Comment by MetaWhirledPeas

Comment by MetaWhirledPeas 15 days ago

17 replies

View on Hacker News

> the parties policies are aiming to realize fundamentally different visions of the world, based on fundamentally different values

This is an incorrect and cynical statement. I understand why you feel this way (for one thing, it's the exact type of language coming out of many of each party's idealists) but it's simply false.

One party supports gun rights while the other supports gun control. Those aren't values. Democrats want to pursue safety from guns. Republicans want to pursue safety from tyranny. Both sides care about personal safety.

Abortion rights is about personal liberty. Gun rights are also about personal liberty. Both sides care about personal liberty.

The competing talking points aren't always conveniently about the same issue though. For Democrats their border policies are about compassion and human rights. For Republicans their border policies are about domestic prosperity.

Do Republicans care about human rights? Yes. Do Democrats care about domestic prosperity? Yes. To pretend otherwise is to willfully push apart the tribes in your own mind, and to trivialize the perspective of the opposition.

The real problem is the one you are contributing to: the unwillingness to empathize. Empathy is the only way to come to a compromise. With a little empathy you might even find that you have to compromise less because you might actually convince someone of your argument, for once.

daanlo 15 days ago

Imho opinion, what you are describing are republicans of the past. As parent says, there used to be shared values. Two of the shared valued were peaceful transition of power and respect for the rule of law / division of power between executive, legislative and judiciary.

Imho the values of MAGA republicans are clearly distinct from GWB republicans (even if it may be precisely the same voters). Specifically the two values described above are no longer shared values.

I believe there are more, but for the two values above we have irrevocable proof.

Reply View 3 replies
  • MetaWhirledPeas 15 days ago

    > what you are describing are republicans of the past

    I know it seems that way but it has always seemed that way. Republicans talk about Democrats of the past (southern Democrats). Democrats talk about Republicans of the past (Lincoln). This feeling isn't new.

    > Two of the shared valued were peaceful transition of power and respect for the rule of law / division of power between executive, legislative and judiciary.

    Re: peaceful transition of power the Republicans insist (whether true or not) that January 6th was peaceful. The value is still there. Re: the rule of law, Republicans claim they are abiding by the law. (Are they not?) The value is still there. Division of power is certainly coming under question with the actions of DOGE, but I don't think the mere existence of DOGE is evidence that Republicans don't value the division of power. Some of these things aren't immediately obvious to everyone, especially if they are determined to be legal (whether we like the law or not).

    We must resist the urge to demonize and dehumanize the opposition. That is exactly what is happening: even with our comments and upvotes we are collectively deciding that the opposition is out of their minds and are increasingly a foe to be vanquished. That is, frankly, stupidity of the masses.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • telchior 14 days ago

      If someone changes and begins to continually insists that something plainly untrue is true, does that mean that they possibly still have the values they used to? How long do you continue defending the "well, maybe..." case?

      Throw out the Jan 6th example, it's now ancient history. As a party, Republicans are, at this very instant, claiming that judges are acting illegally for... using their constitutionally mandated legal powers. Simultaneously, but separately, the party apparatus is repeating on a daily basis a new conspiracy theory that the judges they don't like are being controlled by some nefarious power.

      And it's a very, very well established playbook. We have many examples of countries that dismantled their systems of transition of power and division of power starting with the courts. It's a move that could pretty much make it into a "For Dummies" book.

      "The value is still there." I can't see it. But maybe I'm too focused on judging on the entire scope of action and speech, rather than a very narrow bit of speech that isn't at all reflected in actions.

      Reply View 0 replies
  • wesapien 14 days ago

    I think the outcomes achieved for domestic vs foreign is another interesting angle. The degradation of purchasing power of working and middle class is have been consistently getting worse.

    Reply View 0 replies
popalchemist 15 days ago

While you broadly make a great point, there are psychological dimensions to take into consideration. Some people's personalities are more inclined toward tribalistic thinking and will extend their capacity for empathy only toward their own in-group, while others are capable of expanding the "in-group" to include all of humanity. So while it may be true to say that Republicans care about human rights, it is more accurate to say they care about their OWN human rights, and not the rights of people outside their in-group.

If you want to remove the political labeling from this statement, about 30% of the population "thinks" (or, rather, does not think, but acts) this way, and it is important to realize that the motivating factor differs between them and the other type of human, who cares about people in the abstract.

Reply View 0 replies
vendiddy 14 days ago

I think this is spot on.

I feel like folks on both sides would stop talking past each other if they were willing to understand the other POV rather than dismissing it as crazy.

Reply View 1 reply
  • hyeonwho4 12 days ago

    Compromising and using empathy to understand the opposition's views so that you can negotiate for what you need does not satisfy the base, and does not satisfy social media. The (naive) game theory of negotiation says that it is better to stake out an extreme position so that you get more of what you want when you negotiate it away. And the dynamic of primary elections also allows traitors or traders to be punished if they defy the desires of the party too much.

    Reply View 0 replies
watwut 14 days ago

> Republicans want to pursue safety from tyranny.

Not true. This is simply not what they want.

> Democrats want to pursue safety from guns. Republicans want to pursue safety from tyranny. Both sides care about personal safety.

Republicans wants to ensure their opponents are sufficiently tyrannized. They care much less about safety, systematically. They even openly look down on those who care about safety, not seeing them sufficiently manly.

> Do Republicans care about human rights?

Not much. Openly not much so, Musk called empathy the biggest weakness of western civilization. Trumps and Musks moves clearly do not care about human rights, republicans stand by them.

> Do Democrats care about domestic prosperity? Yes.

Yup, they do. I am not really sure about republicans anymore, given last moves.

> The real problem is the one you are contributing to: the unwillingness to empathize. Empathy is the only way to come to a compromise. With a little empathy you might even find that you have to compromise less because you might actually convince someone of your argument, for once.

These people vote for Trump and Vance and see empathy as a weakness. That is not compromise, that is capitulation to a lie. You want one side to dominate and have everything they do excused. The other one should be nice, submissive and empathetic. But this is based on lies - lies about what republicans actually do and lies about their motivation. Lies to make them sound better. And lies about what democrats actually do - lies to make them sound worst.

Reply View 1 reply
  • kulahan 12 days ago

    Of course there are a myriad of reasons why people are republicans, and republicans represent a myriad of peoples. What benefit do you think you gain by putting on blinders like that?

    Reply View 0 replies
Miraste 15 days ago

Abortion rights is about religion-as clear a difference in values as one can have.

Reply View 1 reply
  • kulahan 12 days ago

    I think if you believe this is simply a religious issue, you’ve majorly missed the point.

    Many religions do stand against abortion, but the philosophical argument can be summarized in part as “when is something a human”. There really no need for religion to argue that point, and it can settle a huge number of disagreements.

    Reply View 0 replies
cambaceres 9 days ago

Hi, just want to tell you that this comment was one of the best I have read in a long time.

Reply View 0 replies
dbingham 15 days ago

This was true a decade ago. It is no longer true.

The modern Trump controlled Republican party is not a party that cares about personal liberties. It is a fascist, authoritarian project that is toying with straight up Nazism. They are explicitly pulling from the Nazi playbook in their language and strategy of attack on the rule of law. Someone who supports that party is supporting a completely different set of values from someone who opposes it.

That said, that party is also backed by a powerful and effective propaganda machine that has successfully pulled the wool over many people's eyes such that they don't fully realize what it is they are supporting.

Reply View 3 replies
  • cylinder714 15 days ago

    The left has called every Republican presidential candidate a Nazi/fascist/authoritarian since Ronald Reagan.

    Reply View 2 replies
    • toofy 15 days ago

      this is far too broad of a generalization. just like it would be too broad of a generalization to declare all conservatives to be maga.

      if we’re to believe trump he declares people to be “extreme leftists” who are clearly not even leftists.

      so i find it highly unlikely that the entirety of “the left” called every republican presidential candidate these things.

      Reply View 0 replies
    • goatlover 15 days ago

      Doesn't matter what the left said previously, what matters is that the Trump Administration is behaving in an autocratic manner. Godwin's law has been abused online since forever, but you can just draw a comparison with Putin's ascent to autocratic rule in Russia.

      Reply View 0 replies