• GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Not knocking your worthy efforts, but the vast majority of people don’t turn conservative because of ideological reasons, they do it because they want to keep what they acquired over their lives.

    The people don’t become conservative any more because everyone younger than 40 pretty has pretty much gotten the economic middle finger across the board, so people turn radical instead. If I have nothing to lose I don’t feel protective of the status quo.

    But the greedy fucks in charge around the world are so removed from the reality of life they cannot see past their bank account, and would rather concede to fascism to keep things going for a bit longer, than making the needed changes. For the lost generations and the planet itself.

    • Ragdoll X@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Well it’s worth noting that teenage boys have started leaning a bit more to the right, likely in large part because of Andrew Tate and others in the manosphere, plus right-wing think-tanks like PragerU targeting schools and kids.

      Though it’s not like the gap between conservative and liberal boys is that big, plus it’s not uncommon to hear from men on the left say that they had a phase of watching Ben Shapiro debate compilations only to grow out of it, so it’s not like this is the end of the world.

      Still, it’s also true that Millennials and Gen X are getting fucked by boomers when it comes to money: Millennials only hold 3% of total US wealth, and that’s a shockingly small sliver of what baby boomers had at their age

      I guess we can only hope that the latter is a stronger motivating factor than reactionary propaganda and efforts to curtail education that are coming from the right.

      • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        PragerU is like barely removed from Nazi propaganda. It’s so fucking insidiously and evilly incorrect I can’t believe YouTube allows it at all. Fucking YouTube

      • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        40-54 year olds were 7-21 years old in 1990. That group had >30% of wealth? I have some doubts about these charts.

        • tmyakal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s because you’re reading the chart wrong. It’s showing the change in wealth for those age brackets across time.

          People that were 40 in 1990 had a bigger share of the wealth than people who are 40 in 2020.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      10 months ago

      What exactly are older people afraid of losing? It’s not like even the farthest left politicians are in favor of doing anything more radical than raising taxes on people who are wealthier than the vast majority of boomers.

      • Kage520@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t think they are afraid of losing anything specific. It’s ingrained at this point.

        “If you made straight A’s and someone else made straight F’s, how would you feel if you both ended up with C’s? That’s fair right? No? Welcome to the Republican Party. Isn’t everyone who doesn’t agree with this an idiot? I’m glad we aren’t idiots.”

        I grew up homeschooled and the Christian curriculum my parents used had similar feeling brainwashing tactics. “Scientists searched their whole lives to disprove the Bible, then ended up Christians instead!” Making you feel smart for not wasting your life like the other guy, you are already in the “good” group.

        • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’ve grown up in the same educational situation, and this is exactly what I’ve experienced. Their attempted indoctrination turned me into a liberal, antichristian agnostic. But with mental health issues, because emotional abuse is better than “letting your kid go to hell”…

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well Jesus was a peace loving socialist hippy, who would have been seen as a woke liberal by any US Christian conservative. They would have crucified him and not seen the irony.

            • phillaholic@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              They were also warned about the antichrist, and then elected the embodiment of the warning almost identically.

              • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                It’s a popular theory that the antichrist thing was an attack on Nero, who was persecuting Christians at the time Revelations was written.

                But then that means Trump is nearly identical to the Bible’s description of Nero.

    • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      10 months ago

      Being protective of your good fortune at the expense of others is itself part of an ideology, so I don’t see why you felt the need to contradict and condescend. A person who’s not a piece of shit would have no business being a conservative, no matter how privileged they are.

      Now go argue with someone else because I’m getting big reddit energy from you, and it’s making me anxious.

        • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I get their point - the “greedy [expletive]” part was insulting and unnecessary. But I do think they are overreacting quite a bit…

        • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          10 months ago

          Next time, either be considerate and don’t lead with a debatelord’s tone, or don’t comment at all if you can’t resist being an argumentative prick

          • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            How about I express myself as I see fit, and you compose yourself for the next time someone writes in a way that makes you feel “anxious” yet at the same time unable to control the urge to lecture them.

            Who are you to tell me how I should express myself?

            • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              When you treat people like shit and throw pointed words at them, I’m going to call you out for it. I don’t owe you an apology.

              But fair enough, I’ll block you. I had my fill of you neckbeards during my miserable tenure on reddit, and I never want to speak to you again.

              • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                10 months ago

                Whom did I treat like shit in your opinion? I have not addressed anyone except nameless politicians.

                Maybe spend less time arguing with people you say you don’t want to argue with and more on improving your reading comprehension

          • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            I understand that the last paragraph of their comment was unnecessary and inflammatory, but this (insults etc) is not the way to point that out…

      • natebluehooves@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        The only big reddit energy was this comment and the subsequent doubling down. The comment above was an even handed rebuttal, this response is tone policing and name calling.

        You may disagree with his rebuttal but this is not how you respond to adversity.

        • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I don’t understand why they even went so off the rails. I just gave an addition to their statement which I prefaced with positive affirmation, to make sure the following text isn’t misinterpreted as ridiculing them in their effort.

          Granted I l maybe shouldn’t have cursed as much, but I didn’t even insult anyone specifically, not even republicans as some other people suggest. Just the political leadership that is complicit in suppressing the needed change to save our ecosystem and remedy the ridiculous inequality mankind has to endure.

          Apparently that’s enough to make them block me and then continue to rant about me in random comments.

          Guess im done with this conversation, it turned weirdly toxic for no fault of mine.

        • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Wow, what a hot take. I’m so thankful you stepped in to defend the debatelord. What a great use of your time!

          Just a tip: If you have nothing constructive to add to a conversation, keep it to yourself. Have fun on my blocklist.

        • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          10 months ago

          And I think you ought to keep your thoughts to yourself, if you have nothing worth contributing besides haughty arrogance and presumption.

          Besides, I did read their whole comment. That’s what I responded to.

            • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              That’s EXACTLY MY POINT. If someone agrees with you, then why lead with something as pretentious and haughty as “Not to knock your worthy efforst, but…”

              Why talk down to someone like that and adopt the tone of a pretentious debatelord when you ultimately agree with the other person?

              I encountered people like that all over reddit, so I recognize them – the type of people who think any conversation is a debate that you must “win.” It’s precisely because he does agree with me that I’m so miffed.

              • irmoz@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                10 months ago

                They weren’t being pretentious or haughty. They amended one of your statements because it was a little inaccurate, then agreed that your wider point is correct. Because, yes, “wanting to hold on to what you have earned” is indeed an ideologically driven position

                • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  it was a little inaccurate

                  It wasn’t, though. There was nothing I said that needed amending, nor nothing they said that effectively amended. And they weren’t called upon to do so. They could have said the same exact thing without coming off like a prick.

                  • irmoz@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    It was, because like I said, it is ideological. You said it wasn’t. After I’ve explained my point, you can’t just say “nuh uh”.

          • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Let’s please keep this civil. I respectfully disagree, but I have no problem with you voicing your opinion. The issue is your assumption that the person who disagrees with you is a horrible individual, simply because they have a different opinion. I don’t even care who’s right at this point - we can debate an issue without insulting each other. And even if you’re enraged by it, hiding that fact and calmly countering their opinion with logic is far more effective at winning over an audience…

            Edit: Before any accusation of unfair treatment is made, I’d like to clarify that I disapprove of the original comment’s rhetoric as well - there was no good reason to insult conservatives (“greedy [expletive]”) like they did.

            • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              10 months ago

              What the fuck are you even talking about? Conservatives should be systemically and socially deplatformed and disenfranchised.

              My issue with the person I was speaking to was the haughty arrogance they led with, presuming to argue with me about… what? Nothing they said contradicted what I was saying; yet, they come at me like a debatelord?

              And now you have the arrogance to lecture me on the correct take ™? Literally cis white male energy. stfu

              • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                10 months ago

                There wasn’t any “haughty arrogance,” they were just adding on to what you said with their view, and (from my understanding) were attempting to be polite by clarifying how your point still stands. Not everything is an argument…

                • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Not everything is an argument…

                  What the fuck? The irony of you pointing this out to me when the other guy leads with things like ““Not to knock your worthy efforts, but…” like a pretentious debatelord who’s full of himself. I agree that not everything is an argument, which is exactly why I was calling him out.

                • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I’m genuinely sorry for misgendering you and for bringing race into it. It’s not that people aren’t reacting positively to my critique. I don’t care about that. It’s the other person talking down to me like I’m a fool or a child and he’s in some formal debate that he has to “win.” The last thing I need are other people inserting their opinions into the mix about how I should speak politely to that person when he was being such a cock.

                  And what I meant by “cis white male energy” is people feel the need to tell you their opinion, to the point that multiple people are dogpiling you telling you the same thing, none of which ever addresses the real issue.