this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
259 points (92.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43598 readers
1162 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

ITT: A lot of people answering for people who have diametrically opposed views to them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Often because they're profiting from it themselves.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

I think it's like the old trope of asking a fish how the water is and they reply "what's water?"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They believe that the status quo is better than any alternatives. They have not been exposed to other ways of living and those that have lock themselves to basic tribalistic thinking.

Imagine trying to get a sports fan to see the benefits of being a fan of another sports team. Even if they aren’t personally playing and their team isn’t winning they maintain loyalty. Some even bet on their loser teams and lose money just because of loyalty.

It’s all about team loyalty/ tribalism

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Excellent answer and I'll also jump off this to say this applies to marginalized groups just as much as anyone else, in a way I see a lot of people forget all about. Some percentage of marginalized people, through being in the right place and/or putting themselves there, do experience upward mobility through capitalism and therefore identify with it.

People forget that queer conservatives exist, but think about a gay couple with a lot of wealth, living a fairly standard nuclear family existence with an adopted kid or two, integrated into a society that probably still doesn't fully trust them but sees enough signifiers of "normality" that they're willing to let it slide. Which side of the political divide benefits them the most to align with? And what ideological principles will they come to internalize in the long term? Might they come to see themselves as somehow different or better than others in their marginalized community?

I'm getting tired of the fluff pieces expressing shock at the fact that some % of black voters are conservative, clutching their pearls at the thought of that number increasing, and speculating about black churches and "social conservatism." While also completely disregarding the fact that black voters have always leaned left yet are also affected by some of the same political shifts that every other demographic is. Our first loyalty is generally to our class.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They don't have to balls to think for themselves.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Liberalism doesn't exist because of moral failures of individuals, but because the Mode of Production supports the laws, ideology, art, culture, etc. that exist from it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Interesting question. I don't think I've ever defended either. I've also only lived in capitalist countries, so I have no personal experience with other economic systems.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Liberalism, its propaganda, and its consequences. Also a severe lack of class consciousness and knowledge of political theory.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

I think more important than that, is the reason for liberalism, which is the base, ie the Mode of Production.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

We’re raised by parents that must be obeyed for our own safety. Some people eventually learn to accept their parents are imperfect people and not gods. Many people do not. They look to kings and gods to protect and provide for them.

Those that have power negotiate with kings and gods. People without power attempt to use the only techniques they know to negotiate with their kings and gods: begging and/or pledging loyalty and service in exchange for scraps.

Of course this is but one of many reasons many people worship power.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This might be relevant:

https://youtu.be/J_fZ9o6P0-A?si=-fl7rLryYZBDVgTN&t=194

Conditions here were deplorable by any objective measure. And if you'll recall, one of the hallmarks of early Russian industrialization was: the workforce was often transient. People moved back and forth between their home villages and jobs in the cities, and this flux meant that the places people lived and where they ate and bathed and got medical attention were only ever temporary expedients. It was a bit like you were going off to some particularly crappy summer camp. It was only meant to be temporarily endured, not lived in full time, and so conditions just never got better. People were not just renting rooms; they were renting corners of rooms. You could rent not just a bed, but part of a bed. Sanitation was, of course, practically non-existent, and the food was disgusting. The work itself, meanwhile, was long and grueling. There were no safety standards in the factories. There were hardly any rights for anybody at all. And pay was literally inadequate. The ministry of finance itself surveyed conditions and concluded that a family of four needed about fifty rubles a month to purchase basic necessities (that is, food and shelter and heat) and then they found that 75% of the workers were making less than 30 rubles a month. The economic and moral math was just not adding up.

https://youtu.be/J_fZ9o6P0-A?si=FtaiY47HVyXXBeAP&t=340

The lower skilled, less educated, and still mentally "peasant" workers tended to remain culturally conservative. They were orthodox christian and believed strongly in the divine benevolence of the czar. And indeed one of the things reported by both social democrats and SRs back to their respective central committees was that they struggled to recruit among these workers because they were out there pitching "overthrowing the czar" and everyone was like "What? We... we love the czar, and he loves us too!"

To them, the czar was not a villain, but a hero. Not the devil, but their savior. It understandably made recruiting for a political revolution to overthrow their "hero and savior" very difficult.

https://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/revolutions_podcast/2020/02/1033-bloody-sunday.html

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Which is why the conservative mandate is to defund education and keep people as ignorant as possible.

I mean, to keep the common man as ignorant as possible -- the children of the elites will always go to prohibitively expensive Montessori schools, which will better prepare them for critical thinking and bullshit detection so that they may better rule over and parasitize off the common man.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

temporarily embarrassed billionaires

Richard Nixon's head : I promise to cut taxes for the rich and use the poor as a cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel!

[audience applauds]

Philip J. Fry : That'll show those poor!

Turanga Leela : You're not rich!

Philip J. Fry : But someday I might be rich, and people like me better watch their step

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

For the same reason people idolize the King.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago

Unfortunately many of us have been taught that being a good person and a good citizen equals being productive and accumulating resources. Things that are quantifiable and external to the actual person and their relationships.

Being productive and accumulating some resources can be good activities to spend time on, but they are practical necessities and not defining characteristics of existence.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί