Fox show hosts said Taylor Swift "should be conservative" given her background, because to them it's an identity.
This only makes sense when I realize that to conservatives, it's an identity. They think it's an identity that Taylor Swift should have because she's (presumably) white, popular, rich, good looking, Midwestern, Christian, etc.
To them politics is not about ideas, or policies, or problem solving, or good governance. It's all about identity.
418
Comments104
The real identity politics were the Conservatives we met along the way.
I've heard this same thing said to me by Hitler humpers trying to recruit me based on what I look like, just because we're blonde haired and blue eyed with fair skin does not make us want to be a part of their hateful bullshit.
Anti racists come in all shapes, sizes, and colors. That’s kinda the fucking point actually.
Abso-fucking-lutely.
"But you would be part of the in-group! So why don't you help us make the out-groups life miserable?!"
Is there any tangible advantage to be in the ingroup? What's that I have to give 10% of my income to the church? What's that I have to donate money to a billionaire? What's that I will literally die from treatable malidies?
Yayyyyy....
Damn right.
Well yeah, to them it’s a tribe instead of a moral failing
Right, and so many don't seem to understand the difference between principles and affiliation. It's why when they respond to allegations about Trump being associated with Epstein by saying Bill Clinton was too, they're dumbfounded when liberals say, okay, he should be investigated too.
Generally, liberals are more likely to relate to things based on principles (e.g., people shouldn't have sex with children, so we should investigate any credible allegations regardless of who they're about). Conservatives are more likely to relate to things based on affiliation (e.g., I reject the allegations about that guy having sex with children because he's on my team, but the guy on your team should be investigated). That's why Al Franken isn't in office anymore, even though he was more guilty of an appearance of wrongdoing more than actual wrongdoing.
I don't know much about Taylor Swift, but I assume she is simply too smart to be conservative.
The problem is that plenty of smart people are conservative. Because conservatism is fundamentally a grift, and the smart ones use the dumb ones to get richer.
Swift just has enough empathy to realize she's already rich.
Yep. Important to separate social and fiscal conservatives. Those Gays for Trump and Blacks for Trump types are fiscal conservatives who hope that the social conservatives will consider them "one of the good ones".
That's true.
The smart ones are just evil.
It does seem true that many hyper wealthy people trend fiscally conservative, surprise surprise, to guard their own wealth.
Well-off entertainers seem to swing a little more left. Not sure what the ratio is compared to other wealthy people, there absolutely are plenty of conservative entertainers. I think quite a few of them spent time being poor while trying to win the fame lottery, and of course SAG and other unions are big in the entertainment world.
Anyway, not a huge surprise Swift is left leaning. The ones that are a bigger shocker are people like Garth Brooks or especially some of Dale Earnhardt’s progressive views.
Entertainment requires a lot of traveling and contact with lots of different people. That lends itself to leftwing viewpoints and thinking.
This is true to an extent I think, however it’s different traveling and wanting to experience another culture vs business. If the people you surround yourself with are there to support you and reflect your viewpoint back at you (Ted Nugent being an extreme example) it’s more of an echo chamber than an education.
American “conservatives” are actually radicals by this point.
Neoconservative is the better term here.
I would disagree. I think the paleocons are just as insane
You think any given political bloc isn't mostly made up of people that think it's an identity? If so, you're lucky to not have run into it.
Frankly, most people stick with whatever they are raised with, and that's that. There's just as many blind, inherited democrats as republicans in the US. Most people don't even understand the policy platform of their party, much less bother to challenge the correctness of it for themselves.
There aren’t two party platforms anymore. There’s one political party, and one cult. The cult doesn’t have policy. They make decisions to make the richest in the country richer, and keep their voting block scared over fabricated issues or issues they don’t care that much about. They had 12 years since 2002 to build a border wall, why is it always an issue? Is it because it’s just a grift to pay out construction companies? Maybe. They can’t win democratically so they go after votings rights and make sure the wrong people can’t vote. They exploit the very undemocratic nature of the electoral college and senate to hold a majority of the power with a minority of the overall popular vote. And when that all fails they don’t abandon their bastardized conservatism, they abandon democracy.
Alrighty then.
Gotta be real with you, it took several reads for this to not seem like someone ranting a conspiracy theory.
And it's still a rant even after I figured out what you were on about. Which is fine! Rant awat, it's a shitty situation for damn sure.
But you miss the point.
Here's my rant :)
The point is that we're mired in a two party system, and held there by the electoral method. The electoral college is whatever, but as long as it's the whole first-past-the-post mechanism underlying it, it really doesn't matter what the college does because nobody other than those two groups are getting in.
Which is what I'm complaining about. I'm sick of voting for the the lesser of two evils out of desperation. Whether you (or anyone) likes it or not, the DNC is only useful in comparison to the other party. Without the Republicans as a boogeyman, a supposed opposite rather than just the farthest right section, the democrats are still a bunch of capitalist assholes as whole. They're still voting for shit in Congress that's absurd, and they have been my entire life.
That the democrats are at least willing to give lip service to human rights is great, yay. But it isn't like that's been the case all along. They were just better than the "other" side.
Fuck the two party system, and fuck the electoral mechanism that allows it is what I'm saying.
It is what it is. The Democratic primaries are the real elections in my mind where you can vote for the person you like the best. In the general it’s about stopping the cult from gaining power and taking away more of our rights. I dislike people spreading apathy like they did in 2016, because we see the result. The cult can do whatever it wants and their members will still vote for them. Democrats are held to a much higher standard comparatively. Does it suck? Absolutely. It is what it is.
I've never seen someone with Republican values call themselves a Democrat.
I've seen a lot of people with Democratic values call themselves Republicans.
LOL the idea that you should automatically be conservative because of wealth. They assume that everyone is just as selfish and unempathetic as they are.
I don't think it's exclusive to wealth.
That's putting it mildly.
It's all they have, honestly. Poor pathetic things.
Ms private jet is performatively liberal at best.
Yeah, but that seems in line with the Democratic party leadership.
Uh what? Since when is Taylor Swift a party leader?
edit: Downvotes don't make her a party leader. What is she then? What seat does she hold in the senate?
What part of the sentence made you think that Taylor Swift is a democratic party leader?
If that's not what you meant, then what part of that sentence is relevant to what I said?
They're saying that the actual Democratic party leaders are equally performative.
...Yeah I got that. Why is it relevant?
... you sure you got that?
I can clarify. I am pretty sure it was mentioned to position her outlook in a similar spot on the overton window as the conventional mainstream liberal representatives, so that it is clear that she's aligned with other socially liberal and fiscally colonial oligarchs.
Taylor Swift is shadow majority leader in the Senate, it's all part of the conspiracy yo.
Joking aside, I think what Shepherd meant was that Swift being performatively liberal made her more similar to Democratic party leadership than to any sort of conservatives.
You have an internet connection, so you're performatively liberal at best too. You don't even think about people that can't afford an internet connection, how can you be on the left?
In fact everyone on the internet is performative. That's what everything on here is, someone's performance. You could be Jeff Bezos for all anyone knows.
I know I mentioned this a few days ago but some anonymous person on reddit said something like this a few years ago:
Honestly, I understand what he means. She's from a stupid rich family and grew up surrounded by country music influences. Statistically speaking, she probably would be a conservative.
The higher the population moves up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the fewer conservatives in the population.
The problem is that FOX isn't conservative, it's reactionary. Conservative fundamentally means that you stick to what you know works, so they should all be social democrats. Because that is what worked the last 70 years. Not neoliberalism or magnifying fringe social issues
I hope that Taylor Swift makes like a Dollywood type thing.
That would be so awesome.
I'd probably make the trek.
I hope she parks her jet.
It's tribalism, embraced by people who are proud of just barely graduating from animal status.
https://youtu.be/2f6s2X6adh0
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/2f6s2X6adh0
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Could we possibly get an app that actually fucking works on mobile? Piped is bullshit
Have you ever read I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup? If not, I suggest that you do.
Scott Siskind is probably not worth your time, https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Alexander#Race_and_IQ among other things.
It’s called gas lighting
Why are you watching that garbage in the first place?
So, I'm going to be that guy because it's a pet peeve of mine.
It's NOT called gas lighting. People like to throw that phrase around but it has one specific meaning, which has nothing to do with this situation.
Well, I guess it could have two meetings but the second one is literally lighting gas on fire.
Yeah, it is for when someone is literally trying to convince you that you are crazy, that things you know are true didn't happen. Usually found in abusive relationships.
Fox isn't convincing people they are crazy. They're telling people everyone else is and they're the only same ones, bolstering their confidence, and that drives a false narrative on its own
hol up. you're saying "being conservative" is an identity to these people like "being insufferably against anything conservative or R" ISN'T part of 90% of Lemmy Users Identity?
Finding you insufferable isn't part of my identity, it's just a fact that you are insufferable.
There is no conservatism. It’s grifting and using identity politics to keep grifting. Everyone should be insufferable against grifting. It’s a big con. You’re being conned. Their figure head would be the poster child for everything they claim to hate if he decided to be a Democrat. East coast elitist, divorced, paid a porn star for sex, insults military heroes, checks off a laundry list of warning signs of the Antichrist. It’s downright comical.
No, you being thought insufferable has nothing to do with identity. At least, not anyone else's identity. People are against conservatives and Republicans because they are massive hypocrites, racists, sexists, corrupt, thieves, transphobes, homophobes, and many other descriptors I don't feel like mentioning.
P.S. Fascists as well. That's a massive one I can't believe I forgot.
You are just describing all Liberal ideologies (which modern conservatism is - I don’t mean liberal in the USA sense)… it’s all vibes and identity, it’s pure ideology without any material analysis. Things happen because of “ideas”.
I think the parentheticals are being lost on some.
Normally I'd take this chance to complain about liberals not being able to define liberal, but it's more than a fair point these days that "conservatives" aren't liberals anymore. They should be, to be "conservative" about the society they grew up in.
The modern American conservative now:
Hates liberals
Especially hates socialists
Rejects the idea of human rights
Rejects democracy
Wants a single, possibly hereditary leader both above the law and above criticism
Wants to reestablish colonialism/strong imperialism
Wants an ethno state or theocracy
Is wildly nationalist and xenophobic
Anyone want to pipe in with what that actually makes them?
I don’t think so… people just don’t understand what I mean by liberal I guess. Not their fault, politics is totally fucked in the US.
Nah I understand what classically liberal means, it’s the rest of your comment that was nonsense.
I agree to the point where I literally emigrated
Biden: ‘If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black’
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/biden-charlamagne-tha-god-you-aint-black/index.html
Let me throw a counterpoint at you:
Taylor Swift is a lady who has had to work really hard and became the top of her field, who works hard to stay in shape, whose entire love life has been filled with unmanly men leaving her unfulfilled until she started dating the ultimate alpha chad where they have a relatively standard supportive relationship, whose career has been about producing competently produced uncontroversial works of status quo work, and not to mention her extremely conventional hairstyles, clothing, and make-up.
I mean, all those things lean conservative and not solely due to identity per se.
Working hard and staying in shape is conservative? I am pretty sure "exercise" is liberal mumbo-jumbo.
"Self-improvement is masturbation, now self-destruction..."
It depends which worldview you take on, but things like hard work and staying in shape have been called "fascist" by a left wing that sees any form of self-improvement as counter-revolutionary.
It seems to me that I was reading The Republic a couple weeks ago and Plato 2500 years ago was talking about the need for people to stay in shape in the gymnasium (not the same thing as today, but still a place to hone your body) so there's definitely precedent to call it conservative since it's a value held since antiquity.
You have an incredibly inaccurate view of left wing politics. Leftists don't have a problem with staying in shape or self improvement. They do have a problem with discrimination against those who can't stay in shape. Leftists are not opposed to cochlear implants, this is laughably inaccurate. Leftists are the ones pushing for universal healthcare. Leftists want free college so people can improve themselves. They want workers to have more power, trade unions are full of some of the most hard working people in America. The only part about Taylor Swift that aligns with American conservatism is that she became incredibly rich by having rich banker parents fund her music career from a very young age.
You really should try to see what actual leftists are advocating, not some culture war garbled YouTube videos are telling you.
I'd say you have a pretty inaccurate view of left wing politics.
Which is understandable. There's been a major shift in the past 15 years that really fundamentally changed the mainstream left.
You and I probably have similar political views in many ways, but when you stand in a stream, you don't have to move for the water to pass you by.
Better open your eyes before it's too late -- you'll get your bank account shut down for wrongthink.
No really, you are the one who has no idea what the left is advocating. I am very involved in leftist politics. If you agree with the things I said you are likely more aligned with the left than you think..
No idea what the bank account comment is about.. sounds like some weird conspiracy theory stuff, really dawg lay off the utube videos
It was weird conspiracy theory stuff when the Liberals and NDP illegally invoked the emergencies act to shut down the bank accounts of people contributing to a peaceful protest.
I'll lay off the conspiracy theory channels of... the house of commons video feed.
Are you talking about Canada?
Where are you getting your information from? Teenagers on TikTok or Tucker Carlson’s Twitter account?
I don't think an idea just being old making it conservative is a good definition. I also think "left wing hates any self improvement" is a pretty wild one. Maybe it's true of some sliver of people.
I don't know, it's really tough to say -- If you're reading old texts hoping to glean some wisdom, depending on the context that would definitely be conservative, but depending on the context it might not be. I was just talking about Wang Mang around 30AD, and he spent a lot of time digging up evidence of how imperial china was run 1000 years before he was born based on confuscian teachings from 500 years before he was born. On the other hand, at this point after 200 years of Marx you could claim marxism is conservative (and in fact Xi is really making a conservative maoist argument in his government right now hoping to return to the stricter times of his childhood)
Here's an interesting video on the idea of the left hating self-improvement. I won't claim it's universal, but the argument is somewhat convincing in light of many things I've seen far removed from this particular video including stuff like opposing technologies like cochlear implants that would make a deaf person non-deaf. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Vf-ry-3rg
Conservative does not mean old
YouTube videos by randos aren’t sources. Liberals are not against cochlear implants. Some in the deaf community are against them.
Leftists aren't liberals.
The left was mostly aligned with liberalism some time ago, but they aren't the same thing and now the two are mostly incompatible.
“Leftists” aren’t in control of the Democrat party. They have no power. It’s irrelevant.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=s6Vf-ry-3rg
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Greek gymnasiums were a hell of a fun time.
Oh my god, I am stunned by the hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness here. So you think the right is obsessed with identity? Get the fuck out of here. I've seen the contempt the left has for any conservative minority. They feel entitled to black or female votes.
The "left identity" is wanting everyone to have healthcare and education to struggle less. The "right identity" is quite loudly screaming about hurting the people they don't like.
"The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them."
There is no paradox. Tolerance is a social contract which includes the tolerant. If someone is intolerant, they break the contract and are therefore not included in it.
If you tolerate intolerance, intolerance will rule. It's literally a paradox by definition.
In this thread: people screaming in agreement
If you equivocate about the meaning of tolerance you can justify some bad things.
Can you provide any examples of this? Not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Usually 'tolerance' is very poorly defined. Someone saying some vile shit? Time to physically attack them. So one intolerance is thought or speech, but the resulting intolerance is violence.
In some cases that's fine, but people seem to think just saying "paradox of tolerance" is a tool that lets them strip others of their humanity without engaging in any actual ethical or philosophical discussion.
It's words on the internet, though, so it's not like most people will have a chance to actually test their poorly considered position, but they do end up saying some vile shit in defense of others at times.
I think you're missing the point.
When someone is outwardly hateful toward others for things outside of their control (race, gender, ability), that's generally viewed as intolerance.
Tolerance, is me recognizing you have the right to believe whatever you want, and letting you do so, as long as you're not obstructing anyone else's right to do the same.
The paradox is basically saying a negative reaction to a hateful behavior, is not itself hateful. Identity politics doesn't agree, and makes those who identify as hateful (knowingly or not), feel hated.
Violence is a further escalation of things that the concept of tolerance inherently tries to avoid.
Lol, this reductionist shit is dumb no matter who does it. Fastest or not. Though
thenthem fastests really fucking love it.Are you trying to say fascist?
Trying?
They're referring to this, I think. If you were typing via smartphone, your autocorrect done ducked you.
I was also doing the ducking bit.
Not entitled, just surprised when people vote for anyone who openly hates them and wants to take away their rights.
When a lot of people that like that certain people are getting hurt and also don’t believe they won’t become the targets later.