Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Friday, September 20, 2024

Thoughts about ill-will in American politics

Rhetoric from MAGA (America's authoritarian radical right) consists almost completely of ill-will toward its opposition.[1] There is a lot of evidence to support that assertion. In view of the evidence, one can see that as being a fact, not mere opinion. For example, JD Vance recently publicly said that he will lie to the public as a means to draw attention to all the horrible things being done to the Americans people. He did not specify what the horrible things are or why lies were necessary to get the job done, when facts and reason work just fine for sane people.* He used that "reasoning" to justify vicious lies about falsely alleged illegal Haitian immigrants (they are not illegal) eating house pets (none have been eaten). That clearly consists of both lies and Great Replacement Theory racism. 

* One can reasonably believe that Vance sees himself, DJT and the MAGA movement generally as populated by sane people. If asked, that is what he will say.

In malicious mendacity like that, where is the good ill or good faith? There is none as far as I can tell. There is cynical ill-will for sure, but where is the good will? 

The same argument can be leveled at the MAGA rank and file. Many or most of them have been argued to joyfully revel in the discomfort and pain their arrogant lies, racism, bigotry and slanders inflict on innocent targets. From my blog post yesterday:
MAGA likes inflicting pain on its political enemies. It likes and enjoys creating these ridiculous and absurd memes. It loves to provoke people who are on the outside. It’s part of the joy of this MAGA movement that can include this extreme aggression online. The people who are in on the joke [Haitians eating dogs and cats in Springfield Ohio], the core MAGA people who are pushing the memes out, look, if it’s true, great. If it’s not true, who cares? They’re having a good time.
From what I can tell, there is a lot of truth in that argument. Much of the MAGA rank and file seems to be having a darned good time, or at least they act that way. Listen to them talk. They like pissing off attacked and slandered people and groups.

In response to all the ill-will, joyful or not, what reactions among the lied to, slandered, attacked and crackpotted upon are fair and reasonable? From what I can tell from science and personal experience, emotional and moral impulses give rise to most of the reactions among groups and individuals that MAGA attacks, insults, lies and slanders. As usual, the range of responses is quite broad, probably ranging from boredom and/or indifference to seething outrage and/or intense fear.

Some argue that the center and left are not sufficiently empathetic toward MAGA compared to other groups. Well, isn't that to be expected? Sure it is. Most attacked and/or insulted people will tend to emotionally distance themselves from attackers in emotional/moral self-defense. In those situations, negative feelings like anger and resentment toward abusers will override empathy for many or most people. In these moral assessments, one needs to be cognizant of who is the attacker and who is the attacked. 

I have experienced exactly that kind of self-defense and democracy defense response. Early on, e.g., 2016 to about 2018, I had some empathy for the rank and file. I accorded the MAGA rank and file less moral responsibility for supporting DJT, because I saw them as deceived, manipulated and betrayed by MAGA dark free speech. I accorded MAGA elites ~85% of the blame and ~15% to the rank and file back then. But now after years of accumulating evidence proving that DJT is extremely dangerous and thoroughly morally rotted (and a convicted felon), I accord the rank and file 45% of the blame and the elites 55%. Although blame assessment in politics for things like this is mostly a subjective assessment, maybe I should nudge the blame estimate to ~50:50.

When it comes to the MAGA rank and file, I lost my empathy. In my opinion, mostly amounts to just being a sane human being under attack.

Q: Is it reasonable or morally justifiable to lose empathy for all of MAGA, elites and rank and file, in the face of a perceived deadly MAGA attack that is grounded mostly in ill-will, was unprovoked and is implacably opposed to my core moral values?***

*** My core moral political values: support for and belief in pluralistic, secular democracy, civil liberties, the rule of law, fact, true truth, sound reasoning, etc.


Footnote:
1. What about ill-will from the left aimed at the right and center? Yes, some liberals express ill-will toward conservatives and/or the very different MAGA wealth and power movement.* Examples include, stereotyping and insulting language, e.g., "idiot[s] out on the farm", uneducated, racist, homophobic. How prevalent that is in the non-MAGA world is unclear. But the prevalence of ill-will is shown by overwhelming rank and file MAGA support for DJT. That is quantified by opinion polls. One cannot rationally, or in good faith, argue that support for Harris and Dem politicians amounts too a mindset as about equally driven by ill-will as minds that support MAGA.

* Real pro-democracy conservatives are not MAGA -- they have left the GOP or been RINO hunted out by some combination of the elites and the rank and file. The rank and file, not the elites, voted Liz Cheney out of power.

Is liberal ill-will qualitatively and quantitatively about the same as MAGA ill-will? From what I can tell, most conservatives do not convey nearly the same level of ill will and mendacity that MAGA does. Fact-checkers provide significant evidence of ill-will in the MAGA movement. In my firm opinion, lies** and slanders are direct evidence of ill-will. And to me, lies are direct evidence of moral rot, ranging from mild immorality to flat out evil. Political lies aimed at political opposition tend to, probably usually do, attack and/or insult the target. 

** Lies are intentional and knowing, unlike honest mistakes that are unknowingly based on false information, insufficient information (ignorance), or unintentionally flawed reasoning. 

My emotional and moral assessment:
Lies = ill-will and ranging from immoral to evil
Honest mistakes = good will and moral





No comments:

Post a Comment