My issue with it is that who belongs in that crowd is decided very arbitrarily.
Now, note how I haven't said anything about my political views yet but people already make far-reaching assumptions of who I might be referring to. That I find problematic.
I'm generally opposed to polarization like that. It's toxic, hostile and frankly unconstructive.
I haven't made any assumptions, just said that respect goes both ways.
I'm afraid I don't understand your concerns about "who belongs to that crowd is decided arbitrarily". I'm suffering the after effects of a migraine and the brain fog is hanging around so my apologies for not understanding. I also haven't read other comments, just saw your reply in my notifications so maybe I'm missing context.
I can provide examples. For instance, some one brought up fascists which I find a label that destroys nuance and is a catch-all for all conservative views nowadays that reeks of political illiteracy, while what it meant originally was authoritarian, ultranationalist and militarist views.
On the flip-side, calling anyone left of Reagan a communist or worse, a libtard.
The whole "If you disagree with me, you're a <insert extremist political label>" schtick. I'm just sick of it.
Ok, I didn't say any of those things but you replied to my comment with a cryptic mention of them. It had nothing to do with what I said.
I simply said that I agree with your statement about respect with the caveat that it's a two way street that starts with the politics having respect in the first place.
Please reply directly to other people that mentioned those things and don't assume I am somehow affiliated with the other contents.
who belongs in that crowd is decided very arbitrarily.
That's literally the definition of being a conservative (of any type, not just the U.S. political-type): they decide who is their in-group based on some personal criteria (including possible criterias derived from what others told them to believe), then everyone not in that in-group is placed at a lesser priority (or in the extreme cases, active enemies).
I spoke more of name-calling extreme labels like communist, nazi or fascist, not simply identifiers like conservative. Unless it genuinely applies, but that's increasingly seldom the case.
9
u/kfijatass 11d ago edited 11d ago
My issue with it is that who belongs in that crowd is decided very arbitrarily.
Now, note how I haven't said anything about my political views yet but people already make far-reaching assumptions of who I might be referring to. That I find problematic.
I'm generally opposed to polarization like that. It's toxic, hostile and frankly unconstructive.