Political Stereotypes

[Crockerland]

I have never heard of a single Liberal doing anything like that.

Do you watch the news?

Pretty regularly, yeah.

[Benjabobaria]

Political stereotypes are very common in the US and certainly increase tensions.

The stereotypical leftist is either an academic elite who doesn't care about the intellectually inferior average person or a butthurt, hypocritical, self-righteous brat that yells "racist" and "sexist" at everyone until the words have no meaning while shaming anyone who disagrees with them.

The stereotypical rightist is either a wealthy businessman that doesn't care about the parasitic average person or an intolerant, uninformed old redneck that won't listen to reason and clings to meaningless traditions.

Notice the elitist stereotype that both sides sometimes use when thinking of the other - stereotypes are just evidence of the greater problems.

Anti-intellectualism and ignoring the truth is at an all-time high - It's not good when scientists and reporters that work hard to discover the truth and improve our lives are seen as political tools of the left. The fact that so many Americans deny science makes me very worried for the future. We need non-biased media to support our democracy - to point out the flaws in our society and help us progress. Yes, the mainstream media can very slightly favor the left at times, but think - maybe this is because the right has some problems at the moment? The Trump administration isn't exactly scandal-free.

Both sides certainly have problems - Both sides seem to have a desire to confirm their biases. I kinda feel like the right is worse though as it ignores science more.

Now I'm just an intelligent liberal elitist science-loving young brat scumbag, so what do I know?

[Basking Turtles]

Stereotyping is a way of simplifying reality, so that you don't need to know all the details before being able to make a relatively good decision.

This has evolutionary advantages, because it helps you assess a situation much quicker. It has obvious drawbacks in a modern political context, where things are just too complicated to be molded into a few stereotypes.

The issue with democracy is that most people don't have either the time, the motivation, or the mental capabilities to look beyond stereotypes. That's why elections are won or lost by stereotypes. That's why Trump won. That's why democracy will never be the answer to our problems.

[Empire of Cats]

I have never heard of a single Liberal doing anything like that.

Do you watch the news?

I've heard horror stories about how liberals are going around burning and looting and rioting. In a few cases, yes, that's true, however, I'm fairly confidant that any true nonviolent protester or liberal would denounce them for what they are: those who take advantage of an issue and exploit it to the fullest. They don't represent us when they do that.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Many view me as a socialist nutjob seeking to take over the world, but I'm only slightly socialist

[Neu Leonstein]

I think my favourite stereotype is the one about "the bankers". "The bankers" are meant to be Republicans/Tories/Liberals (in the Australian sense), as establishment as they get and fundamentally opposed to left-wing politics.

But of course most real-life people working in the finance industry are educated young people from diverse geographical backgrounds. And educated young people like that tend to be open-minded, idealistic, forward-looking and intensely convinced that if only given the tools, someone smart and committed can change the world for the better. Those are not the characteristics that naturally lend themselves to conservatism.

Just speaking from experience, I've probably met as many committed greenies in finance than I have committed conservatives. Not that they don't exist (and naturally, there are more of them among the older cohort). It's just that it's amusing that, aside from the views on the finance industry specifically, many bankers inside the Wall Street towers probably don't differ so much in their general political outlook from the Occupy protesters outside.

[The Conez Imperium]

I think my favourite stereotype is the one about "the bankers". "The bankers" are meant to be Republicans/Tories/Liberals (in the Australian sense), as establishment as they get and fundamentally opposed to left-wing politics.

But of course most real-life people working in the finance industry are educated young people from diverse geographical backgrounds. And educated young people like that tend to be open-minded, idealistic, forward-looking and intensely convinced that if only given the tools, someone smart and committed can change the world for the better. Those are not the characteristics that naturally lend themselves to conservatism.

Just speaking from experience, I've probably met as many committed greenies in finance than I have committed conservatives. Not that they don't exist (and naturally, there are more of them among the older cohort). It's just that it's amusing that, aside from the views on the finance industry specifically, many bankers inside the Wall Street towers probably don't differ so much in their general political outlook from the Occupy protesters outside.

An interesting thought.

A potential problem is that these bankers you know hold junior/middle positions within the company. It may be the senior echelons of the banking industry that are the "opposition".

I mean when you have the CEOs of the big four banks tell Sydney that house prices aren't "over-inflated" as the SMH puts it, there appears to be a serious disconnect from reality.

I have no doubt that recent graduates when entering the bank represent the best ideals of the new generation but its the old that leads the young.

[Neu Leonstein]

An interesting thought.

A potential problem is that these bankers you know hold junior/middle positions within the company. It may be the senior echelons of the banking industry that are the "opposition".

Well, there's certainly an age difference, yes. But actually, it's not clear-cut either. The boss of Goldman Sachs (and much of the firm) is famously "New York Liberal", and very much in the Obama/Hillary camp of political views. But the second in command recently left and joined the Trump Administration, albeit as one of the adults in the room. The boss of JPMorgan is obviously famously critical of banking regulations, which has put him at odds with Elizabeth Warren especially, but is also somewhat leaning Democrat. Robert Mercer (a hedge fund billionaire) is by some considered as the dark eminence behind the recent rise of populism. But George Soros is the left-wing boogieman of populists the world over.

But anyway, those people are in the minority, now more than ever as banks have cracked down on middle management and shifted the balance towards younger staff. I think it's fair to say that most people working in banks believe in some way that markets are a good way to organise the distribution of resources. But I'm not sure that you can generalise much further from there. Nowhere near as much as the stereotype would have it, anyway.

I mean when you have the CEOs of the big four banks tell Sydney that house prices aren't "over-inflated" as the SMH puts it, there appears to be a serious disconnect from reality.

That's not a question of someone's political views though. They're talking their book... they kinda have to. They are mostly giant home loan factories, and most of their balance sheet is in some way connected to the value of the homes they hold as collateral. If they started screaming about a bubble, they'd be talking down their own share price and get sued.

And as to the substance of the matter, I think that one can be either left-ish or right-ish and either believe that it's a bubble or believe that it isn't. There's no particular reason for the two to be connected.

[Datlofff]

Liberals might view conservatives as a bunch of religious fanatics with one hand on a Bible and the other on an AK-47.

Typical and untrue stereotype made up by the liberal media. No self respecting and red blooded American would chose the AK-47 over the M-16.

Kalashnikov is more reliable, and the stopping power more potent, just like a colt over a Glock every day of the week.

[The Conez Imperium]

I mean when you have the CEOs of the big four banks tell Sydney that house prices aren't "over-inflated" as the SMH puts it, there appears to be a serious disconnect from reality.

That's not a question of someone's political views though. They're talking their book... they kinda have to. They are mostly giant home loan factories, and most of their balance sheet is in some way connected to the value of the homes they hold as collateral. If they started screaming about a bubble, they'd be talking down their own share price and get sued.

And as to the substance of the matter, I think that one can be either left-ish or right-ish and either believe that it's a bubble or believe that it isn't. There's no particular reason for the two to be connected.

I explicitly didn't mention housing bubble because that seems to be up to debate. What isn't up to debate is that housing is more expensive than ever and is simply unaffordable for the average Australian.

[Divitaen]

...most of the political stereotypes are true though. I mean, demographically, most GOP conservative voters are rural white hillbillies with low educational attainments and non-college educated. I don't really see what's wrong with depicting GOP voters that way when, statistically, that is their demographic. It doesn't mean ALL Republicans are like that, but most of them are.

[Nordengrund]

I'm a Georgist, so I don't really fit into either the left or the right. Neither side is perfect, and both have done things that people on both sides aren't too proud of.

[The Sauganash Union]

I get the Stepford stereotype a bit.

[La Cosa Fedora]

I for one feel superior to both sides.

[Neu Leonstein]

I explicitly didn't mention housing bubble because that seems to be up to debate. What isn't up to debate is that housing is more expensive than ever and is simply unaffordable for the average Australian.

The degree of unaffordability depends on where you look. But Sydney, yeah, I would agree with you - I mean, I'm in the same boat. But again, Labor didn't "discover" this for their political campaign until a couple of years ago, and even now they're hesitant to call a spade a spade. The issue is not so much one of political affiliation as it is one of the terrible politics of having a politically active and numerous "rentier class" (for want of a better word) that has an interest in higher asset prices, and a politically apathetic (and politically stereotyped) group of young people who for the most part barely even recognise just how much they are being hurt by all of this.

I mean, Australia has this whole system of private superannuation. But by far the biggest asset for most people is the home they own. What the current situation produces is a larger and larger group of people who are not only missing that asset (and the associated capital gains) in their portfolio, but have spent effectively the same amount of money over the lifetime on rent, with zero return.

Anyway, that's just a rant. Point being that of course the boss of a home lending bank isn't going to talk down house price valuations. That's not really about their politics though.

[Hyggemata]

To me, liberals are the people that drive the country forwards. People also seem to forget that the American revolution was started and accomplished by liberals, because conservatives obviously formed the United Empire Loyalists and fled to Canada.

I also don't think any point in the past is worth of retrogression, that is, undoing the total progress of society to recreate a past state. For every problem that reforms create, I am confident that many more are solved; there are few policies that really bring more damage than good, and most of those come from the conservatives who reject progress. Even the Canadian conservative party was once labelled Progressive Conservative to demarcate themselves from the reactionary elements of the neighbours down south.

[Greater USA]

Stereotypes are rampant.

I'm a conservative, and am thus immediately dismissed by many people as being a racist, sexist, Christian fundamentalist who totes guns and hates poor people. Little do these folks know that I'm brown, non-religious, don't own any firearms, etc. I also want there to be better schools and more business opportunities for the disadvantaged. And I acknowledge that grade-A jerks like Rush Limbaugh like to class all liberals as smug, latte-sipping hypocrites who are sexually promiscuous and lacking morals. This is obviously wrong.

[Ancient Pluto]

"SJWs." "Alt-Right."

/thread

EDIT: But seriously, though, enough. These stereotypes are turning politics into a toxic wasteland. It's gotten so bad, NSG is the most reliable forum where both liberals and conservatives hang out.

[Theodosios]

...most of the political stereotypes are true though. I mean, demographically, most GOP conservative voters are rural white hillbillies with low educational attainments and non-college educated. I don't really see what's wrong with depicting GOP voters that way when, statistically, that is their demographic. It doesn't mean ALL Republicans are like that, but most of them are.

Can you provide proof for these claims?

[Empire of Cats]

"SJWs." "Alt-Right."

/thread

EDIT: But seriously, though, enough. These stereotypes are turning politics into a toxic wasteland. It's gotten so bad, NSG is the most reliable forum where both liberals and conservatives hang out.

So true, though.....

[Divitaen]

...most of the political stereotypes are true though. I mean, demographically, most GOP conservative voters are rural white hillbillies with low educational attainments and non-college educated. I don't really see what's wrong with depicting GOP voters that way when, statistically, that is their demographic. It doesn't mean ALL Republicans are like that, but most of them are.

Can you provide proof for these claims?

There: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/

[Soyouso]

They're not really a bad thing as long as people understand that they're not really reality for everyone in the ideology. And even if people believe it's true that "all liberals are easily offended college students who cry over everything " or that "all anarchists are druggy hippies who want to rebel against their parents", it only harms their own point in political debates and it's silly to actually believe that they're always true. But it's splendid for satire, if there weren't people who acted like it stereotypes wouldn't exist.

[Free Missouri]

To me, liberals are the people that drive the country forwards. People also seem to forget that the American revolution was started and accomplished by liberals, because conservatives obviously formed the United Empire Loyalists and fled to Canada.

I also don't think any point in the past is worth of retrogression, that is, undoing the total progress of society to recreate a past state. For every problem that reforms create, I am confident that many more are solved; there are few policies that really bring more damage than good, and most of those come from the conservatives who reject progress. Even the Canadian conservative party was once labelled Progressive Conservative to demarcate themselves from the reactionary elements of the neighbours down south.

"Liberals" back then would today be considered radical KKK Racists, or if you adjust for the times, at the very least would be Libertarians today, not progressive DNC Members.

Progressivism is a cancer unto our country that has eaten at economic and personal freedom ever since the days of Teddy R, Wilson, FDR, and LBJ.

[The Liberated Territories]

To me, liberals are the people that drive the country forwards. People also seem to forget that the American revolution was started and accomplished by liberals, because conservatives obviously formed the United Empire Loyalists and fled to Canada.

I also don't think any point in the past is worth of retrogression, that is, undoing the total progress of society to recreate a past state. For every problem that reforms create, I am confident that many more are solved; there are few policies that really bring more damage than good, and most of those come from the conservatives who reject progress. Even the Canadian conservative party was once labelled Progressive Conservative to demarcate themselves from the reactionary elements of the neighbours down south.

Very interesting, but there is just one flaw. All the people who were liberals back then would not be considered liberals today.

[Olivaero]

To me, liberals are the people that drive the country forwards. People also seem to forget that the American revolution was started and accomplished by liberals, because conservatives obviously formed the United Empire Loyalists and fled to Canada.

I also don't think any point in the past is worth of retrogression, that is, undoing the total progress of society to recreate a past state. For every problem that reforms create, I am confident that many more are solved; there are few policies that really bring more damage than good, and most of those come from the conservatives who reject progress. Even the Canadian conservative party was once labelled Progressive Conservative to demarcate themselves from the reactionary elements of the neighbours down south.

Very interesting, but there is just one flaw. All the people who were liberals back then would not be considered liberals today.

Maybe, maybe not. they would have political differences with the democratic party of today for sure, probably because they would dislike the federal government doing so much but they would also probably lose their shit about any efforts used to promote religion in government and they probably really wouldn't like the war on drugs or starting wars of aggression generally. Making them opposed to conservatives as well. They were certainly liberal at the time though and would certainly understand trying to bring change to a state that is considered un-just.