Politics Can we find some common ground with Trump/new right supporters? Do

[Rodney Dangerfield]

I lean neither way really but watch on with interest, it’s more entertaining than television shows these days.
But I did find it funny to read the OP say the right complain a lot, from where I sit most complaining seems to come from the other way. Even saying a Trump supporters complain a lot? Since he came into power the complaints haven’t stopped and it’s not from his supporters I’d hazard to guess! Even this thread is a complaint really.
Anyway the extreme ends of either side are as boogie in the head as each other.

 

[Mofra]

How about - the need to address income equality?

Swan was lambasted for his comments a few years ago about he widening income gap in Australia, now it seems recognition of the 'working class' is an important part of the political narrative for almost all political parties.

 

[Gethelred]

I am a RWNJ who also works in the climate change field and believes in protecting the environment. It is on us to convince the near 50% who are either deniers of climate change, or don't give a s**t.

The lower and middle classes get preached to by celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio, who take private jets to attend climate conferences and tell poor people that they need to lower their standards of living to help out. This is a big problem from the RW perspective: the wealthy who believe this stuff need to be leading by example. We are seeing mass riots in France presently, where the elites think they can help the planet by raising the cost of living for the poor. I would rather see us incentivise good behaviour than punish poor behaviour, eg with the rebates we have for solar systems here in Aus.

Another issue is condescendingly talking down to sceptics as if they are dumb/uneducated, by claiming that climate change is "settled science". It is not. I believe in man-caused climate change, but we are far from establishing anything about our real impact on the climate, and should not insult those who question it.

A good example of this is Tucker Carlson's interview with Bill Nye. Yes, Tucker is as biased as they come, and yells over Bill a lot. But he is incredibly popular, and this is the sort of thing RWers are seeing. Bill fails to answer any questions about the precise impact that man is having on the climate. Ask a scientist in the field how many degrees Celsius that man has warmed (or even cooled) the earth, and there are no answers. So calling it "settled science" is counter-productive, IMO.

A huge problem the Left has at the moment - and I say this as someone on the left - is that in a lot of cases we simply don't have the argument anymore. We treat an argument as won - by us - and call anyone who wants to have the argument an 'ist': sexist, racist, homophobe, behind the times, climate change denier (you get the idea). It's largely due to laziness - "You're not worth arguing with!" being a cover for "I cannot be bothered arguing the point" - but in some cases it's due to fatigue; people having already argued that point before, in the past, without changing someone's mind, and being unwilling to commit to that experience again. People, by and large, do not like confrontation.

A necessary component of discourse is ensuring that you must argue the point every single time, to the best of your ability, without breaking the rules (using logical fallacies to win). This is the only way to ensure - if being correct is too lofty and speculative a goal - that you are not wrong.

If you ever see someone doing this, call them out for it. Tell them they're being lazy, completely and wholly intellectually lazy; by refusing to have the argument at all, you are absenting your view from the discourse, too above it to do much more than insult someone for having an opinion. Shits me to tears.

 

[Seeds]

I lean neither way really but watch on with interest, it’s more entertaining than television shows these days.
But I did find it funny to read the OP say the right complain a lot, from where I sit most complaining seems to come from the other way. Even saying a Trump supporters complain a lot? Since he came into power the complaints haven’t stopped and it’s not from his supporters I’d hazard to guess! Even this thread is a complaint really.
Anyway the extreme ends of either side are as boogie in the head as each other.

I didnt say the right complain a lot. I said trump/hanson supporters complain a lot. They are not the same thing.

 

[Seeds]

How about - the need to address income equality?

Swan was lambasted for his comments a few years ago about he widening income gap in Australia, now it seems recognition of the 'working class' is an important part of the political narrative for almost all political parties.

There is no widening income gap. There is a widening wealth gap. The two are very different and the policy responses that should take place are very different.

 

[Balls In]

I am a RWNJ who also works in the climate change field and believes in protecting the environment. It is on us to convince the near 50% who are either deniers of climate change, or don't give a s**t

Likewise I'm an enviro engineer and have done a lot of work looking at marine plume dispersion, dust and noise models. I dont profess to know anything about climate models but I can tell you straight up many models are deeply flawed.

For example I once had a noise boffin complete an expensive noise validation exercise using measurements in the field. On review of his report I found he'd "calibrated" his measurements to "fit" his model instead if the other way around. He was protecting his model...

 

[swingdog]

A huge problem the Left has at the moment - and I say this as someone on the left - is that in a lot of cases we simply don't have the argument anymore. We treat an argument as won - by us - and call anyone who wants to have the argument an 'ist': sexist, racist, homophobe, behind the times, climate change denier (you get the idea). It's largely due to laziness - "You're not worth arguing with!" being a cover for "I cannot be bothered arguing the point" - but in some cases it's due to fatigue; people having already argued that point before, in the past, without changing someone's mind, and being unwilling to commit to that experience again. People, by and large, do not like confrontation.

A necessary component of discourse is ensuring that you must argue the point every single time, to the best of your ability, without breaking the rules (using logical fallacies to win). This is the only way to ensure - if being correct is too lofty and speculative a goal - that you are not wrong.

If you ever see someone doing this, call them out for it. Tell them they're being lazy, completely and wholly intellectually lazy; by refusing to have the argument at all, you are absenting your view from the discourse, too above it to do much more than insult someone for having an opinion. Shits me to tears.

You're assuming both sides argue in good faith.

 

[CatFan79]

There is no widening income gap. There is a widening wealth gap. The two are very different and the policy responses that should take place are very different.

Let people re-distribute their own wealth as they please. ie. some people are bad with money and will waste it on s**t, deal with it!

What moron out there thinks it's the government's role to do so?

 

[parsons nose]

Let people re-distribute their own wealth as they please. ie. some people are bad with money and will waste it on s**t, deal with it!

What moron out there thinks it's the government's role to do so?

Yes, I agree. I think we should do away with government altogether.

 

[CatFan79]

Yes, I agree. I think we should do away with government altogether.

Nah, we need to tax people higher to fund more s**t like this.. https://www.wgea.gov.au/

 

[parsons nose]

Nah, we need to tax people higher to fund more s**t like this.. https://www.wgea.gov.au/

Let’s start a revolution!

 

[Opts]

Trump and his ascension is a product largely of the alt right which is fundamentally a white supremacist movement.

So the question really is are we interested in finding common ground with the white supremacy movement?



Footnote: I know not all Trump voters are white supremacists, ie. the rusted on republicans, rural people sick of the cities, people sick of the system generally, etc.. They could have had a candidate other than Trump though who was not a product of the alt right.

The bigotry on this website is amazing. You get to label all Trump voters as white supremacists and no ban or penalty? I've been banned for stating that "left wing voters are less likely to own property". Just proves how bigoted left wing people are doesn't it. They hate to have a balanced argument.

 

[Opts]

Not necessarily. Depends what the answers are. Here is a chance to sit down and have a think about what you actually want done and not simply respond to our thoughts on the news cycle like in the other thread. I think there are likely to be some areas where we agree on. At least I hope so. But we never hear Trump supporters views about how they would actually fix things.

Why do you need to hear from Trump supporters about how to fix things?

Firstly, you will reject everything they say because of the lefts bigoted beliefs.

Secondly, the man they voted for has fixed things and has in fact been the most successful US President in the last 60-70 years. The economy is booming, the US debt is falling, unemployment is as low as it has been since the 1950s, he's made trade agreements with vital manufacturing countries and best of all, he's p1553d off the liberals and their media. Amazingly, the left simply ignore these FACTS and preach hatred towards the President and anyone who supports him. Imagine the outcry of racism if Obama had been treated as Trump is?

 

[Opts]

A huge problem the Left has at the moment - and I say this as someone on the left - is that in a lot of cases we simply don't have the argument anymore. We treat an argument as won - by us - and call anyone who wants to have the argument an 'ist': sexist, racist, homophobe, behind the times, climate change denier (you get the idea). It's largely due to laziness - "You're not worth arguing with!" being a cover for "I cannot be bothered arguing the point" - but in some cases it's due to fatigue; people having already argued that point before, in the past, without changing someone's mind, and being unwilling to commit to that experience again. People, by and large, do not like confrontation.

A necessary component of discourse is ensuring that you must argue the point every single time, to the best of your ability, without breaking the rules (using logical fallacies to win). This is the only way to ensure - if being correct is too lofty and speculative a goal - that you are not wrong.

If you ever see someone doing this, call them out for it. Tell them they're being lazy, completely and wholly intellectually lazy; by refusing to have the argument at all, you are absenting your view from the discourse, too above it to do much more than insult someone for having an opinion. Shits me to tears.

Well said. It's called bigotry. Hopefully the many Bigotfooty posters and "he who shall not be named" learn from this and eventually make their arguments in a logical and sensible manner instead of abusing, labelling and banning. Unto that happens we are wast g our time on these forums.

 

[Gethelred]

You're assuming both sides argue in good faith.

Because that is a necessary assumption.

If you treat anyone as though they're not, you're immediately doing both them and yourself a disservice. Them, because you're deciding without hearing from them in any way that they're not worth arguing properly with; you, because in any exchange there is the opportunity to examine how other people think, and potential ways to counter it or adapt yourself.

 

[Gethelred]

Well said. It's called bigotry. Hopefully the many Bigotfooty posters and "he who shall not be named" learn from this and eventually make their arguments in a logical and sensible manner instead of abusing, labelling and banning. Unto that happens we are wast g our time on these forums.

You do see how, in the same breath you tell someone else to

... make their arguments in a logical and sensible manner instead of abusing, labelling and banning.

you're also calling what the left do in my post bigotry, and mock Chief as "he who shall not be named".

It isn't bigotry anyway, not by the standard definition of the word.

 

[The Passenger]

Global warming was made to impoverish man kind?

The best anti climate change signature on BigFooty is "Global Warming is this generation's Y2K" or something like that. I can't remember who it is. The funny thing is this person doesn't even realise they are promoting a proactive stance on climate change. Y2K wasn't a "thing" because an extremely proactive approach from within the software industry prevented it from becoming a thing.

 

[swingdog]

Because that is a necessary assumption.

If you treat anyone as though they're not, you're immediately doing both them and yourself a disservice. Them, because you're deciding without hearing from them in any way that they're not worth arguing properly with; you, because in any exchange there is the opportunity to examine how other people think, and potential ways to counter it or adapt yourself.

And what if you know the other side isn't arguing in good faith on an issue?

 

[Crankyhawk]

What a sh*tstain on the world. The quintessential Useless Campaigner. No wonder he's struggled to find work. Hope he ends up starving in his mum's dungeon.

He is proving that there is a lot of stupid out there that can be exploited and influenced. I despair for children trying to analyse for truth in media today the task seems impossible

 

[Crankyhawk]

I don't know. Should you? Plenty of welfare recipients, uni students, stay-at-home mums etc who vote but don't pay tax.

Everyone pays tax via GST

 

[Crankyhawk]

... are you going to convince them they have the wrong idea if you don't?

Most of the socialist alternative back in my Melbourne uni days (mid to late 90s) were eternal students and believed in differential pricing of food and essential services (poor people pay less and rich pay more)

 

[Seeds]

Let people re-distribute their own wealth as they please. ie. some people are bad with money and will waste it on s**t, deal with it!

What moron out there thinks it's the government's role to do so?

Why should the govt distribute income and not wealth? A lot of wealth accumulation is due to luck whereas wage income is due to work. If the govt has to take one it should be wealth rather than income as people always earn their income. They dont always earn wealth.

 

[Seeds]

Everyone pays tax via GST

That's only if their gst tax more than offsets welfare payments. If it doesn't they aren't net tax payers. And its net tax that matters.

 

[Gethelred]

And what if you know the other side isn't arguing in good faith on an issue?

How do you know that unequivocally?

 

[its free real estate]

If Trump declares no wars or “liberal interventions” then he is a pretty good president imo.