Demands to Denounce

[Szdfan]

The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.

This is the problem with polarised American politics today.
Calling me, for example, a “Trump supporter” is both an act of attempting to dehumanise me and also an outright lie. Yet you keep doing it.

What do you find so dehumanizing about being called a Trump supporter?

[JohnH]

The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.

This is the problem with polarised American politics today.
Calling me, for example, a “Trump supporter” is both an act of attempting to dehumanise me and also an outright lie. Yet you keep doing it.

What do you find so dehumanizing about being called a Trump supporter?

It’s about the approach you (and others) take, as if being able to accuse someone of being a Trump supporter makes them some kind of evil, less than human person.

Lots of Americans are Trump supporters - indeed, the majority, are. Just because we might not agree doesn’t mean we need to use it as an epithet or as a means to try to make ourselves “better” than they are. It is indeed this attitude that I can’t stand; the sneering arrogance and airs of superiority from the anti-Trump crowd who demand that nothing less than 100% denunciation is good enough, or else we will try to deny you having a job, your freedoms, and being able to be part of society at all.

It is also undemocratic. If you want to live in a democracy, it starts with respecting the results of the democratic process, as opposed to endlessly trying to find ways to thwart the will of the voters.

In any case, you have lied repeatedly when you call me a Trump supporter. It’s tiresome, and it’s in bad faith. I wish you’d stop it.

[Szdfan]

The source of your confusion is that you consider anyone who worn make a blanket denunciation of Trump to be a “Trump supporter”.

This is the problem with polarised American politics today.
Calling me, for example, a “Trump supporter” is both an act of attempting to dehumanise me and also an outright lie. Yet you keep doing it.

What do you find so dehumanizing about being called a Trump supporter?

It’s about the approach you (and others) take, as if being able to accuse someone of being a Trump supporter makes them some kind of evil, less than human person.

Lots of Americans are Trump supporters - indeed, the majority, are. Just because we might not agree doesn’t mean we need to use it as an epithet or as a means to try to make ourselves “better” than they are. It is indeed this attitude that I can’t stand; the sneering arrogance and airs of superiority from the anti-Trump crowd who demand that nothing less than 100% denunciation is good enough, or else we will try to deny you having a job, your freedoms, and being able to be part of society at all.

It is also undemocratic. If you want to live in a democracy, it starts with respecting the results of the democratic process, as opposed to endlessly trying to find ways to thwart the will of the voters.

In any case, you have lied repeatedly when you call me a Trump supporter. It’s tiresome, and it’s in bad faith. I wish you’d stop it.

If anti-Trump leftists are as dishonest, dehumanizing, and contemptuous as you describe, why does their opinion of you carry so much weight? Why allow people whose judgment you regard as fundamentally immoral to define your humanity?

[Bootstrap]

Lots of Americans are Trump supporters - indeed, the majority, are.

Well, his approval rating is 38%, his disapproval rating is 58%.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/pol ... polls.html

And many of his policies have really low approval.

Just because we might not agree doesn’t mean we need to use it as an epithet or as a means to try to make ourselves “better” than they are.

Seriously, could we all just stop trying to label the other person, and stop making every single issue about whether we support Trump? People have views on the Iran war, the economy, government fraud, what the government's priorities are, etc., and it sure would be nice to discuss them. Without going after the other person.

Whenever you say "you just believe that because you don't like Trump", or talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome, or ask if I believed that when Obama was president, that makes everything revolve around pro-Trump vs. anti-Trump, as though people are unable to actually think about issues and care about issues, as though people's views on Trump can never be a result of their views on other things, but always the driver.

I don't think any of us need Trump labels. I don't think we need to replace our denominational affiliation on our profiles with our Trump affiliation status. But some days it sure seems like some people do think that's the right way to go.

[JohnH]

If anti-Trump leftists are as dishonest, dehumanizing, and contemptuous as you describe, why does their opinion of you carry so much weight? Why allow people whose judgment you regard as fundamentally immoral to define your humanity?

Because I don't think of them as fundamentally bad people. I think of them as people duped by a heinous ideology that teaches them it's actually good and moral to treat other people that way, and I fundamentally reject that manner of thinking.

I don't think the level of dehumanisation I see is good and I'd prefer to see a different way.

[Bootstrap]

It is indeed this attitude that I can’t stand; the sneering arrogance and airs of superiority from the anti-Trump crowd who demand that nothing less than 100% denunciation is good enough, or else we will try to deny you having a job, your freedoms, and being able to be part of society at all.

I'm pretty sure everyone here wants jobs, freedom, and inclusion in society for people across the political spectrum. And I hope that most people here don't think that the political spectrum is the one that matters most.

You repeated the same claim I asked about in the OP. Care to answer it now?

This is a claim you make with some frequency. Can you please point to some specific posts that do this?

My impression is that nobody does this, but the accusation keeps circulating. I could be wrong. You seem to believe that this happens often. You could be wrong. Either way, in the name of truth and brotherhood, I think it would be right to either:

1. Provide clear examples of posts that demand that someone denounce a political figure. With links to the original posts, so we can clearly know that this happens, or else
2. Stop making this claim as though it were true.

If people are actually doing this, they should stop. If they are not, it would be good to stop promoting false narratives that divide and polarize. Either way, this is important to track down.

The silence is deafening.

[JohnH]

Lots of Americans are Trump supporters - indeed, the majority, are.

Well, his approval rating is 38%, his disapproval rating is 58%.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/pol ... polls.html

And many of his policies have really low approval.

He also won an election, along with his party winning both houses. There's this thing called "democracy" and "elections" we use to find out what the will of the people actually is.

I find it intriguing how much of a desire there is to actually deny this.

Seriously, could we all just stop trying to label the other person, and stop making every single issue about whether we support Trump? People have views on the Iran war, the economy, government fraud, what the government's priorities are, etc., and it sure would be nice to discuss them. Without going after the other person.

Yes, I'd love to see that. However, it's become apparent that a lot of these matters are solely about opposing whatever Trump's ideology happens to be. I think that's toxic and harmful and is not a good way to either think and view the world, or to debate with others.

If something is good, it's good whether or not Trump does it. If it's bad, it's bad whether or not Trump does it.

Whenever you say "you just believe that because you don't like Trump", or talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome, or ask if I believed that when Obama was president, that makes everything revolve around pro-Trump vs. anti-Trump, as though people are unable to actually think about issues and care about issues, as though people's views on Trump can never be a result of their views on other things, but always the driver.

It's certainly reasonable to ask if something is bad when any President does it, or only if it Trump does it. If the latter, it's not really even worth debating or discussing.

If the former, a lot of things that Trump does that I don't really even like or agree with are things that have been long-standing tricks of the trade of the executive branch. I'd love it if we could talk about those things, but we don't seem to be able to ever get there. (An obvious example is talking about the federal government agreeing to consent decrees with itself.) Of course, I very much doubt most the people I debate with here would have any interest in repealing a lot of these consent decrees.

It often comes down to this, as well: "I like a questionable use of power when it supports a policy or ideology I like. But when it's done for something I don't like, I strongly oppose it." I also think that's bad.

I don't think any of us need Trump labels. I don't think we need to replace our denominational affiliation on our profiles with our Trump affiliation status. But some days it sure seems like some people do think that's the right way to go.

I haven't said that at all. I think it would quite healthy if people were neither 100% Trump supporters and also weren't 100% Trump denouncers, and would instead focus on the issues at hand.

[JohnH]

It is indeed this attitude that I can’t stand; the sneering arrogance and airs of superiority from the anti-Trump crowd who demand that nothing less than 100% denunciation is good enough, or else we will try to deny you having a job, your freedoms, and being able to be part of society at all.

I'm pretty sure everyone here wants jobs, freedom, and inclusion in society for people across the political spectrum. And I hope that most people here don't think that the political spectrum is the one that matters most.

Are you sure about that?

It seems to be a quite common refrain that if someone doesn't subscribe to the right ideology / support the right people... they don't deserve access to things like medical care. This was a very common thing (including right here on this forum) to hear during the whole COVID debacle: if you didn't agree to whatever the vaccines were being promoted back then, you should be denied access to any kind of medical care.

That kind of divisiveness is incredibly toxic.

This is a claim you make with some frequency. Can you please point to some specific posts that do this?

My impression is that nobody does this, but the accusation keeps circulating. I could be wrong. You seem to believe that this happens often. You could be wrong. Either way, in the name of truth and brotherhood, I think it would be right to either:

1. Provide clear examples of posts that demand that someone denounce a political figure. With links to the original posts, so we can clearly know that this happens, or else
2. Stop making this claim as though it were true.

If people are actually doing this, they should stop. If they are not, it would be good to stop promoting false narratives that divide and polarize. Either way, this is important to track down.

The silence is deafening.
[/quote]

An obvious example is when pretty much any post I make in the Politics arena that isn't framed as 100% rejection of Trump gets me labelled as a "Trump supporter". You know it's an insult, I know it's an insult, you know it's meant to hurt, and I know it's meant to hurt. Yet it keeps being said, over and over.

I'm quite sick of it. A great place to start would be for you to at least admit that I am not a Trump supporter and never have one, and to quit repeating falsehoods that I am.

[ohio jones]

Seriously, could we all just stop trying to label the other person, and stop making every single issue about whether we support Trump? People have views on the Iran war, the economy, government fraud, what the government's priorities are, etc., and it sure would be nice to discuss them.

We do. In Politics, of course, mostly, though some of it bleeds out elsewhere.

[Bootstrap]

Lots of Americans are Trump supporters - indeed, the majority, are.

Well, his approval rating is 38%, his disapproval rating is 58%.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/pol ... polls.html

And many of his policies have really low approval.

He also won an election, along with his party winning both houses. There's this thing called "democracy" and "elections" we use to find out what the will of the people actually is.

I find it intriguing how much of a desire there is to actually deny this.

I think elections determine who the president is. I don't think they give the president the right to do whatever he wants, or guarantee that the people will approve of everything he does. Democracies also have freedom of expression.

I don't know what aspect of democracy you think people are denying when they disagree with Trump.

Seriously, could we all just stop trying to label the other person, and stop making every single issue about whether we support Trump? People have views on the Iran war, the economy, government fraud, what the government's priorities are, etc., and it sure would be nice to discuss them. Without going after the other person.

Yes, I'd love to see that. However, it's become apparent that a lot of these matters are solely about opposing whatever Trump's ideology happens to be. I think that's toxic and harmful and is not a good way to either think and view the world, or to debate with others.

If something is good, it's good whether or not Trump does it. If it's bad, it's bad whether or not Trump does it.

It's only become "apparent" because you project that onto other people instead of engaging in the substance of the discussion. You insist that's the only reason, but that's on you, not on the other person. If you want to understand the other person, you have to engage with the other person, not brand them and dismiss them at the start of the conversation using Trump-related labels.