this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
34 points (94.7% liked)
AskUSA
283 readers
74 users here now
About
Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the USA. Non-US people are welcome to provide their perspective! Please keep in mind:
- !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world - politics in our daily lives is inescapable, but please post overtly political things there rather than here
- !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com - similarly things with the goal of overt agitation have their place, which is there rather than here
Rules
- Be nice or gtfo
- Discussions of overt political or agitation nature belong elsewhere
- Follow the rules of discuss.online
Sister communities
Related communities
- !asklemmy@lemmy.world
- !asklemmy@sh.itjust.works
- !nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
- !showerthoughts@lemmy.world
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah but they want to believe anything simple will fix their lives.
You can substitute any other simple answer. Trade deficits. A lying body of scientists. That a previous leader somehow betrayed them. It doesn't matter.
Because any substitution fits the bill, that's why I say it isn't about the bigotry. It's about whatever leadership sold them. It just happens to be the case that what was for sale was bigotry. For (most) voters, it's a means to an end, not the end in and of itself.
Don't get me wrong, hardcore bigots exist. Being able to recognize that it isn't useful to ignore that there are differences between those who'll (stupidly) accept bigotry as a solution to an actually existent issue (wealth loss) to those who see bigotry as a goal in and of itself. Recognizing the relative proportions between those two groups is valuable too.
You'll make bad decisions if you're operating with an overly simplified model. This applies to Republican voters grasping for an explanation they can comprehend, as well as to democratic voters trying to understand the reality of the political landscape.
Do you think that Dem's solutions are more complicated?
"Lets spend money on improving infrastructure and accept people who are different" seems pretty simple to me. So did 'let people choose who they want to be' and 'maybe the country that prides itself on immigration should welcome immigrants'. In fact, opposing the thing we brag about seems more complicated to me without the racist justification making it clear that it is about racism, not immigration.
I actually do think the Dem answer is more complex because it doesn't actually provide an explanation to why things are bad. Why could a family in the 70s have a house, car, trips to Disney and 3 kids on a single income, but you can't do that now? Why?
They're burdened by some semblance of responsibility to tell the truth, but the truth is REALLY inconvenient for both parties: both have been complicit in a broad set of neoliberal policy that has led to a concentration of wealth.
Dems, not being able to stomach a bold faced lie, prefer to stay silent. Prefer to NOT reflect on the last 50 years and just say "we'll build more roads". You can shirk your share of responsibility by refusing to honestly review the past.
Was that the problem? Not enough roads and bridges? Is that why I can't afford eggs?
The Republican leadership, however, is completely unburdened by truth.
Why could a family in 1970 blah blah blah... "Because you're paying so much taxes now because immigrants are getting a fortune in welfare"
Yeah. It's WAY more simple. Because it's a lie. It answers the question. It's a fucking lie but it answers the question. The Dems literally don't provide any justification for the current state of affairs.
I mean, eggs are not the problem. A temporary price increase due to bird flu is not relevant to either party’s policies
So if we do those 6 things, I can own a detached home, car, and support a wife and 4 kids on a single income?
"My brother works for a union in a state with a minimum wage twice as much as the federal one, and he still sure as hell can't afford a house, wife, and even 2 kids on his income alone"
"I am in favor of bringing back manufacturing though, that's what all these terriffs are for, so thank god you agree with Trump on that"
Edit: to be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong. I frankly don't think your points are enough. Corporate taxes are a large component that needs reform as well. I'm just saying how this hits the ear of someone who voted R, and why it's still much more complicated than the offered one liner :"You're poor because you're taxed out the butthole to support illegal immigrants". That single sentence lays out a simple cause, as well as suggests an obvious simple answer to the simple problem.