I had a good friend/startup founder once say anyone who supported Trump deserved to be fired and blacklisted.
At least, that's my story. I'm exaggerating for effect, and in the spirit of fun. But I was literally publicly berated at work once on the company forum for not being liberal enough, not having views consistent with California democrats, and not contributing enough money to the party.
I never feared for my job though, that's awful. I could have actually been a conservative and I wouldn't have had to worry. There were conservatives in the company, though they did keep rather quiet about their views.
Someone who makes a blanket statement about firing anyone with impure thoughts... it happens, but let's hope it was only a moment of weakness or anger on your friend's part.
I do agree with some of trumps policies. I don't agree with his behaviours though.
The simplistic tax reform makes sense. A bigger deductible would mean poor people would have middle class would have a larger net gain.
I support infrastructure investment.
I support stricter high skilled immigration.
It's interesting to note that the word "fired" in an employment context is the same word used to describe what occurs when a gun is operated.
That's just a silly line of reasoning
However incompetent I think he is, I doubt that was deliberate though, and is besides the point.
Every president will inevitably make military decisions that will lead to civilian casualties. It's never nice, and it's never "okay", but it's also extremely difficult to avoid, in a conflict.
Repealing ACA is purely political, with very real effects on tens of millions of Americans losing coverage, benefitting only rich people.
It's not an unavoidable side effect. Just fucking don't do it. Your comparison is ludicrous.
Your trying to claim your statement is equivalent to mine is silly.
Syria is a conflict zone where the government has lost control and the USA along with 50 countries from the NATO is trying to help get the situation back under control. Nobody involved there is actually intending to hurt any civilians. In fact, the USA pulling out would likely cause a lot more deaths. (I'd like to remind you of the syrian government attacking their own civilians with chemical weapons.) Further, under no other candidate would substantially less deaths happen in that area, and particularly with Pence being a noted hawk there'll likely be more involvement there than under Clinton.
PS: Bernie would've been the sane choice for your country. But hey, what can you do in a two party system.
There's a wide gulf between deaths caused despite one's best intentions, and deaths caused directly by one's intentions. I believe US laws put such deaths in two distinct categories.
E: I also answered the syria question in a post further up.
It doesn't seem to be as bad even in other equally-liberal tech areas outside SV.
The fact that people didn't seem to grasp the hypocrisy and danger of their actions made it even more chilling.
It's disheartening, really.
Maybe people haven't seen it in America before, but this happens all the time.
Radicalism begets radical responses over enough of a time line.
People in this thread keep feeling disheartened or calling out liberals enclaves - but they completely forget that this is only 3 weeks into Trumps presidency.
As a candidate he was frightening to liberals, in a way no American presidential candidate has been in a long time.
And now he is president. He scares and disturbs people around the world. I can't imagine how liberal groups feel.
On top of that he won and is supported by people who argue that hate speech is free speech.
(Conservatives are not acting conservatively, either...)
Human actions ultimately find their motivation in emotions, not in rationality.
Besides- that's a belief unmoored from reality.
There's a fight going on, and one side has been using techniques to dismantle every institution and source of strength of the other. Youll have reached the point that even facts itself are under question.
The period of following ideals died a while back. Either liberals learn from the political play book of the conservatives, or they disappear.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire
59% of Trump supporters believe the last president of the United states was not a citizen of the US, and therefore ineligible to be president.
66% believe that Obama is lying about his religion and is secretly a muslim.
Put together, that is some real "Protocals of the Elders of Zion" stuff. No wonder they want to ban muslims, they actually believe the country has already been secretly taken over by them. There's multiple bestseller books that claim exactly that. People pushing this conspiracy are all over the Republican establishment and Trump and other public figures drop blatant dog-whistles that just sound like stupidity to normal people, but confirm these paranoid fantasies for believers.
Trump actually said on television that Obama actively helped the Orlando shooting. And people in this thread are like "well, I like his tax policies" and "people are so rude to supporters of Fascism, that's the real fascism!".
The question I ask myself is where does being "rude" end and oppression of your opposition start. I'm thinking about this in the broader context of multiple elections happening here in Europe this year and what is the appropriate response.
On one hand I'm strictly in the camp that if you say shit people should be fully allowed to critize you for it. On the other hand I'm not sure this is a helpful strategy to further the wanted end.
That aside, this sub-thread is about the fine line where the power relations change and those who weren't in power before now start to abuse that power themselves. I've seen multiple calls to legally oppress people that voted for Trump. That's as wrong to me as legal oppression of women and minorities. I don't know if there's such a thing as "good oppression", but I have a feeling the answer is no.
Maybe one day we'll need to worry about women and minorities suppressing white men, but we're not there yet.
Do you think we should wait until we are there, so we can again react to problems instead of preventing them? People stated that they want to do this.
Does this make the things the other side did any less horrible? No, multiple things can be horrible at the same time.
With state power and ownership of material resources, duh. Being a dick to someone isn't oppression. Making them homeless is oppression. Rounding them up and putting them into a camp is oppression. Shooting them is oppression.
Do people not realize that these things happen today?
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/yes-pol...
[2] https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2014/06/n...
Trump was the last straw for me. I voted McCain and Romney but Trump was just too far into the deep end (that and Mitch McConnell has been one of the most obstructionist politicians in American history).
Eich used his capital to deny rights to our friends. They did nothing to his rights.
I haven't been ostracized, I haven't been "silenced" or "oppressed". I have had my ass handed to me about uninformed opinions I held, though. And that hurts your pride, but eventually makes you a better person.
Serious question: are you white?
San Francisco is generally more accepting of almost everything, and I love that, but when it comes to political ideology I ironically find it intense, unaccepting and extreme. It feels like anything goes in SF, so long as you're not on the right politically. (I don't even consider myself super duper on the right, just not allll the way on the left)
Growing up in the south, as a non-white, it's not if you've been mistreated, but how many times PER DAY. Your identity is that of an outsider. You're not part of the white culture.
It's so common that it just becomes the usual part of life, and you deal with it from there.
You are definitely lacking any idea of the experience of other races.
Mormons, they go around house-to-house trying to convert people.
Try doing the same thing as a Muslim, with a long beard, in the deep south, and then let me know if you still think you'd be more comfortable expressing your views in the deep south. =^D
I'm a white Jewish-atheist male with... certain political views, and I honestly expect that if I open my mouth in the Deep Red zones it will lead to violence.
>It's not "people have different ways of viewing things, and boy do I think you're wrong," it's "if you think that _____ or voted for _____ you are my enemy."
Well, fascism is not just another way of looking at things. It's a way of killing people. Fascists are the enemy of every sane, decent human being on this planet.
Now, folks at work or in government may or may not be fascists, but if someone brings up the concern that they are, the right thing to do is to contest the factual question. You really shouldn't just dismiss it by saying, "Whether or not so-and-so is a fascist, it's only fair to tolerate fascism!"
No, what's fair is "never again". Totalitarianism in general and fascism in specific are the worst ideas in the world.
I'm not saying that's what you're doing, but it's a frequent tactic.
I'm sure I'd feel comfortable sharing liberal viewpoints in a small, deeply-red town as well, but I'm also a straight white male.
You're worry about being ostracized. People in Kansas have to worry that radical christian terrorists are going to murder them [1].
[1]: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/kansas-crusaders-arreste...
By far the most internally racist populations I've ever lived in were those where any recognition of ethno-cultural differences was explicitly verboten. If you make a joke about Mexican culture in SF (even if you're Mexican), there's a good chance you're getting fired, so internal thoughts about ethnic differences are suppressed and allowed to fester, and then people cover it up psychologically with a huge dose of self-loathing and, externally, doing the exact opposite of whatever is thought to be racist. The result is a modern version of "white man's burden"; a lot of the people in SF are absolutely convinced that without their help the poor, trod-upon people of color (replacement for "minorities" after that phrase starter to apply to white people in many US regions) would surely starve.
The point being, being a straight white male has nothing to do with it. For the record, I'm neither straight nor white, and I agree with the GP that I felt safer expressing disagreement in conservative environments than I do in very liberal cities like SF and NY.
I've always found it really funny that extremely disfunctional racist places like Chicago feel like they should define the cultural behaviors to fix racism.
Having lived for >2 years in 6 different US states (NY, CA, TX, MA, NV, MT)
and cities with populations ranging from 2,000 to 20,000,000, I can
absolutely guarantee you that rural white areas have the least internalized
racism of anywhere in the US.
Secondly, are you yourself white? I only ask because I am not, and I have had the experience of going into a store in a rural, conservative area, hearing conversations stop and heads turn as everyone stopped to look at the different-looking person walking in.
I believe that when you are referring to rural, conservative areas anyone that is a stranger or strange looking (clothes, hair etc.) would have a similar experience.
That's pretty threatening I think?
You are worried that a private organization that someone no right to be a part of might not want to have anything to do with the alt-right?
The link you posted doesn't support that. “These charges are based on eight months of investigation by the FBI that is alleged to have taken the investigators deep into a hidden culture of hatred and violence,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Beall. “Many Kansans may find it as startling as I do that such things could happen here.”
A hidden culture, not an open one, and open surprise and bewilderment from people don't really work with the idea that people are actually worried about being murdered by christian terrorists. It sounds like people didn't even know this existed.
You are worried about problems in America?
- Some white guy in 1955.
Regardless, if said white guy from 1955 said he was uncomfortable about something, or otherwise felt bad, telling him why other people have it worse seems counter productive. Someone always has it worse.