What Liberals Get Wrong about the Right with Corey Robin - Factually! - 236
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 ноя 2023
- It's easy to caricature those on the political far right as outlandish, cartoonish, and bizarre, and easier still to dismiss their agendas as irrational or uninformed. This, however, can be a tremendous mistake. Assessing political rivals requires not just learning the history of their influences and principles, but also remembering that they are real people. In this episode, Adam speaks with Corey Robin, Professor of Political Science at Brooklyn College, to learn the history of where the far right movement emerged from, and what we can learn from evaluating them honestly. Find Corey's books at factuallypod.com/books
SUPPORT THE SHOW ON PATREON:
/ adamconover
SEE ADAM ON TOUR:
www.adamconover.net/tourdates/
SUBSCRIBE to and RATE Factually! on:
» Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
» Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0fK8WJw...
About Headgum: Headgum is an LA & NY-based podcast network creating premium podcasts with the funniest, most engaging voices in comedy to achieve one goal: Making our audience and ourselves laugh. Listen to our shows at www.headgum.com.
» SUBSCRIBE to Headgum: ruclips.net/user/HeadGum?sub...
» FOLLOW us on Twitter: / headgum
» FOLLOW us on Instagram: / headgum
» FOLLOW us on TikTok: / headgum
Backblaze makes backing up and accessing your data astonishingly easy. Go to backblaze.com/factually to start your 15-day no credit card required free trial!
Get $15 off a Skylight Calendar at SkylightCal.com/FACTUALLY!
Support the show on Patreon: www.patreon.com/adamconover
See Adam on tour: www.adamconover.net/tourdates/
*This episode was idiotic on so many levels. STOP EMBOLDENING HALF WIT FASCISTS & NAZI SYMPATHIZERS. Entertaining these half wit discussions go NO WHERE & have NEVER helped the country*
You should look into talking to actual conservatives.
This was my first factually and disappointed. Not very factual.
god damn this comment section's keeping you busy, eh?@@lucashenry6281
Try reading the comments from these people and tell me again how I should see them as fellow people? And not just people looking to inflict as much harm to myself and my community as possible? With CLEAR malicious intent.
Its hard to respect and humanize folks that are actively working on taking away my human rights and dont consider people like me human.
As someone who has had some success in winning over Conservatives, If you can get a Conservative to trust and respect you that is a good point for creating a dialogue, as it is trust and respect for others that civil society is based on, but of course, not all Conservatives are willing to trust or respect other people, and in that case, civil discourse and a meaningful exchange of ideas is just not possible.
Citations?
@lucashenry6281 this poster gave us anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence in the first person does not require a citation because they are the originator of the evidence. This in an inherent trait of anecdotal evidence.
Anecdotal evidence does not include all behavior or examples accrross an entire population, this is understood as being anecdotal.
Judging g from your response, I would guess that it is more likely than not that you belong to the group that this poster was referring too.
@@christophermeier8329 oh I know, it’s why I challenged them.
I think the broader context of this guy's spiel is that the right writ large has to be respected in the sense that they aren't just buffoons stumbling towards bigotry and worse outcomes for most people, but a coalition movement of varied values that have goals and motivations and ideologies that they will patiently work towards without necessarily announcing it. I think the message is that there is danger in taking everything at face value since many of the actually powerful are also working towards obscuring their goals. In terms of humanize, idk, if i'm being charitable id say that we need to recognize that they are humans operating with their own wills and goals and not just insane arbitrary robots of evil.
We mock them for being clowns instead of looking at projects 2025 with the horror it deserves. We made this mistake with Trump. We have to learn from that.
Oh? And what horror are you looking at precisely? People not obeying your orders? What a shame.
@@lucashenry6281You cannot possibly be accusing someone of authoritarianism while supporting the most authoritarian political party.
@@Leo9ine so which political party has been trying to consolidate power and restrict Constitutional rights while the conservatives have been fighting against it? Oops, I gave away a hint.
@@lucashenry6281 what r u talking about? Both parties consolidate power to the executive but trump and Barr thought the president should be a king. Luckily Barr didn't want to go as far as trump. Ever heard of the unitary executive theory? The conservatives constantly try to destroy the voting rights act. Several states have created maps they knew were unconstitutional and then fight to keep them tooth and nail. They dont even believe in democracy. U know how many conservatives have started saying we are not a democracy. Yes we r a democratic constitution Republic. But we all know no one means direct democracy. So when they say we are not a democracy they are priming you all to accept that we aren't any form of democracy. They want to purge the entire executive branch of federal employees and put in trump loyalist. Read project 2025. They gave up their ability to be politically relevant when they got behind trump after the election lies and j6. Now they have no choice but to become more and more authoritarian because they aren't popular. Have been for decades. How many popular votes have they won? One single one in my lifetime with bush in his second term. Remember also the lock downs and covid stuff was all under trump. Biden's mandates were only for federal employees. Every normal person had the choice of test or jab.
@@lucashenry6281 The party that bans books and controls women's bodies. Always amusing when you guys cry for "small government" while forcing unwanted pregnancies and literally rewriting history books.
It is interesting to discuss socialism and the Green New Deal as old thoughts. What I struggle with is so many on the left, didn't want that term- socialism. I realize Bernie did. But other left folks would have liked to leave the term behind because of its perception. I don't know how we get away from the whole "say it three times and folks think it is true" when Republicans are walking around saying "the left is communism".
What I'd like to hear is more of a focus on "Safety net".
I think it can soften the perception common on the right that people "don't want to work". No, safety nets are about the ability to take risks. If your medical care isn't tied to your job, you can change jobs or start a business- without worrying your kids will be without doctors for months.
If you know that if your risk doesn't pan out, we'll give you a hand up, this is a good thing. It is why mosh pits can still be fun- because some folks will pull you up when you fall flat on your face rather than stomping you to death.
I don't know how the left markets a "hand up", without Republicans marketing it as a "hand out".
I also think of it as those Spartan race slip walls - the first person has to be boosted, but once boosted, they reach back and pull other people up. I just don't know how to sell teamwork to the highly individualistic mindset that says "don't give me a hand up, give me a gun to keep you out".
Its not socialism. It's a Social Democracy. Like most of the countries in Northern Europe have.
@@thebarbaryghostsf yeah thats kind of what I was trying to work around to saying- that some Americans equate a social safety net (Social Democracy) to "Socialism" which they also use interchangeably with "communism" because we're all knee jerk against anything new (old historical photos even show people protesting with signs that said race mixing is communism).
Might have been unclear. Bernie's embrace of the word socialism, his kind of "take it back" mindset when he was really talking about a very typical social safety net that even countries who are mostly capitalistic in nature do hurt his case more than helped it.
It just turns off the brains of some people once they hear the word.
They don,t want the term because you NEED the Boomer vote to win, and Boomers are really drilled into that Red Scare propaganda to this day.
I’ve been thinking about this a lot. I grew up in a very rural, conservative, religious community. I went to graduate school and moved to a liberal city, but my heart is in the country and I go back often. I hate how urban liberals talk about rural conservatives, and vise versa. Country folk are usually very kind, loyal, helpful, and clever. They’re good neighbors and hard workers.
I hate the way the right-wingers talk about progressives, especially the way they've bastardized the word liberal and how they talk about POC when they're at home. I don't call them conservatives. They're not.
Do they pay any attention to what’s real, or just believe what trump tells them.
I agree. Everybody is flawed. But abandoning that kindness and loyalty "to save the country" at the behest of propagandizing John Birch Society conspiracy theorists is the literal definition of fascism, as defined by the fascists themselves.
Again, you're making the mistake of thinking they are stupid. It's easy to debase both sides as stupid. As half are dumber than average statistically. So it's low hanging fruit. I take positions on both sides. Literally almost half and half on the big issues. I think both sides have their points. And both are absolutely wacky on some issues. If you're left leaning, I can point you to people advocating after birth abortion. Right, religion in public schools and weird marriage traditions that don't work in modern society, and racism on both sides. Both are silly. But one is killing a litteral baby. But it's not a widely held opinion. But stupid ideas are held by both sides. And both have good ideals as well.
@gimiked8685 Nobidy wants to kill babies, nor is any non-troll going to even suggest it, let alone any party remotely approach abortion in the last trimester if we are honest. If you pay someone to say it, no matter because they won't do it. What does kill mothers is conservatives, on the legal record. What does kill doctors is far right conservatives. Who shoots up churches? Far right conservatives. There is no problem with left agendas, and your only example is a murder accusation that cannot exist as a legal action anywhere on Earth, stop fence sitting bud, please.
Something I always try to remember is that nobody or almost nobody thinks of themselves as the villain of their story
Agreed.
That's a step in the right direction but too simplistic. The belief goes further. People on the right are able to believe *anything* that serves their end goal. I don't mean "pretend to believe." I mean actually believe, in the moment, and completely flip their genuine belief the next moment if it serves their purpose.
That's *how* they never see themselves as the villain.
@@jaiclary8423that makes more sense than "my friend is such an a** whenever he feels like it."
when your in a position to control the judicial system, being the villain is very vague concept to narcissists.
....and do you look at the mirror when you remember that?
One of the important things I came to grips with over the last decade or so was just how different some people see the world. You can know it on a surface level, but it's very easy to assume that you all hold certain fundamental ideas in common and only disagree on more trivial stuff.
But no, there are in fact people out there who effectively believe that up is down, the grass is blue, the sky is green, etc. And no small number of them, either.
The next step is to realize that a lot of them haven't made that same realization themselves; *they* think *you* -- and people in general -- think more like them than you actually do.
I call them "Big Nouns". Too subjective & intentionally misused by the Right to be useful. Commies+Conservatives are in parallel, blaming a phantom "Liberalism" for the pace of social change and the messy outcomes of industrialized democracies. I see now that most in tv suck: you *have* to have a breakdown and realize most around you are idiots with their language if you're in journalism or politics. They really aren't saying *anything* on PBS NewsHour or Meet The Press. I remember the moment reading a philosophy history book, a letter between Enlightenment thinkers,: "Wait a minute, *we are all living under "Liberalism". That's the only word to use for Freedom &: Fairness + Representation + Reason". Conservatives just steal it's messy success every generation.
Yeah, pretty much.
I mean it doesn't even have to be political stuff. Currently I am in training to become a technician. And evertime I ask different people the same questions I usually get almost as many answers as the amount of people I ask. Thing is the people I learn under are hailed as those elite experts in our company. So while I think consensus on technical details is universal, it usually isn't.
Now translate that to highly emotional topics like politics and identity. And we got a ton of extremely different opinions people don't like to budge from.
But the problem is that as a whole, we are not asking the experts. We are asking a man born in space about life on earth.
@@veilenjplease forgive but are we not all born in space? Are we not all space and time travelers? You are much forgiving me, I beg thee prithee.
most underrated comment
Adam needs to do one on busting the myth of democracy in America, and exposing the corporate owned oligarchy.
Just read the constitution and the amendments needed to force equality on the states opposed to women, blacks, natives and indentured persons the right to vote. The US government thumbs their noses at the world's politics but allows the oligarchy to thrive without ethical or moral consequences regarding their public and private decisions to bankrupt the US and the Americas. That is the democracy myth.
USA is not a democracy, we are a Representative Republic.
I actually am a "hard right-winger" as he said in the beginning of the show and I agree with you.
As if that's a secret or even news at this point.
@@mr.pavone9719 you would imagine, right???
I’d like to see a video about what the Right gets wrong about the Left. I like what you said - it lurks in the human heart. We all have the same human nature, regardless of political affiliation.
This is one of the best conversations I’ve heard on this subject.
That would be hours long. 😂
The right thinks the left hates USA and wants to tear down the system that built this country. Which would be all bad.. ask all the people that just came here from shit hole countries. I digress... also the right thinks the left is making child molestation okay by calling it attracted to younger persons or some BS. The right doesn't want everyone to change their sex or be gay bcuz we won't survive as a human race unless men and women have children. Lol we can't all be that way until the meta verse is up and running lmao just bcuz we disagree with others doesn't mean we have to hate them. The right think the left are the people that hate others. I'm personally in the middle! For the freedom we the people still have must be kept or the government will control us like shit hole countries ran by communism/socialism regimes. We have to shrink the government down and take away the corruption paid by corporations. 1 love 1 race.. human race!
@AngelaKSellsHomes
Agreed hours long its like a young earth creationist describing Evolution by saying somebody banged nothing to create humanity for our soul existence
1 the singularity event known as the big bang is NOT anything to do with genetics
2 life being formed is not part of it either so thats also out
3 you need to be able to reproduce with populations over generations and will not see it with your own eyes unless your really lucky and do it for many years with bacteria as was done took a good half a century
4 why cant god program us like a simulation to create evolution why must he hand craft everything? what is it about the book made by people who say dont wash your hand and the earth is flat makes you want to take the age literally?
Contradictions to make themselves feel better and thats why they hate intellectuals and LOVE dumb people alot why else would you hate collage educated people
Using someone on one side to define those on the other side... is far from objective. Would you ask Trump to define the left in that video for example? Or Clarence Thomas etc?
ruclips.net/video/5c3wWNsmLA0/видео.html Women asking valid questions he treats her like some dimwit who cant research anything so the Media
Saying women never think
ruclips.net/video/xiyYN2_JKPc/видео.html
are these enough along with grabbing their genitals enough to show he is a scumbag?
It's also a mistake Liberals make to focus on the dumb stuff like how cartoonish or irrational or hypocritical Conservatives appear, and then dust their hands off and pat themselves on the back for a job well done. As if pointing those things out and laughing will be so devastating a critique that the Conservative will shrivel up and hide back in the shadows.
Yeah they ain't scared of us at all
I'm glad you said Liberal instead of the left like Adam keeps saying.
Conservatives should be deported to Afghanistan right after Jan 7th
Those critiques aren't for them to hear. They don't listen anyway, so they're not intended to be internalized by the right. Those are the liberal and lefts hedges against the right for themselves. If the left abandoned it's bread and butter it would starve. For the left it's important for us to be seen, that we still even exist. We don't care how we are received by the right. We can't be expected to shrivel up into the shadows either.
@@NILgravitywell at least part of that is legitimate as going back to the French revolution liberalism was the radically egalitarian philosophy compared to the monarchism that came before it.
As someone who only recently deconstructed his conservatism (and reconstructed as a socialist anarchist? WTF, me?), this is so true. There is so much determined principled stance’ing on the right, and so much energy goes into dealing with the cognitive dissonance involved in holding positions which are necessarily paradoxical. I was a good guy, kind, helpful, benevolent; I believed in the individualist philosophy, even when it seemed no one around me took it seriously. My shell was cracked from the inside by that calloused disregard for decency shown by my social and religious heroes, and eventually shattered to bits by the raw decency and invested-action of the folk I was instructed to see as diabolical enemy.
To dismiss right-wingers as unprincipled idiots is to deny the power that a simple, crystalline, sterile worldview has for folk who have the luxury of holding it.
Let me ask you this, how does a socialist anarchy function when there is no one to force the dissenters to cooperate? Matter of fact, how would you describe this society?
Before you even try it, it is human nature to rebel or seize power which is why socialism has never worked.
@@lucashenry6281that question is obnoxiously irrelevant to this person's point.
@Vesta_the_Lesser you literally described the justification for authoritarianism.
@Vesta_the_Lesser See I want to agree with you. But a more nuanced point of view is actually more helpful.
Dehumanize your enemy is always the easy option. And humanizing them is always hard. You see that in the current political climate in different countries. Now I don't speak for everybody and I do think there are some people beyond gone, but history shows that If we dehumanize we are making ourself easy to be seen as less human.
You cannot see the inner workings of a person, you cannot know what they have gone through to come to their held views. But chances are, if you stop and listen to them you might be able to show them, that the preconceptions are wrong.
An easy example is the misinformation around gender affirming care with children. A lot of people hear that and usually assume that children are put under the knife and are taking hormones, which couldn't be further from the truth. Now why do people think that parents are running around giving their children hormones? Well some parents did do that. Assuming you know how gender affirming care for children works you probably shake your head learning that some fringe parents did in fact do that. You might even think its unbelievable. But sadly it happens. Rarely but it does.
Now mix that with some bad media outlet or influencer conflating those bad actions with the larger field of gender affirming care for children and you have very polarized people angry. And those polarized people seeing trans people defending gender affirming care as equally neglegent than they perceive those parents to be. This can ripple down and evolve into more and more radical thinking. The only way to get someone to repent from those radical viewpoints is to educate them in a respectful tone.
If I would start to talk down to you and tell you you are wrong and evil for seeing the right spectrum as evil. Well you (and honestly I if I would be on the receiving site) would stop reading immediatly.
I'd say you were in the minority, though. Not everyone on the Right would countenance, or even find possible, a Saul-to-Damascus conversion to the Left.
I would love to live in a world where the issue of homelessness was viewed as a similar moral and pragmatic failure to the barbarity of slavery. The fact that one of the most basic rights of a human being, shelter from environmental harm, is kept from people by virtue of random circumstance or mental health (where treatment is denied or too expensive to access) or education level or otherwise is the most cruel and insane thing I can imagine. People less caring might walk by and yell get a job and then fail to imagine the person in tatters and dirt can’t wander anywhere without being blamed and accosted for their condition and would be hounded to the hills for trying to work without even having a place to clean themselves or comfortably sleep.
It was a democratic movement against slavery in the U.K. too. Decades of campaigns, petitions, boycotts etc. There is a brilliant book called “Bury the Chains, the British fight to Abolish Slavery” which details it. It’s incredibly inspiring
The bumpkins you wanted to sterilize took the blacks you were trying to help and now they're oppressing them with freedom
Slavery is still a thing
Sadly it was the Democrats who opposed the abolition of slavery here in the US.
@@jarodmedart8293 The Democrats also tried to sterilize rural white people
@@jarodmedart8293 it was a democratic movement not a political party in the U.K. But in the US the Democratic Party were the party of the Deep South and the Republicans were the party of the Northeastern Liberals. Things change
I think Corey still misses the point. The job of the Right is to "win" - they treat life and politics like a zero-sum game. If you are to "win" someone else obviously has to "lose" and they sometimes focus very heavily on making sures others lose: if everyone else is losing, then probably you're winning... something... somewhere. That's actually the driving principle of people who live, work, and vote on the right. (and then mix in from time to time a right-driven sense of self-guilt about this that then makes the right want to rally behind a "moral compass" that tries to offset their daily activities in pushing other people into a losing position)
I am now on tehe left flank of the US political spectrum but was raised a republican in a highly politically engaged household (not looking forward to tomorrow lol). This is 100% correct btw.
Thanks for not understanding the right just like the guest.
The ideal conservative government is minimal power and mostly powerless politicians. The “job” of the Right, is to not give power to the system most likely to abuse power, historically.
By the way, if someone is losing, by definition someone else is winning. Otherwise, WHO IS THE LOSER LOSING TO? And if you want to talk about offsetting a moral compass, ask yourself which side has been complaining about white privilege, social equity and reparations? Stop projecting.
@@leighz1962 cope
Someone gets it!
The portion about villains was so telling, and I've fallen into that trap so many times. Thinking that the enemy is stupid, because if they were smart (the unsaid portion being "smart like I am"), then they'd have come to the same conclusions that I did. But the realization that those on the right have a fundamentally different worldview, where they believe that equality is the enemy and hierarchy is inevitable and good, was jarring. And when you realize that, all the supposed hypocrisies of the right fall neatly into place. It's not actually hypocritical to them to demonize drug use by the poor while engaging in it themselves; *we* are higher status, *they* are lower status, it's okay when I do it but not when they do it. It's okay when I get a govt subsidy on my mortgage because I deserve it due to my status, when the lower levels get the same it's an unearned handout. It's cruelty, yes, but they don't see it as such. They see it as every member of the ladder staying on their rung and treating everyone above and below accordingly. It's why they're so against taxing the rich even if you frame it as being good for them too. Because if anyone can come for those at the very top, it means their station is just as vulnerable, and they'd rather stay in a system where they're comfortably in the middle than risk losing anything. As much as they shout about strength and courage and fighting against some supposed cultural enemy, it's a worldview defined by selfishness and fear.
Reminds me a lot of "The only ethical abortion is MY abortion."
You sound like you literally read my mind 😂. It was uncanny reading your comment.
This comment made it click for me so much better than the guest. I truly didn't understand what he meant by the right having principles when contradict themselves all of the time and are nothing but hypocrites. I kept waiting for him to explain what exactly these principles were.
And it's important to remember that the rank and file of the rightwing movement didn't just come up with these ideas themselves. The same billionaires who built the rightwing media and entertainment ecosystem put a lot of money into thinktanks, marketing gurus, and public relations psychologists to figure out how to motivate ordinary people to act against their own interests. Look for example how nearly every major rightwing core value is expressed in moralistic terms. Abortion is murder. Guns are freedom. Taxes are theft. Morals are always tools for society to curb self interest in favor of some higher goal. I've had rightwing (former) friends tell me flat out that because abortion is murder they don't care if Trump is literally going to take over the country and become a dictator as long as he outlaws abortion. Because the perception of morality that the rightwing movement has crafted overrides their understanding of their own self interest.
I'm not sure I agree with this interpretation of conservative thinking. Adam may be truthfully illustrating how the right thinks, but that does not mean they are not KNOWINGLY being hypocrites.
The right is WELL aware of the immorality of a caste system. They laud the USA as "the land of the free" where, unlike in the old world, you can rise to any level. In fact doing so is labeled "The American Dream".
But even more telling is their religion wherein a lowly carpenter who defended the poor and lowest among society is worshipped as their savior. Their ultimate exemplar states great tenants such as "Do unto others as you would have other do unto you", "He who is greatest among you would be your servant" , and most telling "In as much as you have done it unto the least of these thy brethren... you have done it unto me."
So they KNOW the line of thinking you are explaining is immoral and even "Sin" in their own eyes. They simply find it too inconvenient to actually follow.
George Lakoff has a book : The Political Mind where he talks about conservative vs progressive ways of thinking. He narrows it down to strict vs nurturing families. Conservative people think: tough love.
Bullshit.
sounds interesting ,,we are a conglomerate of our experiences.
I was hoping for a conversation more akin to Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind." Where this conversation falls short is in on having someone from the right. There are literally millions of people who would tell you their opinion if you asked for it.
I agree 100%. Having someone from the left discuss what the right’s ideology is just reinforces what the left gets wrong about the right. And that’s everything except the right being reactionary. There’s also a huge distinction between the establishment Republican Party and the populist MAGA movement. It seems like the goal of this interview is reinforcing the left’s view of the right. The bubble is alive and well.
@bidencrimefamilymottof-cky953 I'm glad you said that, that was my thought the whole time. This dude knows no more than a typical leftist. At least he's level headed. Adam had to throw shade at every opportunity.
Yes! Same exact feeling!
have you ever seen videos by the LBC or the Problem with Jon Stewart episode abt white people?
have you ever tried to talk to your conservative family members? there's a very specific way the conversation goes, and it's a bad faith nightmare where instead of considering ANYTHING you said, they PIVOT to the talking points they get in their media ecosystem. if you use the _softest kid gloves ever,_ they will engage with you (and if you're a family member, they can't actually dehumanize you) and not just lash out, but it's still incredible how frustrating it is.... taking what THEY SAID in good faith and just point out an inconsistency, instead of changing their mind??? they pivot and the conversation doesn't go anywhere. watch right wing media sometimes, it's very clear where it comes from.
Psychoanalysis and cultural critique are traditional weapons of the left. Its called deconstruction and narcissists confuse this political weapon with empathy. The left is about mythologizing a racial threat in white people and the right is a reactionary response to this racist assault. Leftwing victory is the extinction of white people, conquest of the world, the destruction of civilization, and the establishment of a racially insecure, rabidly genocidal, and mentally ill elite
I love the comment about putting kids in public school instead of private! I've been having this argument with my in-laws a ton lately. They insist they'll pay for it, and I keep telling them that's not the problem. I want my son to be exposed to many different walks of life, specifically, different socio-economic walks of life. Hence, it becomes much more challenging to dehumanize and reduce those people to a "problem that needs to be fixed."
I loved it too! I grew up rural, in an area where my parents talk about people not wanting their kids in the schools because the kids are "rough." And I sent both my kids through public schools accordingly.
I really treasure some of the lessons I learned in public school that were NOT academic lessons. I had to figure out how to interact with people who had quite different backgrounds from mine and learn to work in community with them. The same has been true for my kids. We're in this together.
Couldn’t agree more! My daughter, who happens to be biracial, has been and will continue to be in public school for this exact reason! One team, one fight!
A student was murdered at school in Raleigh the other day. I don’t understand how people will send their kids to school there
@@Halfdrunkpadre I understand you, but private schools are no guarantee of safety. See The Covenant School in Nashville.
Ill say that its not garenteed though I've worked at public schools were the reverse happens. There is enough kids to form specalized cliques around there culture and they become insulated fom the very thing you want to happen. Even when i was school a simialiar thing happened to me because i was finally in a largest enough pond to find people with my shared interests. Aditionaly what both sides are arguing about is that the poor economy making both parents needing to work often means school is responsible for more and more of the share of raising the child so the stakes of what schoool and where you go are higher and thus more contested.
Great conversation! I’m really trying to understand, and to that end I have formed friendships with people who challenge my way of thinking. Still, there are a few points I just can’t seem to get past:
1) they talk about strength, and dominating other people in a way that borders on lasciviousness.
2) they loath preferential treatment. They think people who need accommodations should just graciously exclude themselves from participating. But legacy admissions, using family connections to garner favor, and tax loopholes are fine.
3) they insist that success and prosperity is proof of deservingness.
4). They are terrified of crime, and want to see criminals punished (as opposed to solving the underlying issues that lead to crime.)
It's all because they feel they earned it and it was their choice. That's why you always hear them upset when calling out the privilege. The tax loopholes and admissions? They earned those benefits and they extend to their children because they worked hard for their children to benefit like that.
Crime is 100% choice. There's no reason to stop it at the source because it's just people making indivual choice and you can't do anything about that.
Like accommodations for learning disabilities and such or is that something they don’t touch?
Almost like they are in the club at the top of the hierarchy and the behavioral immune system activates to exclude people they see as less
@@MekarePif we provide education to those in prison (a rehabilitation program) we would be dealing with the sources of crime.
It would reduce recidivism and more than pay for itself.
And only specific types of crime. Not tax fraud, not insider trading. Even though these white collar crimes do more damage to more people and involve larger amounts of money and resources. These crimes are only available to those people that already have power.
As a person that grew up in the South in a “traditional” working class, religious, moderately conservative (but not unreasonable and often moderate) family, surrounded by moderate to highly conservative, I know “the Right” pretty well. After being a music major and joining the military, I spent a lot of time around both extremes, and started becoming much more grounded with being an independent moderate to highly progressive, I’ve seen both sides even more objectively for a couple decades. I’ve been all over the world and spent time in a lot of different cultures. The biggest takeaway has been that people are more alike than not, regardless of your birth, raised and chosen beliefs. I still spend a lot of time around people I normally wouldn’t choose if it was on me, and all too often, when I’m around conservatives, I’m the most progressive person in the room, and when I’m around very liberal people, I’m the most conservative person in the room. After I started studied science, I felt that trying to take unbiased approach to problems was important to getting the best results. I tired to call myself an independent moderate for as long as I could, but independent progressive is really the most accurate. I do see how so many people box themselves into restrictive and not fully realistic views. With the internet and social media, we seem to have created even deeper and detached bubbles. We all will fall into ridiculous holes of rhetoric and nonsense; it’s just a matter for how long and how deep before we catch ourselves from it. And nowadays, it can feel really isolated and lonely by trying to be so rigid with not getting sucked into either direction it can go. Now that election season is in full swing, with likely yet another election with two candidates that are terrible for uniting a country and a part of systems that are the problem, it’s a frustrating and depressing place to be. I don’t have hope things will go well regardless who the next elected figurehead will be. It’s not that it’s bad to have extreme views, but when you reside in one camp for everything, that when it becomes toxic to a functional society and culture. There are no cookie cutter fixes for everything; that is why an adherence to one political party or set of ideals (as they are most often realized and employed), especially with a mostly two-party system, is terrible for a democratic republic. It is certainly understandable and unpreventable to not get extremely mad and frustrated by “the other side“, but you cannot dismiss them or write them off completely, or it just exacerbates our problems even more. And in an age where we live more in the extremes than in a long time, it allows those with power, influence and money to gain even more control of things, and rig the system against the majority.
Have you ever looked at parties other than the Democrats or Republicans? I was also military and I find a lot of us don't really fit in either camp...
Great comment! I had a different upbringing but similar experiences and have a very similar outlook to yours. What part of the country do you live in?
Great comment. I have had a very similar experience. I feel like the movement of everyone’s lives to the internet has only served to divide people even further deep into their little echo chambers. There’s so much paranoia on both sides… I hope more of us out there try to understand the other side so we can inject a bit of compassion for the other side when people start circle jerking and shit talking like they so often do
I grew up in a Christian evangelical environment, amongst predominantly well to do white south africans. At eighteen i moved to Norway, home of my biological mother. Your comment ressonates with me, as i try to bridge gaps in communication between different political world views, religious world views, and ethnic bakgrounds. At 43 i guess im not religious at all, politically im a moderate social democrat. I love talking to people with different world views and backgrounds, but i think statistically i am a kind of anomaly. Ill go to lengths to keep dialog with others alive, but most people are not going to reciprocate.
I believe the social triggers play a bigger part in the division than you acknowledge. I ask questions of ultra right conservatives. First I ask, why are you so angry? Is it gay marriage, is it taxes, is it trans issues? Then i wait for their answer. Almost without fail their reply begins by mentioning old testament laws. At that point in my mind i give up on them. Number one above all else keep your religion out of my government. Number 2 maybe they should actually read their bible themselves as it is very apparent most of them have not done so. Thus they are being manipulated by power hungry greedy men whose biggest desire is to divide the voters and ramp their people up and make them angry over what are usually non issues. The trans population is something like .003% of all citizens. Why is it even an issue? Have a bud light and calm down.
I watched this because I honestly questioned myself, why are smart people for Trump? Maybe there should be one for "What Conservatives Get Wrong about the Left" because conservatives have some pretty vile ideas about liberals.
Would they listen? Would they care? Are they trying to bridge the chasm?
Seriously, it's insane how brainwashed they are about democrats. They legitimately think that liberals are all child molstrs who want to destroy the country. It's crazy and grotesque the things they believe. But their ignorance, lack of education, and amount of brainwashing makes it impossible for them to see clearly and think logically.
@DeniseEngle-vl3ph precisely. The whole thrust of this diatribe is "you need to be better people than we are and keep extending an olive branch that we'll always knock aside".... yeah. No. Its exhausting and pointless.
theyre not smart.
@@DeniseEngle-vl3ph at this point, Liberals are a lost cause.
Also check out Innuendo Studio's "Alt-Right Playbook" series. It's quite possibly the best and easiest to understand guide to how they think and why.
Dumpster Flower's "Dark Side of Liberalism" is excellent to the history of the right as well
Want to know how conservatives think? Here’s a test.
Does it cede power to the government?
Does it ACTUALLY accomplish anything?
Yep, two questions. Here’s an example.
Biden banned lynchings as a hate crime. Does it give power to the government? No. Does it actually accomplish something? Sounds like it, but if you’re already being tried for murder which is 25-life, it’s rather irrelevant.
Any gun ban ever. Does it give the government power? Yes and in an extreme way. No conservative will support it.
California’s ban on gas powered cars. Does it give the government power? Yes! No conservative will support it.
Chicago’s experiment with government run grocery stores. Oh you best believe the government will be telling people what they can and cannot eat! So no conservative support.
Hope this helps.
Wait, are people _still_ using the term "alt right" unironically? I thought that all vanished in a puff of chagrin after Richard Spencer (the guy who created the term) realized President Trump wasn't the racist the media had portrayed him as, and told all his followers to vote for Joe Biden in 2020.
@@masonwheeler6536 people still use “alt-right” and “far-right” to describe anyone they don’t like because the individual won’t obey.
Interesting fact, Innuendo Studio's ARPB episode on conservatism was inspired by Corey Robin's book. It's cited as a source and he has a whole Twitter thread going over reading it for research.
@@lucashenry6281you're a true hero and rebel😂
18:34 this is funny, I was talking to my dad a couple days ago (who doesn't know I used to live in a tent myself, long story), and he suggested basically this. I tried to gently suggest how bad that would actually be for homeless people, but he didn’t get it lol
At one point my husband and I were couch surfing because we were homeless. Even though my parents were among the couches we were on, my mother refused to acknowledge how big a problem it is.
Off topic of the show, but on topic of set design... Whoever choose that reflective trophy or doodad on the shelf behind Adam, such that it shows the guest's reactions when they're not on camera, well placed. ❤
Ive never thought Clarence Thomas was stupid but ive always thought he was a evil oligarch. Now hearing that story and what he believes just strengthened that belief.
While i get that we want to understand the other side, at the end of the day we've gotten to a point, today, where these questions are not very complicated: if you try to overturn an election by force, you must be defeated. If you try to ban an entire religion from entering the country you must be defeated. We're not talking about who had the better tax plan anymore. This is foundational; either we're going to be a Democracy (Republic 🙄) or not.
Us: “hey I understand you so much better now.”
Fascists: “great. Get the f in that railroad car”.
Based on your opinions I would bet confidently you get your news from only left wing point of views.
@@ItsAllCulturalMarxismYa boy lied about the election to motivate all the easily duped clueless MAGA Goons to stop the lawful transfer of power.
Fact
Trump tried to get a ban on Muslims entering the country when he arrived in office.
Fact.
Please... We can all tell when MAGA Goofballs are pissing in our ears. It's just insulting.
@@ItsAllCulturalMarxism whether you read left wing or right wing news, doesn't change the fact that banning a religious group and staging a Coup violates the Constitution. Sorry 🤷🏾♂️
The question is not whether or not the current conservative movement must be defeated. The question is how to do that more effectively, instead of less effectively.
The issue with clarence thomas not speaking is that he doesn't ask questions. It means he probably formed his opinion before he heard the trial (because he has to do good by his donors)
“I don’t like how the uppity black man thinks!” is plantation owner mentality by the way. Enjoy!
There lies the problem.
agreed, conservatives are famously non-curious because they have already formed their opinion and nothing else matters to them, and nothing will convince them.
People always make innuendos like this about Justice Thomas, but no one has ever demonstrated any actual _quid pro quo._ When someone shows that he's taken some donation or gift from somebody, they never manage to also show that that person got a judicial favor from Justice Thomas. As far as I'm aware, they've never managed to show that such a person ever even had a case before the Court in the first place!
@@masonwheeler6536 The right is impeaching Biden because they seem to think he "looks" guilty. Its called optics of impropriety. Unlike Bide, Uncle Thomas has been taking money from rich benefactors with cases in front of the court for 20 years, and Alito is just now being investigated and im sure more will turn up there.. and the new right wing justices are also having issues not taking money from people with cases before them. The right cant have it both ways, impeachment with nothing but a thin claim Biden looks guilty with no evidence, and then defend their corrupt activist judges legislating from the bench arent guilty when there is decades of proof and miles of paper trails. If optics dont matter to you, then prove Biden did anything criminal, because from where I sit, there is mountains of evidence against trump AND thomas of criminality, and instead of the court of public opinion, we can, and will prove it in the court of law with actual objective evidence.
The caliber, uniqueness, and volume of fresh and nuanced information that this episode provided was exceptional. I genuinely feel intellectually enriched from having viewed this discussion. (additionally, from my heavy heart, PLEASE SUPPORT ANTI GUN VIOLENCE AWARENESS & ADVOCACY. NO GUNS IN SCHOOLS.)
Guns weren't federally banned from schools until the early 1990's. There also was no rash of school shootings until the late 1990's.
While I'm not going to assert that the relationship is causal there, as I don't believe it is, banning guns from schools has also demonstrably *failed* to meaningfully mitigate school shootings, so you should reconsider the premise of your opposition to firearms rights.
@@PingOnThisThe reality of gun "rights" is that the 2nd ammendment guarantees a state militia access to blunderbuss equivalent technology for only formation of a state military, not private ownership, nothing invented after 200 years ago for sure, and not even ownership is involved just patrol inventories. Anyone reading the law knows this is a huge misinterpretation being propped up because a judge literally said so, and nothing else despite clear lack of definitive law supporting it. That's the issue, and the crimes are countless. It's not just injustice, the entire movement is flawed in fine print at its core. Remember, even if all guns are banned like in most nations, you can still always hunt, do sport and compete with guns. The only benefit is stockpiling for nothing since survival post-apocalpse is all about entirely different maintanence-mandated weaponry anyway even if you want to fight people.
@@PingOnThis We don't care. Keep 'em banned from schools.
Bravo! This is a great example of discourse divorced from emotion. This is what we need everywhere, but especially on the national stage. Keep up the great work!
And for that to happen you need an academic rather than a politician. Unfortunately in the US (and indeed in the UK) it's generally one camp screaming against the other, the intelligent discourse doesn't happen it just becomes my guys vs your guys.
This is a good example of emotionless discourse, however it isn't between members of both the right and the left.
ruclips.net/video/ECUxBJonR30/видео.htmlsi=YTYCx5klFX7HbgRE
One minute in and why should I care about someone that wants me outlawed or dead?
Exactly, tolerating the intolerant is intolerable...
Conservatism and Christianity are both Death Cults.
Citations? I mean I already know your lies before you even say them, but I want you to admit to them first. Tell me how conservatives want to outlaw or kill the LGBT despite being wholly unable to cite a single example of ANYONE saying anything that remotely aligns with your claim. Tell me how a bill you disingenuously called the “don’t say gay bill” is genocidal because it prohibits teachers from talking about sexuality in elementary schools (and yes that’s from the exact text of the bill, that such topics are required to be age appropriate). I challenge you to prove me wrong, but I know you won’t. You’ll cry and call me a fascist, or something along those lines, and I’m fine with that.
@@epiccollision so you don't care if they die, isn't that the problem you have with them, that they don't care if you die? so long as you get your way right? you expressing that you don't care about them at all is only more fuel for their intolerance, you are the person the right makes propaganda about. the left as a whole has to show the right that just because we disagree with them, doesn't mean we want them to suffer.
because well off white dudes said to do it.
We're 55 minutes in and Adam hasn't asked about the massive grift ... I'd be interested in hearing how Thomas's beliefs make it okay for him to receive thousands and thousands of dollars in unreported gifts.
Also, not a fucking word about Ginni Thomas.
The grift falls in line with Thomas being a cynical, calculated accelerationist making expedient alliances
I'd also be interested in hearing what we on the left have gotten "wrong" about people on the right. Title is a bit misleading. There's nothing new here. Progressives want to move society forward at the cost of forcing people in power to change behaviors. Conservatives hate that shit. An hour into this and we haven't broken new ground.
I think in the 45 minute area, he says how Thomas thinks the black community should put their faith and hope and power into some patriarchal figures to care for them. And when you get in that position, the receiving of gifts among other figures is seen as doing business maybe?
Right before that he talks about how they have principles, which is hilarious if you've been paying attention to American politics at all.
To use McConnell as an example; when Scalia died, he refused to entertain the possibility of confirming any nominee for the vacant SC spot, saying that it'd be undemocratic to do so before the election that was going to take place almost a year away at that point. Then, when RBG passed, there was this mad dash to confirm Amy Coney Barrett with TWO MONTHS until the 2020 election.
If conservatives were truly principled, one of those two judges would've been appointed by Democrats. But they're not. They only use the language of principle to justify their hold on power, because it's literally the only thing they care about.
As a conservative moderate and significant libertarian I can't help but notice the identification of the right is the total government non-libertarian right which to me is as bad as the total government left. Both parties were more libertarian and liberal has its origins in the word libertarian.
Our system was setup to prevent the abuses of total government. No longer is the question if we should have total government but a fight over who has that control.
There are things we need the government to do and things we don't. The right coversations aren't being had in the right ways.
We let the government grab too much power. And now it can't administrate the things that are no brainers like most of the budget so that it becomes a political football. There is nothing that says the whole budget had to be passed at once. That is just something they do. It is madness and about increasing control among politicians.
Just starting watching this and aligned with you. Yes he opened up with control... And I'm like project much? Democrats went power hungry early and strong and Republicans were leading against it and then the broken nomination system gave us Trump... In 2016 part of the year the conservative headline was "Never Trumpers are the majority" means nothing if you nominate on plurality. Rank order voting would fix both sides. What we have is a stupid system.
Because politics has no thoughtfulness in it it has become one side's idiot or thug against the other's.
Thoughtful discourse is increasingly dying.
It's ebbs and flows. The tragic thing is that other disenfranchised people are swept up in these movements, such as those who lost due to globalization, and these people are actually further hurt by the movement they support. Because the conservatives don't really care about them, but they do need them to stay in power.
In a 2-Party system groups often don't vote for the party that cares about them, they vote for the party that talks to them.
This was a great discussion that exceeded my expectations. I think one thing that gets lost in the discussion of intellectual leaders on the right is the base appeal to the masses. Most people, regardless of their voting history, don't have a coherent political philosophy. I truly don't mean that as an insult per se and it absolutely applies to people on the left and center as well. But it's important to delineate a thinker/leader like Thomas or Gorsuch from your aunt or uncle that are literally brainwashed by FoxNews and FaceBook, and aren't reading theory.. or anything (not even a newspaper anymore). However, I do think Corey really honed in on the common thread of those reactionary leaders and your average R voter, and that's the pessimism. The concrete belief that things can't change for the better in a meaningful way. They don't believe that any politician can make things better for everyone. Maybe, at best, they can make things better for them or people very similar to them. And boy howdy to the modern Democrats do a great job of proving those people right when they repeatedly fail to acknowledge or address economic inequality despite expansive rhetoric. This messaging from the Republicans and the similar pessimism shared by neo-liberal centrist Dems inoculates voters against a message like Bernie's. In 2016 Clinton said, "People who have health emergencies can't wait for us to have a theoretical debate about some better idea that will never, ever come to pass." Her and Obama ran a pessimistic messaging campaign in 2016 that was a galaxy away from Hope & Change. It was much more about the path being set, and not needing to deviate from it. I truly believe that messaging hurt Clinton in the general. It was not optimistic, and even Obama's 2012 campaign still used that optimistic framing. In 2023, we feel far away from it. Biden didn't really run on that kind of message, and won't again in 2024.
This is a great comment and insight
We need to publicize the public voting records of congress, as is our right, and the job of the 5th estate, to inform us of this Stark difference. Just a glance tells you that the right have been lying, always vote against constituents and foe big money, big pharmaceutical, megachurch corruption, soft on crime, everything anti-people. The left may sound pragmatic, but anyone looking at the facts of their votes in congress suddenly stops voting right and starts finally voting for themselves, every time. See for yourself, and show everyone what is real. Just because some people gave up doesn't mean crimes and totalitarian regime behind lies is suddenly OK and a direct, true democracy. We need to be real, or we already became a totalitarian regime via representatives that are corrupt still crime ridden by apathy of all? Not viable.
Wow. A leftie with a little bit of perspective. Imagine that. If more liberals engaged in reflection and self criticism, they might get to a place where they could actually engage with the substance of what conservatives actually believe, instead of projecting on to them their own misanthropic nihilism
@@Chris_Patton There are a ton of open minded liberals (and conservatives). People need to stop looking at the loudest, vocal majority as the sole representative of each sides beliefs. Most of my liberal friends are embarrassed by the kind of childish behavior exhibited by these really extremist voices. Just as I'm sure most conservatives are embarrassed by Trumps retinue.
The idea that we all are just dismissing conservative people as stupid because we have no idea of conservatives' inner thoughts or philosophies is just not true. A lot of people have family who are deeply conservative and grew up that way so they understand it. I know all the rational I had when I was conservative and I know all the cognitive dissonance required to make the whole cart not tip over.
I am willing to show understanding and compassion when I talk to people, but some people will take your intellectual civility and spit on it.
I can't even define the term fiat currency without my relative calling me an egghead who thinks he's stupid and yelling at me that I am crazy and stupid and a communist. That is the reality in a lot situations. I might dismissive say so and so is being stupid sometimes because it is shorthand for unwilling to look at ideas; they put some ideas in a box and just won't engage. It is very programed. There are things i used to be able to talk about and then the rightwing media made them bugaboos and now i can't talk about it. Like walkable cities and public transportation! As someone who can't really drive for medical reasons, I care about this issue a lot, but now walkable cities and public transportation is an evil agenda to destroy america or something?!
This really all comes down to the tolerance of intolerance. Conservatives want to make some people's lives illegal by calling some human rights unnatural (e.g. women's right to choose, marriage equality, trans healthcare) and then get mad when progressives won't tolerate that intolerance.
Too many conservatives act like not censoring free speech means people who aren't racist should stand up and clap when a racist person says something racist. It is nonsensical.
You want walkable cities? Ok. Explain Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, St. Louis, NYC and San Francisco. I can engage with damn near anyone I want to, in public, down in the conservative South. I can even walk on over to the higher crime areas and engage with anyone there. Can you do the same in the cities I listed? Can you do the same without ending up on the news?
@@lucashenry6281 What on earth are you talking about sweetie
@@AmyDentata I spoke rather blatantly.
@@lucashenry6281 your mental illness isn't anyone else's problem, seek therapy.
@@lucashenry6281 no you did a bunch of conservative virtual signalling that shows that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about
Does this man have a book? He says he wrote about it. Maybe you can put a link in the description to your guests books. I'd like to purchase it if it exists.
He mentions the title in the beginning 😅
I've never heard of this show before. Thanks for bringing on Robin. He's fantastic. Love his books.
"A reactionary movement to equality and freedom" so I do understand the right perfectly 😂
It's difficult because every leftist is different and every right winger is different. Some hold their beliefs for awful reason and some are understandable how they got there even if we disagree.
@@firefly9838 I mean yes, but also, there's a reason there are groups. And yeah, the left is characterized by fighting for equality and freedom, and conservatives are a direct response against it 🤷♀️
No, you're making the same mistake -- about the left, not the right -- that Adam and Corey make here, thinking that because the left is always _talking about_ equality and freedom that it's somehow _promoting and producing_ equality and freedom.
The truth is, that's never been the case. Corey utterly beclowns himself here when he criticizes Edmund Burke for criticizing the French Revolution. Burke didn't criticize it because he was opposed to the revolutionaries' goals of freedom and equality; he criticized it because he could see it was never going to work. *_And it didn't!_* The French Revolution was one of the greatest political catastrophes in the history of mankind. No sooner had the revolutionaries deposed the monarchy, then they turned on themselves in a horrific cycle of violence and oppression that _they themselves,_ (not their political enemies, as one might imagine!) called the Reign Of Terror. It left France a basket case of a nation that went through multiple political upheavals for centuries.
This is the history of the Left in a nutshell: they always make high-minded claims of Utopian improvements and more happiness and freedom for everyone, and then what they actually deliver is misery and destruction. And the reactionary right reacts to these ideas by saying "don't do that, it will cause a lot of harm." And they're virtually always ignored until they've been proven right, once again, by history.
@@masonwheeler6536 It's always flowers and friendship under the right, while the left only causes pain and never makes any progress, of course. We have all these wonderful reactionaries protecting the world, I feel saved. What a shallow ass take.
When revolutionaries become authoritarian that's inherently right-wing behavior. Revolutions aren't inherently leftist.
The French Revolution while progressive for its time was not a particularly 'leftist' undertaking. Aristocrats and oligarchs within the merchant classes wrestled power away from the monarchy by hyping up the masses.
In high school, an atheist friend of mine wanted to read the Christian Bible "to know what their philosophy is, what they're going to use to proselytize to us, etc" It's good to know your enemy, not disregard them.
And then he became a christian.
Defining as an enemy... Says a lot about worldview.
Yes, because we were very tired of being proselytized to, especially when many of the people out to save our souls were quoting false Bible verses in order to convince us.
@@imakethesites3048 I would agree... except on trans, DEI movements, etc. Tired of being preached to by those quoting data I've studied more than they have.
@@imakethesites3048 I'm hoping you're catching the obvious parallels from this and why. The two sides are both ridiculous in the defining of other. And neither is completely wrong in doing so. Also religion is separate from political leaning, but that's a whole other story. It can be related but plenty of any religion on any side, don't conflate issues there.
I haven't heard the word "co-opt" yet. Gingrich was really good at "cribbing from the left" as you say. In my vague recollection it was the left that was big on owning the language, and boy did the right learn from that one. Turning anti-abortion into pro-life being the biggest example.
What I take from this description is that the issue is FAIRNESS and what everyone sees as FAIR. It is both not fair that people should be oppressed or exploited AND not fair that people should lose their advantages, especially if they are not personally oppressing others. How do we draw together a social movement around a negotiated consensus of fairness?
I wrote a paper in the 90s for my Early Modern Political Philosophy class that aligned the views of Rousseau, Locke, David Hume, and others into what I thought was a decent summation of liberal and conservative views. There is really one big assumption and the rest are derived. What is man in a state of nature? Locke (liberal) - They are happy and the social contract is made to protect private property. Hume - Man in a state of nature is in a state of war and the job of government is to stop man from being at constant war with each other. With Hume you can get there through religion or not. That leads to the question of what is more important, security or liberty. The liberal line came out with liberal and the conservatives security. That leads to a third question that are people improvable through policy? While in reality this question is really answered on a per case basis, the normal conservative answer is no. Policy can't lead to improvements in people. If we can't improve people through policy, then social programs don't work. If we view security over liberty, stronger police forces are favored, if man in a state of nature is at war, strength is the only way to any freedom or security. That is not me agreeing with these policies, that is just what I came up with at 18 (oh so long ago) after working my ass off in my Political Science undergrad. I have since become reformed and have a masters in Information Systems so I make my money in tech.... cause no one cared about that paper and being a lawyer seemed odious.
Great analysis, Peter. I only wish your thoughts about the law profession were as insightful.
@@jimosborne2 Well the thing is that I worked for a company that filmed depositions and did playback in trials. Because this was pretty expensive at the time I would film big litigation. Two big companies suing each other over something. I spent a lot of time filming toxic tort litigation. Someone builds homes over an old toxic dump, people get sick, kids die, etc. So one company is hired to limit the liability of the builders and they go in every day for over a year interviewing people that had their lives ruined by this builder trying their best to say.. it was only THIS bad. That experience soured me on being a lawyer. I've done very well in tech, but I have to say, working at Microsoft Soured me on working in technology, so I may as well have just have been a lawyer.
The biggest problem I have with conservatives is there willingness to forego reality that they don’t like in preference to ideology that they do.
This for me is what has allowed the far/hard right to claw its way back into mainstream politics when, after the last century, it’s clear it should never do again.
Like their greed addiction labeled business efficiency.
Like thinking men can be women? You mean that kind of foregoing reality that they don't like in preference to ideology that they do?
The day after the 2016 election, I had to attend a work-related seminar about suicide in the US. The presenter showed a map of the US that depicted which states had the highest suicide rates. I couldn't help myself, I jumped to my feet and stated, "It's the red states! They're all the red states!" The presenter replied, "Clearly these people are struggling." It would appear that our systems are failing them.
Can you say "TDS?"...
I agree. The red states are failing but they voted for it.
They voted to have our systems fail then blame democrats for the failing systems. It's a very good strategy.
Correct, we ARE failing them.
The red states are falling behind, losing money, jobs, hospitals/clinics.
We ought to, at least, build public hospitals and clinics in rural areas.
@@850cathedralyou need to read what he wrote again. Steeped in politics he recognized the states listed as having high suicide rates... People at risk of taking their own lives.
Thats got nothing to do with your insult...
@@850cathedralI would think the person with "TDS" is the one who brought him up when noone was talking about him.
I am a moderate conservative and I loved your show Adam ruins everthing. I just recently found your channel and I love it to.
What did you think about the statements on maintaining hierarchy and authority?
@@maedesmond2461 I definatly do not agree with everthing he says but atleast he give an explanation to his points. I am open minded enough to listen and appreciate a
somebody elses thoughtful points and even sometimes change my mind on things.
@@edwardtocco5760 Right on, that's cool 🙌🏽
Would you say any aspects of your beliefs are about maintaining traditional hierarchies? Lol I know that phrase is strange, but I'm curious if that applies to being a moderate conservative, or how you think about your political beliefs
@@maedesmond2461 My political beliefs are very fluid. I typically am not a big fan of any politicians. I perfer ones that like Adam explain why they have certain polcies. I was even a minor fan of Bernie Sanders but now I am a fan Vivek Ramaswamy. Hes not afraid to say whats need to be said. I think all media have agenda and he puts it out there perfectly ands turns thier BS back on to them.
Huh. Ive tried for years, ive spoken with Right side freinds, co-workers, acquaintances etc. The thing you don't consider is those people have no interest in using critical thinking for ANYTHING. go talk to them, see if im wrong. They aren't stupid, they just don't care about anyone not in their tribe. Period.
The biggest determinant of whether someone is liberal? The more concentrated the population is where they live. Geographical determinates of political persuasion are legitimate. And our political system gives more power to geographical area than population density, so that’s why conservatives have so much disproportionate political power in our country.
It's pretty mind numbing that made up borders on a map are electorally more important than the people governed within those borders.
"If you are leaning on the rules it means you don't have that much power..." Well said!
If you are not leaning on the rules it means you're cheating.
@chrisanderson6611 100%, and "if you have the power, you can just do want you want" is a disturbing, but typical attitude on the left, and exactly why there is a movement that wants them nowhere near power.
@@chrisanderson6611 Wrong. You can do things that are not cheating without leaning on the rules to carry you.
Besides, the point is that in a democratic society, the rules must be crafted according to the will of the people. Democratic power is the power they were talking of, and the power you seem to be claiming is "cheating".
This was one of the more brilliant discussions about the Right that I have seen and I think the reason why is because it calls for us to respect our opponents. It was a thoughtful presentation not based on hyperbole or glib diatribe. Adam, it is my opinion that you are one of the more overly shrill voices on the left but this one was a winner.
I had an idea for a homeless camp in the desert. It would have an urgent care clinic, a psychiatric center, a state services center, a socially trained sheriff's station, an employment and training center, free pharmacy, support workers, financial classes, and much much more. It would be in a valley in Arizona in the farming area and would have a large, organic, and old fashioned farm that starts everyone $2 above minimum wage. There would also be a hearty business that would draw people from the camps and use the food that would directly support the camp. People would live there free and be helped to save up to get a regular home. Don't think it would be able to afford much more than tiny homes tho. I want them taken care of and helped, not treated like animals.
I don’t get it
Cool idea, made illegal by liberals. I wish you luck, I've always wanted to do the same thing. But there is so much red tape you will get shut down in seconds.
How about having national access to mental health services and an education system that is high quality for all AND an economy that is isn’t predatory?
@@beefandbarley I have that too if you want to help. It's a draft, but that section of the Amendment needs other people to polish it up. Want to be a founding father 2.0?
@@beefandbarley I actually do have a plan for that too, but the one above might be the only way to get republicans to agree. The better plan would require an amendment, which I have, want to join in and be a reFounding father?
I have never known a single reactionary who's asked the question, "What did *I* do wrong?". What they usually ask is "How can I punish those who (in my opinion) did me wrong?".
By reactionary you mean leftist correct?
Definition of leftism.
@@kevincharlesmcmahon😂 this interview went over your head
Read the Powell Memo. It is the document that gave birth to the Political Right that we live with today. It is precisely the kind of navel gazing self-evaluation after defeat that the right felt they had suffered during the 60s and '70s. The Heritage Foundation's PROJECT 2025 Is the next generation of that thinking.
@@EdwardElric-uf3rr The Left's reaction to Trump winning in 2016 apparently went over yours.
My apologies if I over-commented. I just found this to be an excellent and very thought provoking discussion; thanks for making it available.
I just found this channel, and I have to say; I'm REALLY enjoying the good faith, intellectual discussions
Hey Adam I think you would delight in knowing you're the one that set me down the leftist path. Adam Ruins Everything started me on a path of "Hey this stuff suck and maybe it shouldn't". What really stuck out to me was that the show always showed it's sources and I knew from school how much that mattered and how much it meant you probably weren't lying. The. I started to watch other stuff that did the same like Last Week Tonight and Some More News. Little by little my recommendations were different and at one point I realized I was hard left.
Philosophytube, HBomberGuy, ContraPoints. Just some more recommendations to add to your list. 👍
@@TheMrEwe oh this was like 8 years ago. Noah Sampson made his Guide to Left tube about 3 years late for me. F. D. Signifier, Second Thought, Thought Slime, Our Changing Climate just to name a few.
Man what a downgrade, every single one of them.
@@Terker2 what do you mean?
@@Daxter5500 all the new blood make pretty awful videos compared to HBomb Contra and PTube.
But thats just subjective of course.
Book sounds interesting. Definitely added to my read list. I like seeing historical analysis of the historical groundwork of modern movements.
Corey Robin’s “The Reactionary Mind” is what got me into left-wing politics and analysis. He has a great talent at cutting through nonsense and delivering concise understanding
In these conversations the actual legislation and its impacts are rarely discussed and only by the left. Go through what Republicans are doing, blocking and proposing. Until then ...🖐🏽
Conservation of the Monarchy. That's what Conservatism is. That is the so-called "Tradition".
That’s laughable.
@@lucashenry6281 It's true. Burke or whatever thought the problem with the monarchy or aristocracy was not that it was a monarchy or aristocracy but the wrong people were in charge. And it hasn't changed. Look up innuendo studios
@@codebus that’s more of a non-sequitur than a reply, especially since, yeah no fricken kidding? People in a system can pervert the system?!? WHY ID NEVER!
Read up and stop wasting my time with this foolishness.
US politics are so right wing that they believe liberals are left wing.
Ehh maybe on economics but social issues the US left is very left if not leading left. The left in the US does a good job in trying to protect minorities (not saying they are the best at it). It's the economics side of things that the US is pretty right wing overall on, including liberals.
Right wing governments remove guns. Just like left. We’re something else.
Thats what they meant. Dont be obtuse. @@Rockyzach88
@@Rockyzach88I think many African Americans would disagree.
@@Rockyzach88I think they do more to hold them back than help them. It keeps them in a job and the herd in line.
I'm going to say this, because I feel like I need to do so. Just because someone has a reason they behave how they do, that does not mean that they are then excused for their behavior. I do not owe respect or understanding to any individual who believes that being in control of someone else's body, or life, is in any way acceptable. You do not deserve to be respected or understood if you show you don't respect or attempt to understand others. We can fight back, sure, but what is that going to really accomplish? Fighting doesn't solve anything. At best it delays the problem, and at worst it can make the issues exponentially worse. You get what you give, and if all you can give is pain and suffering, that is all you will eventually get. I do understand that these people are human, but I also understand that the actions you make have consequences, and it seems that is something that many government officials seem violently allergic to, as they look for anything they can to push the responsibility or blame onto someone else.
TL:DR - Respect is earned, and understanding isn't something that should be attempted when the individual has made it very clear that, regardless of reason, they are willing and ready to force their own perception onto others.
He starts off by saying they’re not solely about power. And then immediate says they’d believe a certain group of people are better and they should be ruling. That’s called, “power.” Yes they adapt, into whatever form most keeps them in, “power.” 🤔
I think you are missing the point here. A poor right wing person doesn't have power and they don't believe they should have power. That's why a poor right wing person is often ambivilent to the lose their rights and protection for their rights because they "deffer to their betters". But their betters have to come from the same race and culture as them. Because instead of individual pride, they have collective pride in their race and heritage.
To give a concrete example, a lot of workers in the US are anti-union because they believe in their bosses. They think their bosses are good people who will look out for them. While unions will only help the lazy and otherwise bad employees have equal rights to hard working and good employees. The worker in this case is gaining no power by siding with the boss and in fact, losing power. But the worker does it because the worker believes that the boss is a better person then themselves and thus have the right to dictate what happens to them.
If you believe the world is fair and those in power deserve to be in power, its easy to defer to power and fight to make sure nothing upends the world order.
Hard to take Adam's opening comments seriously in light of the clerk who said Thomas, upon taking his seat on the Supreme Court, said he now had 43 years to punish liberals as they had made him suffer.
And this in light of his sexual harassment of Anita Hill ... no, I do not think he has a serious view of jurisprudence.
We have to take them as a threat, not their ideas as serious.
Its not about embracing them or somehow /not/ seeing them as a threat. A threat can also have serious ideas, and generally that’s why they’re so dangerous to you. It’s about recognizing that even he is a fully realized person with something that makes him tick. I don’t see how that’s incongruent with also opposing his decisions and views
Thomas radicalized to the right. There were ideas that led him there.
Are you aware that Republicans have systematically dismantled the local government in most of the important swing states already? They have rallied their people to take civic jobs and to vote in city council people that are also right wing, and ultimately voting in high-level state representatives, all so that when the next election occurs, they can have the support systems in place to challenge any vote outcome, without some pesky liberal representative stopping them.. They are shoring up their defenses to avoid repeating Trumps mistakes in the last election. I think that's a pretty serious strategy.
Soooo... if Clarence Thomas' theory is that Black people should work on lifting up powerful Black men like himself so that those men will then "take care of their own," at what point does he get around to doing that last part?
Tell me you want to misrepresent someone’s argument without telling me…oh wait, you did.
@@lucashenry6281 so what do you think he was trying to say? Because Thomas' argument is good, his hypocrisy at not following it himself is the issue here. So what problems do you have with attributing "black people in power should help other black people" to Thomas?
He never will, Clearance Thomas is an opportunist he will do whatever it takes to achieve his self interest. Thomas only believes in what makes him money its why he was so openly corrupt. He knows that he is not getting impeached because the Republicans care too much about the seat to impeach him. Its why he is able to get away with corruption for so long.
@@amandasunshine2 Clarence Thomas’ statement, was not what was stated by MrSomnus2001. It is therefore disingenuous. Keep trying though.
@@lucashenry6281 ok, then what was his statement? Are you saying OP got Thomas' statement wrong?
"All they accomplished was tax cuts and the supreme court"
That's all they need. That will allow them to confound progress for the next generation, at which point climate catastrophe is going to render all of this moot.
Good show, Adam! Never watched you before. Very insightful, and specifically you've improved my understanding of Thomas. Thanks much!!
Hanlon's razor is an adage or rule of thumb that states: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." It is a philosophical razor that suggests a way of eliminating unlikely explanations for human behavior.
And yet we are facing a group that has engaged in and endorsed some truly evil activities. They mean to deconstruct democracy. To retain their power.
Sun Tzu: ‘Know the enemy and know yourself in a hundred battles you will never be in peril. When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal. If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril.’
And there is the first mistake people on both sides make. We are not enemies! We are all Americans. This is the reason why we are a great country. It takes ideas from all three sides ( left, right, and middle) to accomplish this. By having rational conversions, and trying to understand each other’s points of view is the only way for us to survive. Basically one side balances out the other so that we don’t go off the rails.
THIS! A thousand times! THIS!
You really need to read about how the Weimar Republic fell.
@@miguelvelez7221 You mean from hyperinflation and reparations?
Republicans talk forgetting video is being recorded and rope is for sale in every jurisdiction in the United States.
Probably my favorite episode I've seen from you so far. Excellent guest and you lead a good discussion.
The rights love of capitalism was/is to preserve the nobles/ruling class.
I had a long, rambling (and, tbf, mildly stoned) post up, but I decided to delete it and just say two things:
1. Bravo. I was worried this piece would devolve into both-sidesism. I'm so glad it didn't you stuck to your beliefs, and while I don't know the beliefs of your guest, I'm supposing he's not right wing/MAGA, either. It's perfectly okay to take your opponent seriously -- like this video does! -- while still recognizing: they are your opponent. I feel like this video strikes that balance well.
2. After seeing that you have an interview with a personal star of mine Cory Doctorow -- you earned a sub. I'm increasingly anticapitalist and antiauthoritarian these days, and Doctorow is a *brilliant* standard bearer fighting both of these anti-democratic, illiberal trends, but as opposed to focusing on historical cause and effect, he talks about concrete ways to fight the good fight in the here and now. And that almost always starts with "defund the corporations." After that, the REAL conversations can begin.
Bravo!
I've found Robin's book quite enlightening. For example, it explains why they seem to punch down so often, since it gives those at the lower-tiers of the movement someone to feel superior too. But while I can intellectually get it, I can't quite grok how they think. In my value system, that's like making a conscious choice to be an a-hole, and I can't quite grasp why someone would _want_ to be that.
Especially considering their religion wherein a lowly carpenter who defended the poor and lowest among society - is worshipped as their savior. Their ultimate exemplar states "Do unto others as you would have other do unto you" and "He who is greatest among you would be your servant."
He may be explaining truthfully how the right thinks, but that does not mean they are not KNOWINGLY being hypocrites.
Because it's not really about making them feel superior to someone lower. That message is always accompanied by some form of blaming them for how things are, it's an anger redirection tactic. Look at those people with less than you, they're the reason why you don't have what you want. It's not me amassing billions by paying 100's of thousands minimum wage & no health insurance that's the problem, I earned that, it's them taking up the extra scraps that could've gone to you. Your hard work doesn't bring you wealth, not because I kept most of it, remember I earned that as a job provider, but because they get welfare from your taxes. Just imagine if taxes were lower, then they couldn't get YOU'RE money. Imagine hearing that, and almost only that year after year after year.
@@robertbeste I like the insinuation that all conservatives are Christians who don’t listen to their religion. It’s super disingenuous, and factually incorrect :)
@@lucas____________ Just because you can find an exception that doesn't disprove the rule. As someone who grew up VERY religious... they have earned their reputation... and history corroborates this.
@@robertbeste I’m not quite sure what you mean. conservatives are more religious in general. Anecdotally, most Christians I know are center left to center right. I know some who are super far right and some who think communism is the only moral economic system.
If this episode is anything, it’s “How people on the Left view the Right”.
Here's the issue with this debate. I don't doubt that they have principles and beliefs- I know for a fact they do. The question is when they engage in political action, do they engage in good faith? The answer I think is at this time they do not. There was a time within my lifetime where they did and we saw things like bipartisan bills, and 5-4 decisions on issues that weren't necessarily blockbuster controversies but had legitimate grievances in the law. They come into a negotiation and they have a position, a goal, and they refuse to accept anything less than success unless the consequences are ruinous to them by not making a deal. The only thing that can be achieved by obsequious appeasement of their bad faith negotiation is the return of "american values" to the salem witch trials. Alito laid the game on the table by quoting Matthew Hale in Dobbs, the goal is to return to a pre-enlightenment state and everything they do is in service to that goal.
Look at Merrick Garland, then at Amy Coney Barret and tell me they act in good faith. I dare you.
Even someone as principled as Neil Gorsich, it seems his principles only extend insofar as it is not diametrically opposed to the party in a way that isn't ruinous.
I’m confused by the conflation of liberalism and Leftism in this interview. It seems like y’all use the term interchangeably even though liberalism is solidly a Right-wing ideology. I think taking liberal power structures into account when examining the reactionary Right is crucial. It seems like Adam is about to touch on this when he mentions reactionary Democrats, but then the topic is left by the wayside and the typical conservative misuse of the term “Left” prevails throughout the rest of the conversation. I would love to hear this analysis of the Right in a way that includes the ways liberalism has bolstered and furthered reactionary policy.
I grew up in the south around conservatives, I know them just fine.
Try me then. What do you know about conservatives? This will not go well for you by the way.
@@lucashenry6281 I know not to waste my time 😂
LOVED how you discussed what the left is doing right and the failures of actually considering right wing politics on a deep level. Solidarity FTW 🙌
Oh they have ideas, but nearly every single one of them is absolutely horrendous.
Haven't watched yet, but I'm glad this video exists. Thanks for at least taking the time to talk with someone you may disagree with. That is so important right now
Unfortunately, that's not what this is. I came here thinking the same thing, but it turns out Adam is talking to the Left's version of Jordan Peterson or James Lindsay. Someone on his own side who specializes in analyzing the other side without actually being there.
That said, I would love to see Corey Robin have a serious conversation with James Lindsay. That would be EPIC!
As a person on the left interested in this subject, I'd rather read a conservative going in depth on this kind of analysis for his own side.
That kind of thing exists, but you're never going to find it from Adam Conover
@@brandonkiehl269 cool, why don't you provide some examples, then? Try acting in good faith here
I consider myself a religious conservative. The main belief that motivates me to vote and act the way I do is because my faith promises me eternal happiness if I commit my life to God above my selfish interests. I know I live "in" this world, but I believe I am not supposed to be "of" this world. I feel I have an ordained responsibility to bring the world more in line with a Heavenly order, which involves a divine hierarchy, divided into the those that choose to repent and those that remain in sin. Hope that shed some light on what you wanted to know.
A side note, I've decided to listen to only leftist content this year, and while my core beliefs haven't changed, I understand that the left seems to gravitate towards the the belief in humanity perfecting itself without a common moral compass or a unfied set of beliefs, which has always puzzled me.
Great conversation! Really enjoyed Corey's perspective. Senator Paul Wellstone had a great political story for Democratic Socialism: "We all do better when we all do better." Conservatives have trouble arguing against proper cost/benefit analyses that show small investments in human capital and infrastructure have large, future benefits.
I think it is important to make a distinction between the ruling class of the right and the supporters of the right. The ruling class of the right is concerned with power and maintaining their privileges. The same is true for the ruling class of the left. Their first priority is to maintain their power and privilege as well. What I can tell you for certain is that nothing described in this interview as the motivations of the right are the motivations of the supporters of the right.
_"It's not enough that I succeed... it's that others must fail."_ 😬
Is this how you came to understand how the Whites are rich? You're such a caring guy
@@user-pv6rw3ls3p excuse me, why are you judging me Gusthoff? Care to elaborate?
@@jemborg No, you've said enough
@@user-pv6rw3ls3p What are you on about Gusthoff?
@@jemborg Do you think white people are rich because they think along these lines?
I live in a rural area where there's more republicans than democrats (nearly every democrat is a student or union member). My father is a butcher so I'm familiar with death but also doing things you don't enjoy for the sake of making a living / ensuring survival (FYI cows eat agricultural byproducts and generally things people wouldn't want to eat; you can't grow high-value crops on the same land year after year, especially without heavy use of artificial fertilizer). My father passionately hates weakness, I see it as something to work towards reducing without stigma. I'm against big business but also governments as we know them. Politicians will inevitably direct taxpayer money to businesses owned by themselves or their friends or their campaign donors (at an inflated price of course). I think what we need is a combination of socialism and some form of direct democracy. VSauce put out a video once suggesting a jury-duty-like system where people are randomly selected to vote on one or two things that they are given (paid) time to learn about. This eliminates career politicians as well as election campaigns. I worry about modern liberals because many seem to worship weakness, dependence, and being different for the sake of being different. They don't seem aware of the harsh realities of how the world works. Some support Hamas without realizing that Hamas would happily rape and kill them for being gay or simply not Muslim (as a note I do not support the Israeli government). At the same time, I hate Trump (FYI I also hate my father). I'm fine with marijuana legalization but I don't believe people should smoke it or tobacco and they shouldn't drink alcohol.
Such a necessary discussion. It's so easy to dehumanize people who disagree with your political views, no matter what those are. Real progress is made when people stop treating each other like evil cartoons.
You mean dehumanizing people by saying stuff like "the core principle of the Right is the belief that certain people have an inherent right to rule over the rest of us"? Yeah, sure is great to see such evil-cartoonification not happening here!
If Adam really wanted to understand what conservatives are about, he could try talking _to_ one rather than simply talking _about_ them. But then again, the research of Jonathan Haidt in Moral Foundation Theory strongly suggests (though Dr. Haidt is polite enough to not say so in so many words) that it's not truly possible for someone on the Left to understand conservative views without becoming conservative themselves, so maybe these bizarre caricatures Adam and his guests spin are them quite literally doing the best they can.
If they behave inhumaely, it is important to speak up.
Everybody poops.
@@masonwheeler6536 It's true - it is difficult to understand that conservative stance on power and hierarchy.
Maybe being religious is involved with that mindset?
@@maedesmond2461What stance, specifically? I didn't say anything about the conservative view of power and hierarchy, other than calling the bizarre caricature thereof presented in this video a bizarre caricature.
I have always understood that the right wing in politics is pro hierarchy and the left wing is for more equality
This was a great discussion. Also, the shot was set up so that the professor's head was visible in the mirror over Adam's shoulder so that when he was nodding in agreement with what Adam was saying it looked like he had a Prof Corey Robin bobble head on his shelf. I enjoyed that too.
Glad that you cover that there are conservatives that started on the left, but I think it was left incomplete. Many move from the left as they get older because they achieve what they wanted and then want things to stay the same. And now with the oversized cohort of the boomers they are keeping the power longer than usual which means we (and other countries) have moved to the right and stopped progressing forward.
Not so sure that's true. If I remember from political science classes, most people stay pretty stably committed to the party they supported when they came of age.
And the whole "they went from hippies to yuppies" narrative of the boomers is mostly false. They were more conservative than their parents' generation even when they were young, and most supported the Vietnam War. Their feelings on the war spoiled when the draft threatened them, but the actual hippies supporting progressive change to society were still very much in the minority. Their love of Reagan isn't really surprising, except by the narrative we get from TV shows that the boomers were all hippies.
@@rcbridii OP is saying the exact same thing "As they get older because they achieve what they wanted and then wanted things to stay the same."
The world became more progressive, which makes older leftists look more conservative today.
@@3rdeye7thdimension Exactly. They got what they wanted to get to and the movement went past them to beyond the point they were comfortable with.
@@eingames9931 That could be one explanation, and I'm sure it's common. Once you get to new heights though, that's when you can scout your next destination. Some don't, and that's fine too. It's not healthy to be on the front lines all your life. We can only pick up the torch and keep moving forward out of the darkness.
@@rcbridii I think what you said applied to a bygone era, but in the age of the internet there's more avenues for people to become radicalized.
People who are on "A SIDE" will never get the whole of anything, simply because it's ONE SIDE.
Really good interview. I have a question… didn’t the Roman Republic have a right and left? I know it’s very different than early modern France, but in the Optimates & Populares you had the former on the side of old nobility and latter with ordinary citizens. Are a right and left something that just happens to occur in societies with more social mobility?
Great episode, you are never worse off understanding why someone feels and acts the way they do.
I live in a republican area, coal country in Sw Virginia. Very few democrats, and the few we do have are republican, but hate trump.
Anyway, i try to have meaningful conversations with republican voters all the time. MOSTLY, we all agree on most of the basic policies, money out of politics, higher wages, less monopolies, less bullshit in the news.
That last one is where it goes off the rails. I had no less than 6 full grown adults tell me "they just can't be ok with litter boxes in school's".
I had to try and explain how none of that was true.
No one could tell me anything substantial ie: who,what,when,where,why.
No actual facts.
How do we discuss serious facts and issues to get past the cult following of trump?
We arent even living in the same reality.
Most republican voters believe that crazy shit from far right media. Not to mention the way evangelical pastors say trump is the 2nd coming. Its a cult dude. Few of them might not believe, but the majority believe some form of crazy shit.
I interact with them everyday, trust me.
26:32 lets be honest, it was the republican party that started the end of slavery, but since then the parties have changed positions.
I had very similar conversations with Democrats in NYC. It's not so much about the positions themselves, but rather WHOM you are speaking to, in order to represent those positions. If you argue with coal miners, you're going to get a coal miner response. If you argued with Thomas Sowell, you would come to a very different conclusion.
Collectivism is an anathema to our society, and is best left to die in the past where it belongs.
Back in the day, I read a good explanation of Reactionary: " If the Left is For it, the Right is Against it."
On the book: Backlash mentioned, it would be useful to mention the author because there are about 60 different books with that title.
The problem I'm having with the framing of a lot of this can be easily illustrated by Prof. Robin's example of Edmond Burke. Besides his opposition to the French Revolution, he is remembered (or was at least noted by his contemporaries) for his support of Catholic emancipation and the impeachment of Warren Hastings.
On both of these points, he can be seen as a formidable advocate for the oppressed and underprivileged against the ruling establishment. Framing the "Right" only as those who support hegemonic power doesn't tell the whole story or define the term very neatly.
There has always been a very fluid interplay within the Right (and politics worldwide) between individual freedom and collective good. The COVID vaccine is a great example of the Right taking a talking point that is based in individual rights per se (the right to bodily autonomy) and all too effectively arguing for it in what most might call the wrong instance.
People like Ron DeSantis will speak to that point while simultaneously restricting abortion rights (or, as was the case with the Alabama GOP not long ago, arguing for forced chemical castration of sex offenders). The hypocrisy is obvious and conforms to Robin's basic thesis about who and what the Right is, sure, but the arguments resonate because there is that seed of libertarian, populist progressivism in the discourse that is suspicious of overreach and bandwagons and, ultimately, the oppression of the most vulnerable.
The Left loses a lot of ground (money, elections, cultural support) because it constantly approaches people with the assumption that the only people interested in keeping more of their money, or protecting themselves with a firearm, or making their own medical decisions are people who will have the privilege to lose.
The one thing we know best about the encroachment of civil liberties is that it tends to be weaponized against the most marginalized immediately. Black gun owners, e.g. have a lot more to fear from a State that restricts gun ownership than white gun owners do. I just don't think that a skepticism of "all for one and one for all" is anti-progressive though it is classically "right-wing."
“How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century.” Aneurin Bevan, MP and founder of UK NHS
It was easy. They waved some rainbow flags and you all fell right in line.
@@thhunter Don't think I've seen any Republicans wave rainbow flags. Nor any UK Tories, for that matter. What they have done, however, is blabber about meaningless tax cuts to people that aren't paying much taxes and endlessly making emotional arguments about how this or that minority group is to blame.
I maintain that Jordan Peterson's characterization of "conservatives" and "liberals" is the only characterization I have ever found even remotely productive or helpful. He asserts that conservatives primarily seek to create and maintain hierarchies, while liberals seek to challenge and dismantle hierarchies. He proposes that you _must_ have both groups in order for a society to function properly. He says that without the liberals fighting to challenge and dismantle the existing hierarchies, the hierarchies themselves become ossified and corrupt. Without the conservatives seeking to create and maintain hierarchies, society descends into chaos. I appreciate this model, because it recognizes the value of the entire population, rather than attempting to cast one side as better or more correct than the other.
Both the "Right" and the "Left" are wrong, and mostly in the identical fashion--it's two teams wearing different colors but playing the exact same game in the exact same way.
Politics/Government is an evil religious cult, and the struggles between the two opposing factions over which will control the cult are pointless and stupid.
So, I haven’t listened to all of this yet and am still listening. I want to say two things first… I love the shows. There is always really good information and things I didn’t know. Also, I’m very much right-leaning political wise.
What I think is hilarious is that, in this first bit, everything used to describe how people feel about the right, trying to retain power, against people’s freedoms, really stupid idiots is how the right feels about the left. It’s one of the big problems is that when someone else’s core values disagree with your own then it’s very difficult to understand the position of the other person.
Sure, but which side benefits from the electoral college, having two Senators per State, engages in the bulk of all gerrymandering and is actively involved in voter suppression? The right might say that the left are ' trying to retain power, against people’s freedoms,' but it's the right that are actively and consistently doing so (and the left mostly end up doing it in self-defence).
Ironically, it was also the right that pushed for presidential term limits after Roosevelt's fourth term, but also the right that might've benefited from not having those limits (Eisenhower and Reagan).
As to whether it's the left or right that are 'really stupid idiots,' there's only one side that believes in the importance of a traditional family unit but that also demonizes people who fail to adhere to that ideal, thereby creating the environment that increases the likelihood of broken families.
Consider, as well, that a lot of highly conservative religious people are also politically conservative. Religiously conservative people are more inclined towards having large families (not just Catholics, as used to be the case). Larger families increase the population and larger populations, overall, tend to end up living in cities rather than rural areas. And what's one of the strongest demographic indicators of political affiliation?