david robertsAs I've said a million times: reactionaries find the thought of being held accountable for their words & actions genuinely outrageous.
This shit is so funny
🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/AssBoss80085/status/1606457994757144578
This is a famous political definition of conservatism:
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: there must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
But I also think ...
...it speaks to features of the reactionary personality. Grandpa should be able to opine freely on which groups do & don't deserve basic rights, which bits of science are & aren't valid, whether half the human species should be allowed to control their own reproductive systems...
... who should & shouldn't be allowed to vote, who is or isn't going to hell, who is or isn't fully human ...
... but his kids must nonetheless smile, treat him with respect, and hand their impressionable children over to him. Hey, they're just "political opinions."
It's the individual corollary of Wilhoit's famous political definition. Interpersonal rules of decency protect but do not bind him.
David Mankins@drvolts I think the essay you quote and your response to it comes from two perspectives. The conservative sees politics as a separate framework, while liberals often see it in moral terms. Your own response is framed morally. I’ll bet the conservative commentator might have little problem if the grandparents were being shunned because they were a bad moral influence (for some value the conservative recognizes as moral). Having dealt with liberal/evangelical divides in the past, the Evangelicals annoy me because their moral assumptions aren’t mine and they view my choices as immoral. But if you listen to conservative, they’re reacting to what they perceive as liberal scolding — they don’t like being in the receiving end. Yes, they don’t like being held responsible for their moral choices because they don’t see them as moral choices.
ejcrotty@lain_7 @drvolts this line of thinking says they're not choosing to be awful ( racist, sexist, homophobe, etc ) - it's just how they have been their whole lives. I have a relative who felt removing confederate statues was wrong ( removing history) but that when the statue of Saddam came down it was great. Cognitive dissonance. He firmly believes he is not racist. That white supremacists love Trump does not affect him. He is defined by this quote
John Panzer@lain_7 @drvolts They don't see their "political" choices as "moral" choices because they want their moral choices to be the one choice for everybody, and therefore not a choice at all, and therefore not a moral issue. By defining things this way, they escape moral responsibility ("that's just the way it is") and thus when people call them out, they believe themselves the victim.