• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The lengths people will go through to stop something that hurts nobody, but helps many always astounds me.

    I have to credit some rando Redditor for the insight that helped me understand why these people do this. I’ll paraphrase because I can’t remember the exact prose.

    Nearly all actions of Conservatives can be explained by their two implied core principles:

    1. All policies are zero sum. For you to gain something means I am losing something.
    2. There is a naturally occurring societal class-based hierarchy system, and you are required to stay at your level, never rising.

    So the reason conservatives oppose student loan relief applies to both rules.

    1. If student loan borrowers are having debts forgiven (they are getting something) that MUST mean the conservative is losing something.
    2. If they had to take loans for school because they couldn’t afford to pay for it outright, then they should stay in their economic station. Forgiving these loans may allow them to advance beyond their current class, which cannot be allowed.
    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Which number 2 blows my mind as they constantly vote for things which benefit those well “above their station” because they think they’ll be there someday.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          I don’t believe conservatives are trying to argue they need to change their class. They just assume they are already the highest, and its some other group’s fault that the conservative is poor.

      • Eccitaze@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Or they think that the people above their station deserve those benefits–they genuinely think and support the rich getting richer is a good thing, regardless of whether they’ll see any benefit themselves. It’s the mirror image of the progressive mindset of voting to raise their own taxes to help the needy.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        because they think they’ll be there someday.

        Sadly, I think its even worse than you’re describing. They think they are at that higher station now and its rule #1 that is preventing them from actualizing it. As in “I’m not experiencing a luxurious lifestyle because Group X is taking my share”.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t think it’s even that anymore. I think it’s just genuine fawning sycophancy towards their “betters.” They think privileged people deserve even more privilege by virtue of having “won,” even at their own expense. It’s sick and psychotic and completely foreign to my way of thinking, but I don’t think I’m wrong.

        • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You are wrong though. The reason we can’t understand it is they are being manipulated. Christians in particular have made themselves vulnerable, purposefully. Just go back to your Sunday school days and if you didn’t have them listen to the TV preachers in earnest. They are the sheep, they are being led. I’m not trying to be offense it’s just the facts. Even the trumpers who are church adverse fall for similar structures. Usually satellites of the church at large. Biggest facet I can think of is the gun nuts. It’s basically religion. In the 2A they trust. The overlap of the church gives them the same structure. Making them vulnerable to manipulation.

          You and me too though. We just kinda sweep it under the rug. We let our phones run our lives. We feed on dopamine hits all day everyday.

      • azimir@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not really as much as I feel we think. Having read more about Authoritarian mindsets, which includes the rank and file authoritarians, not just the leadership, they’re actually happy to be reinforcing the hierarchy regardless of their position in it. They’re happy to know their place and to ensure the ranks are kept in place. It brings comfort to many people to know that their position, regardless of how awful it is, is being maintained properly.

        This means that they’re entirely okay with a dictator and/or an oligarchy as long as the people on the top are “supposed” to be there.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Don’t forget cruelty. If you aren’t in their circle or above it’s also about cruelty.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        Thats built into #2. If your station is low enough, you should expect to endure cruelty. Its your station after all…is their implied position.

    • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      As Voltaire said: “The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor.”

      The idea broadly underpins modern capitalism, and it sums up why liberal politicians (whether left or right wing) do nearly everything they do. Democratic liberals want to keep the lower classes at least somewhat happy by throwing them scraps from time to time, while Republican liberals will only ever do just enough to keep the lower classes pacified.

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Fun fact, in the 1920s a high caste Indian man sued the US for the right to naturalize arguing that he was white. Arguing that he was verifiably genetically pure because of his caste and descendant from the Aryans.

      The Supreme Court, 9 old white dudes, decided that he didn’t look white enough to be white. And so he wasn’t white, and denied him the right to naturalize.

      'murica