rolling explaining conservatism

I have a theory about global warming and why people think it's real. Go back, 30, 40 years when there was much less air conditioning in the country. When you didn't have air conditioning and you left the house, it may have in fact gotten a little cooler out there because sometimes houses become hot boxes. Especially if you are on the second or third floor of a house in the summer time, and all you've got is open windows and window fan, or a servant fanning you with a piece of paper. When you walked outside no big deal still hot as hell, now 30, 40 years later all this air conditioning, and it's a huge difference when you go outside. When you go outside now, my golly is it hot, global warming. It's all about the baseline you're using for comparison.

Good Storify thread.

Aside from 'sociopathy' being misspelled in the title, very solid thread, this one.

God damn twitter threads make me so mad.

be angry at other things

i'm tellin ya, poor people have a screw loose..

Angry at plenty of things, but I don't understand trying to write an essay as a series of tweets.

Jesus once said, "Help the poor"
But he doesn't believe that any more

People -- before birth, God rates them
If they are born poor, it means God hates them

And destitute children are no longer worthy of our pity
Although grudgingly, Christ allows an orphanage in the worst part of the city

"Blessed is the richest guy in town"
He says, "For his wealth shall trickle down"

LYSOL DOUCHE

Angry at plenty of things, but I don't understand trying to write an essay as a series of tweets.

― DJI, Friday, July 7, 2017 11:42 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

twitter only lets u write 140 characters per tweets (1/)

sometimes you have more than that to say, but want people to be able to read(2/)

it inside twitter rather than click out to something else.(3/)

if ppl have to click another link, they will probably skip it.(4/)

if u dont want to read tweet threads, skip them. (5/5)

guys, conservatives just love to poop their pants. that's it. psychoanalyse them all you want, that's all there is to it.

Lol @m bison, esp the part where even one goddamn sentence doesn't fit into a tweet and has to be split into two tweets.

I think I found the image that sums it up:

https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/simgad/16612822897549419215

All I see here is a bunch of know-it-all's giving their opinion without having read a lick of Republican literature.

Go on and smash with your baseball bats the lowest hanging fruit of the conservative tree while the rest of us try to live our lives the best we can.

know-it-alls doesn't need an apostrophe

yo snipes i question your assumptions

Possibly not the best username to have whilst complaining about conservative stereotyping

just glad to see Wesley out of prison tbh

Republican literature lmao

Aka the back of a dollar bill

Banana Man, let me give you some homework and then we can talk. How about you read Ideas Have Consequences by Richard Weaver.

Believe it or not, I was once young and went to college just like the rest of you.

But then you were done mowing the lawn and went home

In its pages, Richard M. Weaver argues that the decline of Western civilization resulted from the rising acceptance of relativism over absolute reality. In spite of increased knowledge, this retreat from the realist intellectual tradition has weakened the Western capacity to reason, with catastrophic consequences for social order and individual rights.

so Weaver's being prophetic about modern conservatism?

not to nitpick but weaver isn't really "republican literature" right? it's more like conservative literature. there's lots of great conservative literature.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/LincolnNovel.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/Sister-cover.jpg

^ Republican literature

I read Ideas Have Consequences in college too! It's pretty dull iirc

Well, here's a more exciting read

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ihld5IeIL._AC_US218_.jpg

if your parent(s) have (has) enough money, you can get away with treason, and why not?

"He has created more jobs, real estate -- the hotel, the casino industry -- he has created more wealth than anybody in this entire country."

"Where was the media ten years ago when Kenyan Islams placed one of theirs in the White House?"

(1) Stigginit
(2) Hillary had illegal emails. Lock her up.
(3) Obama conspired with the Ukraine vs our Russian friends
(4) Seth Rich, NVR 4GT (his grieving parents are in on it)
(5) Kept us Safe from illegal refugee terrorists
(6) Mexico will pay
(7) Hillary had illegal debate answers. Lock her up.
(8) Bill Ayers
(8) Th3ey're protecting that scumbag pedo Weiner and his pizza sex slave operation.
(9) SOROS!11!

Nugget from our national poll coming out tomorrow- only 45% of Trump voters believe Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with Russians...

— PublicPolicyPolling (@ppppolls) July 17, 2017

It's not treason, because this was a Republican.

Republicans working with the Russians to destroy the United States isn't treason because the Republicans are the New American Confederacy, and their goal is to destroy the United States and replace it with a series of fiefdoms in which they are once again allowed to own people.

When a Republican works with the Russian government against the United States, it's merely working with an ally against a common enemy.

a series of fiefdoms in which they are once again allowed to own people.

actually these will be voluntary contracts. constitution!

"At some point, you've got to ask yourself, has the day of the CBO come and gone?"

Have ye explained conservatism yet

Asking for a friend

He is a conservative btw

is he you

Sir he is not

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/07/20/most-republicans-still-say-they-support-trump-whos-most-likely-to-break-ranks-and-speak-out-against-him/

To answer this question, it helps to look into the social psychology of group loyalty. Consider politics today as populated by two tribes: Democrats and Republicans. A growing literature suggests that partisanship has become a social identity akin to tribal affiliations, inspiring strong loyalty.

...

This might sound counterintuitive, since the people with the strongest partisan loyalties are also most likely to adopt party leaders’ positions on issues. But here’s what makes the difference: People who felt connected to the party were willing to express opposition only if they felt that their party’s position threatened the future of the Republican Party and its ability to win elections.

In other words, strongly connected Republicans were willing to speak out when they worried that their tribe’s future was in jeopardy.

This was refreshingly blunt, I thought

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/07/revolt-of-the-masses

Especially over the past decade or so, these people have increasingly been told that their deeply-held views are not only wrong, but make them bad people. And, being humans, their reaction isn’t to rethink their lifelong worldview and change their attitude, but rather to dig in and say “fuck you.” They know they are “supposed to say” that they are ok with gay marriage, and black lives matter, and all that, because if they don’t they are going to be called stupid, redneck racists by people on TV and in print media. So they have changed what they’ll say out loud, or at least to whom they will say it, but haven’t changed their beliefs. And Hillary and the democrats are exactly the kind of people that would judge them harshly for their views, and Donald Trump and the republicans are the kind of people who don’t. So they are voting republican, no matter how big of a clown Trump is, because at least those people don’t piss all over my fundamental sense of self.

or you know perhaps they actually are bad people

(is that "refreshingly blunt" enough?)

yeah if your "deeply-held view" is that black lives don't matter, I think "bad person" is a pretty apt descriptor

all lives matter

especially fetuses

I don't think they'd describe their disagreements with the movement Black Lives Matter in those terms but sure. Being against gay marriage and wilfully blind to all sorts of systematic injustice is morally wrong. There are fundamental moral disagreements between liberals and conservatives.

There's another piece to this, though, which is that the blue states have seen more economic growth in the past few decades and blue state culture is largely equivalent with mainstream media culture. When the most visible advocates of liberal ideas seem like cultural elites, the hoi polloi are going to instinctively rebel, a dynamic that Fox Newd and similar outlets have played into. Trump's rise was basically a tantrum thrown by people who felt culturally marginalized, even if in all kinds of ways -- like race and income -- they were actually coming from a position of privileged.

A more economically just society where people didn't feel like they had to be at each other's throats all the time wouldn't have this kind of toxic bullshit. Trump voters may be bad people but they got that way due to larger social and economic forces. They are culpable -- don't get me wrong -- but still, we don't just have 80 million bad people in this country for no reason.