Is Trumpism the modern equivalent of McCarthyism?
One was scapegoating suspected Communists. The other is about “He hates who we hate”.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
BohemianBabe · M
pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M
@BohemianBabe And the left do exactly the same thing. It's a symptom of the collectivism of red vs blue team politics. And to be honest, I agree with the left in some places and the right in the other, but often when I talk to a leftist, if i ever tell them that a position on the right may have merit, it's "OMG YOU ARE THE NEXT HITLER!" It's THEM that want to push anyone they disagree with on anything into one big bad guy group and turn it into an us vs them. I've had more moderate leftist friends tell me one on one that even though they agree with leftist ideas, they are fed up with how polarising the louder members of the left makes politics.
BohemianBabe · M
@pianoplayingsteve That's different than saying every aspect of society they disagree with is part of a single evil movement. Conservatives believe that every thing they hate, no matter how seemingly unrelated, is part of a greater narrative being pushed by Marxists or Satanists or Masons or Wokists or whatever the conspiracy is that week.
Leftists generally believe that bad things are a result of material conditions, but we don't think every bad thing is part of one movement or conspiracy.
Leftists generally believe that bad things are a result of material conditions, but we don't think every bad thing is part of one movement or conspiracy.
pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M
@BohemianBabe ‘Conservatives believe’ no side thinks as a borg, you are doing what you are accusing conservatives are doing. Some people on the left may agree with a certain position typically associated with the left, and may disagree with others. And the same can be said about the right. When Trump spoke of the vaccine being safe and effective, some of the crowd booed, but I know others that got the vaccine no questions asked. I know people who own guns but also want hate speech laws. I have quite a mix of views myself. You are really simplifying things and painting one side as all stupid and evil. I say this with all due respect as I respect you and any one else as a person - you are acting no differently than how you describe what you see as the other side.
BohemianBabe · M
@pianoplayingsteve I'm speaking generally. Conservatives generally believe that things they don't like are part of a broader evil movement. Not literally every single right-leaning person believes this, but most of them do. Keep in mind, all of the most popular right-wing figures in politics and media believe (or at least pretend to believe) some form of this conspiracy.
pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M
@BohemianBabe people like to speak ‘generally’ because then they can discuss issues whilst feeling completely reasonable in stereotyping everyone they disagree with, because it’s not stereotyping, it’s ‘generalising’.
‘but most of them do’ and a heck of a lot of times when I do nothing more than make the slightest of points that may end up in a train of thought that could be critical of a talking point associated with the left on this site, ill get many assume I just must be a Trump supporter and give me over used cliche personal attacks based on that assumption. I’ll even get people I know personally taken in by what the ideologues on the left push, including the polarization and ‘it’s okay when we dehumanize people’ logic and end up treating me like some sort of rodent that needs exterminating for the crime of suggesting, say, that maybe Black Lives Matter riots should have targeted purely police stations and not smaller businesses, many of them owned by other black people.
‘but most of them do’ and a heck of a lot of times when I do nothing more than make the slightest of points that may end up in a train of thought that could be critical of a talking point associated with the left on this site, ill get many assume I just must be a Trump supporter and give me over used cliche personal attacks based on that assumption. I’ll even get people I know personally taken in by what the ideologues on the left push, including the polarization and ‘it’s okay when we dehumanize people’ logic and end up treating me like some sort of rodent that needs exterminating for the crime of suggesting, say, that maybe Black Lives Matter riots should have targeted purely police stations and not smaller businesses, many of them owned by other black people.
BohemianBabe · M
@pianoplayingsteve
If I'm talking to someone who identifies as Conservative, I'm not going to assume they believe in some form of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.
However, it is objectively true that MOST right-leaning people do believe in that conspiracy theory. I'm not going to pretend that certain trends are not more common to certain ideologies. I think doing so is to ignore the reality of ideology and the real world implications.
people like to speak ‘generally’ because then they can discuss issues whilst feeling completely reasonable in stereotyping everyone they disagree with, because it’s not stereotyping, it’s ‘generalising’.
If I'm talking to someone who identifies as Conservative, I'm not going to assume they believe in some form of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.
However, it is objectively true that MOST right-leaning people do believe in that conspiracy theory. I'm not going to pretend that certain trends are not more common to certain ideologies. I think doing so is to ignore the reality of ideology and the real world implications.
pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M
‘If I'm talking to someone who identifies as Conservative, I'm not going to assume they believe in some form of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.’
An hour ago you told me this:
‘ Conservatives believe that every thing they hate, no matter how seemingly unrelated, is part of a greater narrative being pushed by Marxists or Satanists’
I also disagree with your usage of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ ,many on the left of whom use that term to dismiss any group of ideas or facts that go against whatever narrative is convenient to them that day. In a manner no less reductionist, ignorant and dishonest as those who dismiss anything that challenge their views as ‘satanic’.
The Institue for Social Research set up in Frankfurt Germany during Weimar aka ‘the Frankfurt School’ was an actual thing. It was set up by Carl Grunberg, who happened to be Jewish, who then passed its ownership onto Mark Horkheimer when he retired, who also happened to be Jewish. Horkheimer went on to hire professors who were overwhelmingly Jewish. The school taught a field called ‘critical theory’ - which was influenced heavily by Hegel and Kant - that aimed to further develop on these 19th century Marxist ideas and because these philosophies were heavily ‘anti positivist’ the German population at large saw the ideology as divisive.’
Because the majority of the membership was Jewish, when Hitler came into power the institute closed down. Many of the professors emigrated to the US, in which some research boards in California were open to their ideas and gave them a platform. Their institutes teach what are known as critical race theory and critical gender theory, which as explained in the previous paragraphs, were formed from Hegelian and Kantistic marxism. That’s just historic fact and I’m more than happy to source my claims.
Now, with how the media represents the idea of ‘conspiracy theorists’ we’ve been conditioned to believe that any researching into a topic past sharing sensationalist headlines that support one’s political bias is some sort of nut job past time. And with the fact that it’s becoming a word used to dismiss any evidence that goes against whatever narrative said person holds, a lot of people are happy to push for this stereotype. It also happened to become a household dismissive term in the age of the internet where your average lay person can have their voice amplified, people more interested in saying things for social media likes from their political tribe than because of what is actually true. Them using the term ‘conspiracy theorist’ dismissively allows them to think there is some sort of virtue in being ignorant. Before all this, we used to call looking into things ‘thinking critically’
@BohemianBabe
An hour ago you told me this:
‘ Conservatives believe that every thing they hate, no matter how seemingly unrelated, is part of a greater narrative being pushed by Marxists or Satanists’
I also disagree with your usage of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ ,many on the left of whom use that term to dismiss any group of ideas or facts that go against whatever narrative is convenient to them that day. In a manner no less reductionist, ignorant and dishonest as those who dismiss anything that challenge their views as ‘satanic’.
The Institue for Social Research set up in Frankfurt Germany during Weimar aka ‘the Frankfurt School’ was an actual thing. It was set up by Carl Grunberg, who happened to be Jewish, who then passed its ownership onto Mark Horkheimer when he retired, who also happened to be Jewish. Horkheimer went on to hire professors who were overwhelmingly Jewish. The school taught a field called ‘critical theory’ - which was influenced heavily by Hegel and Kant - that aimed to further develop on these 19th century Marxist ideas and because these philosophies were heavily ‘anti positivist’ the German population at large saw the ideology as divisive.’
Because the majority of the membership was Jewish, when Hitler came into power the institute closed down. Many of the professors emigrated to the US, in which some research boards in California were open to their ideas and gave them a platform. Their institutes teach what are known as critical race theory and critical gender theory, which as explained in the previous paragraphs, were formed from Hegelian and Kantistic marxism. That’s just historic fact and I’m more than happy to source my claims.
Now, with how the media represents the idea of ‘conspiracy theorists’ we’ve been conditioned to believe that any researching into a topic past sharing sensationalist headlines that support one’s political bias is some sort of nut job past time. And with the fact that it’s becoming a word used to dismiss any evidence that goes against whatever narrative said person holds, a lot of people are happy to push for this stereotype. It also happened to become a household dismissive term in the age of the internet where your average lay person can have their voice amplified, people more interested in saying things for social media likes from their political tribe than because of what is actually true. Them using the term ‘conspiracy theorist’ dismissively allows them to think there is some sort of virtue in being ignorant. Before all this, we used to call looking into things ‘thinking critically’
@BohemianBabe
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment