This is definitely part of it, most people don't spend their time scheming, trying to put others down, trying to make life worse for others.
I am a target of neighborhood Mobbing and it really took me a while, until i considered this a reality. I just couldn't wrap my head around this, that other people were making an effort to get on my nerves or were watching me and passively aggressively attacking me.
There really are people that want to interfere in the lives of other people minding their own business.
Meet the Republican mindset amongst ordinary people
Same reason a tiger has eyes on the front of their skull, and the sheep has eyes on the sides. The predator must focus on their target. The prey must remain vigilant against all threats.
A scammer needs to find one way to trick you. A victim must avoid all scams.
We do have measures against predators though. They are allergic to lead.
I like to think I have boundless empathy but for the life of me I can’t put myself in this mindset.
Like I just want to be nice to all the people I interact with and possibly leave the world a little better because I was here.
I can’t fathom being against something that has no bearing on me. It’s like a more twisted version of how people were commenting on GTA trailer about how the game sucks rah rah rah, like bro just go and enjoy the things you do like and pass by the things you don’t.
I don’t like anime, but I also don’t give a shit if you do like it as I probably have hobbies you don’t like.
Someone help me understand why so many people are like this? I believe I was born with these morals as I’ve had the same upbringing as my siblings, although I saw a lot more fucked up family shit. Yet I’m quite liberal and accepting and my brothers are not really that way. They ain’t conservatives but they certainly get caught up in the noise of hating the wrong people.
Can't be explained easily. It's a bunch of variables triggered at opportune moments setting in place a mish-mash of values that somehow manage to work.
Take a day in your life. Think about what was good and bad in it. Then think what it would've been like had the good things failed and the bad things succeeded instead. Would that change your perspective on how the day went? As day after day pass, these small, usually things cement themselves into a view on life. Who learns what changes from person to person because what, when and how we learn creates differences in values and personality.
An example, you and your brother argue over a toy as children. If the argument escalates and you hit each other, the winner and the loser of the fight will have different perspectives on the situation. Same if a parent or an adult interferes and casts judgement unilaterally. Each person involved will learn something different from the others and this will shape in which direction their overall personality will view the world.
The good and the bad change depending on the position each person is in and each situation can evolve in many uncontrollable ways.
The closest that gets me to empathising with them is thinking about times in my life where I have done stupid, harmful-to-me things as a sort of lashing out to claw back any agency I could. For example, deliberately flunking a test because failing by choice felt safer than trying as hard as I could and doing badly anyway; I didn't realise what was happening at the time, but in hindsight, decisions like that were all about my inability to cope with uncertainty and vulnerability.
I think that people who are unfathomably kind are probably a lot like me, in that they feel scared if they look at the state of the world. They probably recognise in their gut that there is very little that they, as individuals, can do to improve things, and that's scary to them. However, instead of learning to sit with the discomfort of uncertainty and learning how to lean into the vulnerability to do some collective action, they lash out at the world. Being awful to some poor person who is also overwhelmed doesn't solve any of the root issues, of course, but I think that it's cathartic to them to be able to impact the world in some tangible way — it makes them feel less powerless to be able to fuck up someone's day. Plus I reckon there's probably some transference stuff going on, where being unkind to an individual may set them up to be a sort of repository for all the bad feelings they have inside them, like a subconscious scapegoat
Hateful people still baffle me, but over time, I find myself able to empathise with them more. I find people like this quite tragic, because I know that I would have killed myself long ago if I didn't find community and solidarity to keep me pushing onwards. It seems like quite a bleak existence, and it hurts to see them poisoning themselves with their shortsighted hate.
It's because everyone feels the need to enforce things, and these people think that they must enforce a hierarchy where smart, strong people pick on and scam weakers, dumber people who they assume are either also scammers or dumb enough to deserve it. These groups believe in things like might makes right and ableism. They do not care to build a reality based on science or facts or good faith arguments, instead it is based on hierarchy and bullying. They do not even understand what a good faith argument really is.
Based Hank. Great content creator.
Does the right use independent media?
Or do their billionaire pals that have exploited humanity for decades just own the mainstream media... so they don't have to bother with independent media: cause they have dozens of not hundreds of full time staff figuring out how to increase viewership.It's not really a question.
It's just how it isI think I agree?
Like, the right sucked at independent media. They couldn't hang whatsoever on Twitter or Reddit. They need to use billionaires to capture and co-opt these platforms to compete.
And like all the "conservative" social media? Its all 100% AstroTurf (rumble, etc.)
Yes, and it's very popular, at least with younger people. Asmongold, Rogan, Shapiro, Fresh and Fit, Charlie Kirk, etc. They're usually further right than mainstream too. The algorithms boost them, they typically sell snake oil/crypto, and are suspiciously well-funded (last year, many were found to be taking Russian money).
The Koch foundation made a long-term investment in making it seem like grass roots movements were pushing society to the right. They kept it up for over twenty years, and that persistence has paid off for them in ways that will likely take a similar amount of time to reverse https://time.com/secret-origins-of-the-tea-party/
The difference in the size of left- and right-leaning media isn't in news or comedy sites. The right-leaning news and comedy media is only modestly more watched than left-leaning media. Where the right really dominates is sliding politics into every single popular subject - topics like sports, games, wellness, and religion have tons of audience for right-leaning shows and basically no audience for left-leaning ones. https://www.mediamatters.org/google/right-dominates-online-media-ecosystem-seeping-sports-comedy-and-other-supposedly
The left are really good at becoming disorganized and eating itself though. And the right knows this. All the right has to do is making one comment that pits one minority against the other and boom : left will be out for another week sorting itself out before they reorganize again against the next thing the right does.
I'm not sure I understand you. Can you give an example of a conservative making a comment that pits one minority against the other that took the left out for a week?
I spend a lot of time wondering what "independent media" is supposed to be
Independent Media is basically anything that's not owned by Disney/ABC, Viacom, NBC Universal, CBS, Newscorp (Fox), or Warner Bros.
In theory, on the internet, anybody can set up their own website and release their material.
But in terms of sheer scale, every online punk zine combined doesn't have half the reach of each of the 'independent' websites funded by some natural gas lobbying firm or ghoulish right wing family (other than the Murdochs) or supplement company sold exclusively through a pyramid scheme.
And how independent were some of those media really when they were crying they couldn't exist without the USAID regime money?
Yep, the right peddles sexy chest-beating wishful thinking and conspiracy theories which sells itself, the left has to sell the actual hard work that is needed - and yes frequently leans into chasing stupid celebrity endorsements and fluff and getting bogged down in the weeds or getting tripped up by well-meaning labels that get twisted used as battering rams against them like DEI, Woke, Socialist, etc.
Unfortunately we cannot win by being as bad as them, that is the burden of being on the righteous path of fairness, logic and reason.
It's only the same if most people buy snake oil.
The problem is that most people buy snake oil unless they have reveived a good education.
Makes you wonder why the left is not improving education, even outside the school framework.
The left does enhance education where possible. It's just a massive up hill battle when public education is reduced and underfunded every time a conservative gains power, and isn't enhanced much at all when a liberal gains power...
Please, explain how a minority is supposed to win against a hostile majority?
There is no general answer because by default, the majority wins.
For education, I would focus on a small number of communities and pool all resources to figure out what works.
Then use the desire of other communities for the hopefully existing improvements to spread the system.
Long term strategy, across decades, short term tactics. The right has actual goals, and uses culture nonsense to mask it. The Dems have cultural nonsense.
Show me the long term Democrat strategy and how they're going to accomplish it. I'd love to see it. I'd even help.
