Conversation

If you think that people who vote for the political figure you disagree with must necessarily be psychopaths, complete buffoons, idiots, brainwashed, whiny, or angrily selfish, then you should seriously reconsider like, all of your beliefs in everything

100

716

Aella

@Aella_Girl

Feb 13, 2020

Because you're ascribing *morality* to your beliefs; you're focusing on the depravity of the opposition and the holiness of your own tribe. In principle, you're no better than the religious, those who go to war, and those who justified slavery

140

Aella

@Aella_Girl

Feb 13, 2020

you are utterly failing to understand that someone's brain and experience can be constructed in such a way that the opposing policies actually seem like a good, loving, helpful thing for humanity that satisfies thier deepest values. Your politics has destroyed your compassion.

155

Aella

@Aella_Girl

Whenever I meet someone who categorizes those they disagree with as motivated by darkness, I immediately become afraid of them, because I know their love has concrete limits, and if I want to connect with them I have to perform within their approved limits or be rejected.

5:49 AM · Feb 13, 2020

Replying to

Well said. I had been "performing within the approved limits" of many people for quite a while, which basically meant I just self-censored. It drove me nuts. It's easy to make self-censorship a habit, and most don't even recognize the immense value of what they're giving up.

Replying to

and

They're giving up their ability to be their authentic selves and have people like or dislike them for who they truly are. People need to learn to be OK with some people not liking them. If you're only accepted because you hide who you are, then you're not truly accepted.

Replying to

Do you believe this applies to all political systems? Russia? North Korea? Myanmar? What about past ones? Rome under Caligula? At a minimum, there clearly exists a great deal if misinformation and ignorance in American politics. Not all opinions are created equal.

Replying to

Everyone is like that. Limits may be different but they exist.

Giacomo Repulsive 13% Dying Breed Zucco

@giacomozucco

Feb 13, 2020

Replying to

@Aella_Girl

Meh. Sounds quite circular. You are assuming that this assumption is wrong (it may be right in special context) & clearly attributing morality connotation w/ the slave supporter moral comparison. Methodology is important, but actual substance can't be unimportant.

Replying to

Most are ignorant & greedy That mix can produce support for all kinds of horrible policy Line btwn innocent/good/evil not clear "Eat the rich" is ignorance of wealth creation used to justify greed & envy Desire for things (security or otherwise) at others expense is greed

Replying to

I believe our current president is a clear and present danger to our Democracy. I will resist any effort to normalize his corruption, immorality and mental deficiencies. It has nothing to do with taxes or policy positions. He's unfit.

Replying to

Love always has limits, that's a dictate of human nature. The best we can do is continue to struggle for self-awareness, forgivement, and openness. In my world fear is a precursor to hate. If we truly want to connect we cannot perform.

Replying to

and

Laozi and Buddha both did this ... yet are considered some of the most harmless. There are conditions where it makes sense and doesn't limit "love". When you abandon all your falsehood, the conclusion is there

Replying to

Excellent thread. I tried to make a similar point here:

Quote Tweet

daniel f stone

@d_f_stone

Feb 5, 2020

opinion that (imho) should be a lot more popular: Believing another person or group of people is morally bad when they're not (or at least not much worse than most of us) is itself morally bad. Doing this doesn't make us bad people either but does mean we could be better.