pulls a stunt like that, there are 4-5 republicans doing the same. i'd say same with pundits. conservative pundits largely dominate social media.

Well, not trying to justify it, but they're fighting for their existence. I mean, not even democracy is untouchable at this point. They figured that yelling something stupid during the SOTU gives them more coverage and cred with their base than talking about trickle down, makers vs takers, tax cuts or even abortion.

At this point it's not even about ideas, it's about corralling their base through triggering dem libs, and hoping the Democrats fuck up (which they do a lot) to give them a chance. Doesn't mean Democrats don't have their own problems as well, they do, but they're not really existential.

[ChumpDumper]

Of course, you and RG do the full face paint, cheese head blue fan shit. Your side is never wrong.You're wrong.

[Spurminator]

Of course, you and RG do the full face paint, cheese head blue fan shit. Your side is never wrong.

You're literally responding to a post where I said I agree with everything in an article that spends half of its time criticizing my "side," so I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion except that it's another example of a strawman you have to invent in these threads when you can't hang with the actual discussion. You might consider sitting some of these out.

[Ef-man]

Maybe I could just post an article like you, that's not lazy at all.

Or post the definition of CRT from britanica.com instead of providing your definition.

[DMC]

Aww all the hard work you put in in building those text walls and you still look stupid.

That's rich coming from the the target of punching down on this forum.

[DMC]

Or post the definition of CRT from britanica.com instead of providing your definition.

I don't need to define that which is already defined.

[DMC]

You're literally responding to a post where I said I agree with everything in an article that spends half of its time criticizing my "side," so I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion except that it's another example of a strawman you have to invent in these threads when you can't hang with the actual discussion. You might consider sitting some of these out.

You disagree with the "both sides" part because, as Extra Stout pointed out to you and your ilk, you like to feel placated by pretending you're above it.

[Ef-man]

I don't need to define that which is already defined.

That's not lazy at all, as that is not your opinion and you would not have to support it, amirite.

[Spurminator]

You disagree with the "both sides" part because, as Extra Stout pointed out to you and your ilk, you like to feel placated by pretending you're above it.

What am I supposedly feeling "above" in the context of this conversation?

[Blake]

That's rich coming from the the target of punching down on this forum.

Rofl only the simpletons that have no comebacks and are finished discussing the topic go there.

You on the other hand get beat down daily by many different people for being a stupid idiot. And the arrogance gets you bonus lols.

[DMC]

What am I supposedly feeling "above" in the context of this conversation?

Your "some pigs are more equal" approach keeps you morally above the unwashed heathens who occupy the "both sides" world. Sure, it exists on both sides, but your side (and therefore you by extension) are better.

[DMC]

Rofl only the simpletons that have no comebacks and are finished discussing the topic go there.

You on the other hand get beat down daily by many different people for being a stupid idiot. And the arrogance gets you bonus lols.

You have >10 years under you belt of being the "poor thing" here. There's no catching up to you.

[DMC]

That's not lazy at all, as that is not your opinion and you would not have to support it, amirite.

I'm ok with established definitions. Why does that bother you so much?

[Blake]

You have >10 years under you belt of being the "poor thing" here. There's no catching up to you.

Lol only simpletons think that. I see a white flag every time you go there. It's hilarious.

[Spurminator]

Your "some pigs are more equal" approach keeps you morally above the unwashed heathens who occupy the "both sides" world. Sure, it exists on both sides, but your side (and therefore you by extension) are better.

Your armchair psychoanalysis :lol

You've made no attempt to show HOW the two sides are equally bad, you're just offended to your core by the suggestion that they aren't.