- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s called demoralization.
To me there’s a difference between “politics” and taking about a specific topic and concern.
unfortunatly most people that I know that want to “talk politics” always have an agenda and motive. These individuals are never concerned about learning and broadening the topic but “winning” and their agenda.
unfortunatly most people that I know that want to “talk politics” always have an agenda and motive. These individuals are never concerned about learning and broadening the topic but “winning” and their agenda.
This is why my reaction to these people irl is always, “I don’t like talking about politics.” Which, a quick look at my comment history would tell anyone, is absolutely ridiculous lol.
You can usually tell which people are actually interested in discussion, and which have an (usually right wing) agenda to push.
I mean, I do have an agenda, that’s kinda the point. My agenda is to make life better (= more equal, more inclusive, etc) for everyone
If you live in society with other humans, politics will involve you because it literally means things that concern everyone. People not wanting anything to do with it just means democracy isn’t working.
democracy isn’t working
Nailed it.
I’m a first-generation immigrant.
My parents are like: “Stop criticizing [Country we are from]”
Also parents: “I like the job here and the pay is good, back in [Country where we are from], the pay was bad and it took a long time before the payments arrive.”
They currently work a Union job. Strike action is illegal in my former country.
Reminds me of a time I was arguing with a friend in a pub. He didn’t vote and thought it was pointless etc. I was saying:
Me: “Have you been to <city> recently?”
Him: “Yeah”
Me: “Have you noticed a the amount of homeless people?”
Him: “Yeah, it’s getting really bad now isn’t it”
Me: …
Him: “What’s that got to do with the government?”
At this point, a random woman leaned in to comment.
“You know, I agree with your friend. HE shouldn’t vote.”
I work for my county, I have at least one coworker who is proud that she’s never voted and doesn’t care about politics
We work for the government, dumbass! That’s basically saying “no, I don’t want my opinion to be heard on who my boss is” when the options are often a person who wants to give us raises, better benefits, etc. and a person who wants to cut all of that.
It’s probably for the best though, because when she does express a political opinion it’s over the stupidest fucking shit. She supported Trump due to some comments he made about funding IVF treatments, while she’s a polyamorous, wiccan divorcee with several health issues who doesn’t have and as far as I’m aware doesn’t want children. Yes, the republican party with their “traditional christian family values” schtick, who are constantly trying to gut all things related to medical care are totally the party that is going to look out for people like you, and totally worth supporting because you have some vague notions about wanting people to be able to have babies.
I on the team of this woman when it comes to quite a few people
The thing is, no matter who has the power nothing changes, so why care?
More than just Trump, I’ve never seen such a contrast between what Biden tried to do vs what Trump is doing. Surely you prefer one or the other. Surely you can see such a humongous difference. Yet too many people didn’t get their instant gratification so decided to tear it all down.
Biden policies biggest problem was building a better country over a decade or more when he only had four years. The biggest issue is voters without an attention span.
Ive always thought it a good thing the country flip flops every four years. Constantly switching to a new direction quickly enough to keep us trending somewhere in the middle. But Biden demonstrated building solutions to modern problems is complex and takes a long time, while Trump is demonstrating how quickly you can tear it all down once you decide you’re above the law and you’re the only one who matters
Surely you can see such a humongous difference.
I think ‘humongous’ is being charitable.
What we got under Biden was significant inflation and drastically reduced spending power among most of the poor and working class. Under Biden it became a meme that food staples were becoming cost-prohibitive, and while that wasn’t wholly his fault, he clearly didn’t do anything meaningful to change it. That Biden supported a genocide just alienated more voters who wanted real, substantial change.
How likely are you to vote for the incumbent when you’re working three jobs at upwards of 100 hours a week and you still can’t afford to feed your kids?
In exchange Democrats offered excuses, and as you’re watching Donald run roughshod over the Federal Government, you can plainly see that Democrats had all the power they needed to make real change when they controlled the White House and Congress.
Then, when Biden’s condition was no longer possible to hide, they gave the voters a huge ‘fuck you’ by crowning a candidate who stated publicly she wouldn’t do anything different.
significant inflation and drastically reduced spending power
Yet that was mostly a consequence of preventing a pandemic recession. This is back to needing the time. It did work itself out by the end of Biden’s term. People still suffered with the accumulated inflation but current inflation was under control. We needed more time with inflation fixed we’d eventually grow out of it.
And the egg thing is so ridiculous. A temporary consequence of trying to prevent bird flu from becoming the next epidemic or affecting the entire food supply at once. Yeah it sucks but I don’t want the alternative.
In exchange Democrats offered excuses
Maybe, but if the Biden platform persisted for four terms like Roosevelt, you’d see results almost as transformational.
So the bigger question is how to show results within one presidential term when the goal is building infrastructure, building industries, transforming energy use and environmental impact ? Dems certainly need to get better at messaging, Need to get better at taking credit, but the transformational changes we need will take time.
That’s not true. Lots of things change when Trump is president. They get worse.
You want hope, but fear should be enough.
Buahahah, meanwhile TACO and USA being seen as idiotic reactive country right now due to Trump xD
When your choices are Democrat or Republican, it makes sense.
I know you won’t accept this. But I want to say it anyway, on the off chance that it lights some light bulb in your brain.
Not seeing a difference between Democrat and Republican is a privilege. It means that you are equally affected by both of their policies. Not everyone has that luxury.
If you could spend just 5 minutes considering those who are negatively impacted more by one of those parties, it should hopefully be clear that not voting hurts those people.
That’s everyone’s favorite aspect of Democratic Party politics: the finger wagging.
My parents are eighty years old and drive for DoorDash, because if they don’t, this country will gladly render them homeless. This is true whether Democrats or Republicans are in charge.
Maybe save your sermon and support candidates that actually demonstrate some actual intent to change things. Democrats’ last presidential candidate said publicly they wouldn’t do anything different, and a lot of struggling people heard that.
Ah there it is… Complete lack of empathy, and only capable of understanding an issue when it affects them or their family directly.
Too bad your parents aren’t trans. Maybe then you’d care.
So, in your mind AOC and Trump are exactly the same person?
No. AOC and Trump are outliers on either end of the spectrum.
But as a whole the difference between how Democratics and Republicans do politics is nothing more they semantics.
Lobby money, bribery, insider trading, sexual scandal political controversy work just the same on either side of the aisle.
So, you find the outlier you like and help them.
At one point during the election, they were trying to make a big deal over the sheer number of republicans criminals who thought they were above the law, while democrats were the first ones to bring democrats to justice
Insider trading is a bit different since it’s legal. Yeah most from both parties do it and don’t even realize how unethical it is, but fwiw they made it legal
They’re the worst candidates from either direction lol
something something genocide
Does the US really not have any other political parties? Is there some sort of rule that says that there can only be two political parties.
I don’t understand how there can be so much dissatisfaction with the current options, and that dissatisfaction has existed for so long, and yet there are been no other parties formed to take advantage of that displeasure and offer themselves as an alternative.
Does the US really not have any other political parties?
We do, but they’ve been institutionally ostracized since the 90’s, and very few people vote for them. The two ruling parties have the backing of the billionaire class and the national news media, so likely many aren’t even aware of other options to begin with.
Technically we can have any number of political parties and do. I believe I had candidates representing five parties running for my state’s auditor this last time.
However various conditions have always prevented other parties from building a competitive national presence. Things like name recognition and the vast amount of money spent in a typical election is very difficult for a new party. On the occasion when someone has reached the legislature, you can’t really do anything without a party behind you, so it’s tough to make an impact. People complain about the voting system, but it just means there’s no second place: each of the two will win different areas but very tough for a third party to break in since there’s no second place or third place.
It’s basically a mathematical consequence of First Past the Post voting system. Until we get Ranked Choice Voting or similar, we will always only have the 2 parties. And since we need at least one of those parties to support a new voting system, I’m not holding my breath to see a sweeping change there. Happily, a couple states have embraced Ranked Choice Voting, so maybe a change can occur in time.
Is there some sort of rule that says that there can only be two political parties.
No, but I think the issue lies with their system of government. As a presidential republic they don’t have parliamentary government where parties enter coalitions to form the executive, so smaller parties have no good way to get established and share executive power and responsibility while growing.
Couple that with the voting system which also favours the trend to only two parties, and there you have the mess.
PS: They have the Green Party and the Libertarian Party, but they remain at the fringe and largely irrelevant. No seats for either of them.
It takes time to grow a new party. With first past the post voting there is no time to do that in. Since any new party will take voters from the party you allign more with and guarantee the party you align less with wins. And none of the 2 major parties are interested in changing to a system that would give themselfs less power. Those poor people over there are stuck with psycopatic fasistic party that is afraid of everything and everyone, and a megalomanic ignorant party that degrades into in-fighting any time they have any power.
Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.
How is this funny?
that’s quality
It points out how the typical person doesn’t participate in the electoral process, but still complains about policies that elected leaders enact.
Whether it’s funny or not is up to you. Comedy is subjective.
It points out how the typical person doesn’t participate in the electoral process, but still complains about policies that elected leaders enact.
This must be the famous german humour
It’s funny, but not funny haha, funny sad
This community is explicitly for funny haha.
As social animals, virtually all things humans do or make is in some sense political.
You don’t have to be “into politics” to hate the state of current situations. We can all feel left behind when infrastructure fails, society piles on, prices skyrocket and basic homes are out of reach financially.
That’s fine. Just don’t waste anyone else’s time complaining about that stuff if you’re not going to exert the minimal effort to do anything about it.
You don’t have to be into “water” to hate the state of being thirsty. We can all feel parched and frustrated when we don’t pay our water bill.
You can get into politics minimally, you don’t have to nerd out on it, but everyone should have a basic understanding of the political system.
It’s like complaining that your house constantly catches fire but never bothering to realise that your extension cable monstrosity is causing the problem. A basic understanding of the electricity would have prevented the fire in the first place, and learning about electricity now would prevent future fires. But instead you just complain that your house catches fire every other week.
i think the point they’re making is that not being into politics prevents one from recognizing the root cause(s) for these problems and indirectly perpetuates them. which I think is by design honestly. it’s in the best interest of capital owners that working people are not interested in politics.
Everything is political. Trans people need you to talk and act like it is, so politiphobia can’t be used for transphobia. Engaging in politiphobia is a microaggression against trans people.
If you believe that more people being into politics will help the trans, we don’t have the same experience.
In my experience, the people that approve of trans people are all politically active. The people that aren’t politically active don’t tend to like trans people.
The myth that there are people who aren’t into politics is dangerous. People use that myth to harass trans people.
I think you sort of have a point but it’s been lost by the word salad.
Anyone who ever unironically says the phrase microaggression automatically sounds like an absolute twit
THIS is literally the exact kind of bullshit that makes people not take you seriously, whether you like it or not.
Politiphobia IS NOT a thing! There’s almost no way to use the word ‘microaggression’ without sounding like a self-important twat! How about we focus on securing some actual rights for trans people before we start trying to deliver awkward/juvenile ultimatums regarding micro- anythings? 🧐🧐🧐
Posts like this miss the forest for the trees to a dangerous degree, imo
You seem very emotional about their word choice. So how about I reframe it.
Avoiding voting is a luxury because you’re not going to be killed by either administration. And failing to vote is a passive attack on those who will.
I’m emotional about the fact that there’s a portion of the population in this country that seem to think they have any sort of say over what types of medical care another portion of the population can have, where - or even if they get to use the bathroom, or - let’s just be honest here - breathe, live; Ya know, little things like that.
This is why it’s sooo fucking frustrating for me to see all these people shooting themselves in the foot. I dunno if any of y’all paid attention or not, but there was a pretty big election recently that got handed to a racist, recognized by the courts as a rapist, felon who is (and long has been) expressing blatant signs of dementia running on a platform that largely centered around kicking the brown people out of the country indiscriminately.
Your opposition here is fucking big, loud, nasty, violent MACROaggressions, and yet I still see people like you guys on here doing… what? Chastising people (who might actually be on your side already, mind you) who express signs of frustration/displeasure with the people who you need them to be upset with for being so fed up or whatever prompts their “I’m apolitical” statement? Not just chastising, even, but calling it a ‘microaggression’? Which, aside from just sounding like the whiniest thing you can say, immediately paints them as the adversary, putting them on the defensive. And - for those of you playing along at home who might recall - since we’ve already established who your opposition is (or should be, rather), now that you’ve put our theoretical “apolitical” person into defense mode too, well… If the enemy of my enemy is my friend then…
Hmm… Maybe making people feel like they’re just as bad as the racist fuckheads because they perhaps don’t grasp that everything has something of a political component to it isn’t the best strategy, as it turns out.
Ah. Victim blaming. Yeah, that tracks.
Using inclusive language is part of the political process to change laws and get rights.
Meeting people where they are is a vital part of the rhetorical process. The bigots and oligarchs are speaking the language of the ordinary people and a lot of those people are making it clear that their vote is contingent on such things.
I get the value of inclusive language. I’ve been involved in trans activism for a long time and I’ve watched us go from “please stop referring to us with porn categories and dehumanizing language” to things that while I agree with definitely can come off as nitpicking.
You’ll get way further telling someone that they’re only able to not care about politics because there are a few heads in front of them on the chopping block and that the guy with an axe keeps telling them they’re safe. You’ll also get a lot further bringing others’ needs into the realm of their concerns. Its why I’m a huge proponent of PFLAG. A lot of straight and cis people struggle to empathize with queer needs, but can readily see themselves in the shoes of our parents. The right has learned this tactic from gay activism while we’ve let it fall to the wayside.
White liberals are too oblivious to persuade with fear. You have to persuade them by appealing to their saviour complex. They won’t avoid apoliticism for their own sake, but you can convince them to be heroes to the trans community. It’s positive motivation. The carrot, not the stick.
This is an unpopular opinion, but yeah. I wouldn’t go so far as microaggression, but whenever someone says “I don’t really care for politics” it makes me think of all the anti-trans bills and how apparently they just don’t give a damn that that’s happening, or don’t even care enough to learn that that’s happening. Do you care about trans people being oppressed? Congratulations, you care about politics. That’s just kinda how it works, and it sucks.
Everyone should talk about this kind of politics. Just don’t be tribal or an asshole
“I don’t really believe the medium is the message, but let me show you how tone deaf I am by being a populist on Twitter.”
“Ignored politics, eh? I’m sorry, but by this point the only solution to all of your problems is going to require that you fight a cop.”
And yet despite arguing with people and writing my representatives and voting every damn chance I get politics has not improved those things one iota and now I have an ulcer and disowned family members.
Also: Not funny, didn’t laugh.
Badum tssss
