Which group is weirder?

Post Reply New Topic

No evidence is ever enough to the Zionist. The entire idea of Zionism is that any crime, any atrocity is acceptable as long as it upholds the Jewish supremacist state. It's the same as with all flavors of nationalism. It's the same thing as trying to convince nationalist Americans that their country was build on genocide. Nationalists attach a part of their self-worth to particular nations, and when you disparage those nations, they react as if you are disparaging them.
So when you point out these things, either the atrocity didn't happen, the atrocity wasn't that bad, the atrocity was justified, the atrocity wasn't as bad as xyz thing the Palestinians did, or on the rare occasion they actually admit the atrocity was wrong, they still will only offer half-hearted condemnation, because at least the atrocity was (if Israel and its supporters are to be believed) done in the name of the Jewish people.

'Brown immigrants who turn MAGA' isn't weird at all if those brown people happen to be middle or working class. The Democratic party pretty much shoved off a ton of it's constituents to the Republican party and said 'Here you go - we don't want them. They don't meet our purity requirements'.

The Democratic Party should have a lot to offer the self employed and those who work for small businesses, but seem to have written them off. A high percentage of those people are non-white. Also the perception that they can take the non-white vote for granted. Also It the fact that many such people are socially conservative, and that results in their not feeling comfortable with the Democratic political culture. It shouldn't surprise anyone that a lot of them, including African-Americans, vote Republican.

If you are seeking to seek "weird" groups (I'll use your derogatory language)
An incredible 31% of Asians (mostly east asians) still support trump despite his anti-Asian rhetoric during COVID which led to a spate of attacks on east asians.

As for "brown" Asians, plenty of others
there's Raj Doraisamy who is a leader of a far right Florida party called Defend Florida who despite being on the "darker side of brown makes decidedly anti-black comments and is still spruiking voter fraud in trump's loss in 2020 and speaking against vaccination for COVID.

there's brother of "brown" Hollywood actress/writer Mindy Kaling who masqueraded as a black man to get into medical school and then turned around to claim he was campaigning against affirmative action for black students (when he was using his racism to take advantage of being sprung for doing something unethical)

Also special shout out to Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley who are coconuts (brown on the outside and white on the inside in pretending to be right wingers), trump notoriously got his wires crossed recently getting Indian Kamala Harris mixed up with Indian Nikki Haley in a speech.

And of course who can forget these racist clowns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_ ... v._Harvard

I think they rode the 'party of minorities' out past total amortization. The problem landscape is also different than it was sixty years ago (much more financial oppression than racial oppression), it's more of a rich vs. middle and working class cold war environment which is leaning toward neofeudalism / techno-feudalism.

Correct. the groups defined as "weird" are made up of middle-upper middle class (including aspiring middle class seeking the American dream) so naturally swing conservative. Groups traditionally labelled as such still predominantly support the democrats but overlook natural prejudice against their backgrounds to position themselves with politics that they deem as reflecting their personal socio-economic aspirations.

Yep, and they're also:

Western
Educated
Industrial
Rich, and
Democratic.

More seriously, I don't know that going conservative is just a social climbing exercise. I think it's more likely that what they see on the ground as small business owners pushes them in that direction.

At one point, the Democrats' narrative was "the 99% vs. the 1%" or "It's all of us vs. the tiny number of rich people who are messing up everything." The 1% are a very specific group of people. While I still occasionally see this terminology used, at some point there was a major shift to "the privileged vs. the unprivileged," which are much more vague terms. Who's privileged? You might be privileged, I might be privileged, black small business owners might be privileged, anyone and everyone whose opinion needs to be dismissed out of hand can be declared privileged. Maybe that wasn't original intent, but that's how it's used all across social media.

My head canon for how this happened is that financial-system-based movements like Occupy Wall Street failed to stir up enough anger in America and fizzled out, so they looked for something that would strike a nerve in our culture: race. That, and they couldn't wrap their heads around poor people voting for Trump.

I, despite being white and male, have never identified with conservatism, Republicanism, nationalism, etc. The appeal of Trump completely escapes me. But I find this "privilege" tactic extremely alienating. In fairness, I wasn't going to vote for anybody anyway. But I imagine there are some people, including people from marginalized groups, who are on the fence about who to vote for, who have also been alienated by this.

traditional "white" American values. Cherry pies, Christmas/thanksgiving turkey, baseball and spring break (add any other stereotypes as appropriate).

Nobody is weird for being the way that they are.

It's now the party of billionaires vs. the party of millionaires. I have to wonder if it's a signal that the Democratic party defeated the classic socialists by allying with the billionaires. When that happens you have a kayfabe called 'identity politics' which makes people feel great but doesn't give them a dime more in the way of salary other than maybe quotas in hiring.

This is really more about their internet culture than their policies and I've harped on this before, but I just can't get over it: I was on a Broadway discussion group where people thought the ultimate character who epitomized "privilege" was Mark, the penniless filmmaker from "Rent." They didn't merely find the character annoying, but morally reprehensible. Some to the point that they insisted he must be cast with a white actor in every production to emphasize his privilege. There were already other characters in the story who were written to symbolize privilege -- an Old Money family -- but these people decided instead that Mark was the symbol. Because he was white, grew up Middle Class in the suburbs and then "chose to be poor." And that meant he was...stealing the thunder from the real poor people? I guess? I don't know. Also, he was Jewish, but they never mentioned that. However, these people also usually hated Mark's friend Collins, who was a poor, black, gay college professor/political activist with AIDS. Because he "wasn't political enough," or something like that.

I have another example that I can't link to Democrats or Progessives, but sort-of parallels the shift in message. There used to be a series of anti-smoking PSAs (generally a good message, I think) that showed a boardroom of executives plotting how to get more people to smoke. The message was "look at these evil, greedy rich people ruining your health to make more money!" But a few years later, the focus of the PSAs had shifted to, "look at this evil random woman, smoking alone on her own balcony in the middle of the night, spreading second-hand smoke into the air!"

I see a lot of parallels between the 'oppression Olympics' and Zimbabwe's great goblin LARPs. They're both (Rene) Girardian memesis, my guess on the situation in Zimbabwe is they decided that having a goblin LARP is a better way of dealing with societal constriction (their country is in shambles monetarily which is unbearable) than burning witches alive - thus they'll all agree to believe in goblins together to flush the incivility from harsh existential competition out without picking up guns, put the incivility and unease on the goblins, and chase them into white buckets that the shaman does a cleansing ritual over.

I'm thinking if we're stuck with Girardian memesis as a major part of our culture because we're still an animal species and will need it for the foreseeable future (likely centuries if not thousands of years into the future, I'm not even sure we could remove it by tampering with our DNA via CRISPR) then we just need to figure out what the healthiest ways to channel it are, ideally without communist or fascist theocratic revolutions because those are some of the best ways to make things much worse.

Every time highway traffic slows down to 30 mph and it turns out that there's a big accident on the other side of the highway and everyone's impulsively rubbernecking - crows do this, I've seen wild turkeys do it as well. I don't think we're really as far off from other species as we think.

Yes, human beings have/continue to express/release animal instinctive behaviours. How they are regulated/channelled varies through enforcement or through education. In advanced western societies sport, entertainment and hobbies channel animal instinct. We substitute tribalism with clubs, cliques and social groups. Not conforming to social norms makes individuals weird.

I'm guessing there are a lot of regionalized and even ethnic ways to cook a Christmas or Thanksgiving dinner in the US and plenty of those (particularly Christmas) would be mutations on old-world European traditions. For baseball - that looks like the ethnic makeup of Suicidal Tendencies, ie. just about everyone's represented.

I've got a soft spot for the US I grew up in where everyone's just stoked to see talented people crush it at whatever they're doing and if they're an ethnic minority that's cool too. I sometimes worry that Promethean spark is getting addled a bit by the Harrison Bergeron mentality.

this would be fair.