Can the current state of American political discourse be remedied?

[ES 148]

People are latching onto Nazism and Communism because they are out of touch with both history and morality beyond their tiny little bubble of self-interest.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

There is no remedy. America is doomed. Any attempt to delay or reverse it is futility on your part. Have a nice day.

Your message reminds me of the final screen on Raiden's MK1 ending:

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

What the hell? The title of this thread is triggering me!

How can the current state of american political discourse be remedied? That is indeed a question. The question assumes the current state is in need of remedy, and asks how to go about doing so. Fair enough.

Then... "If so, how?"

So... what? You already asked how! If so makes no sense here.

Some better titles keeping the same style would be:
Does the current state of discourse need to be remedied? If so, how?
Can the current state of discourse be remedied? If so, how?

Or, the simplest of all:
How can the current state of american political discourse be remedied?

 

[mrdk_04]

What the hell? The title of this thread is triggering me!

How can the current state of american political discourse be remedied? That is indeed a question. The question assumes the current state is in need of remedy, and asks how to go about doing so. Fair enough.

Then... "If so, how?"

So... what? You already asked how! If so makes no sense here.

Some better titles keeping the same style would be:
Does the current state of discourse need to be remedied? If so, how?
Can the current state of discourse be remedied? If so, how?

Or, the simplest of all:
How can the current state of american political discourse be remedied?

Fixed, thanks for noticing.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Will fix it ASAP, thanks for noticing.

Aww now I feel bad. English isn't your first language, is it? Sorry I thought I was picking on a native speaker. Kudos to you for your completely understandable English.

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

Fox News, talk radio, and televangelism are both recent phenomena and drops in the bucket compared to the far-left stranglehold on the mainstream media, academia, and the bureaucracy.

The left have a disproportionate influence within certain spheres of the media and academia, but I don't think it is very convincing to suggest this has profoundly shaped the political opinions of most Americans. The left has dominated academia for decades now, yet the American public statistically remain predominantly conservative outside of the big cities, and this is true regardless of party affiliation.

As for the mainstream media, the two most viewed news shows in the United States are Hannity and Tucker Carlson Tonight. That's hardly a drop in the bucket, it's an accurate reflection of the audience they're playing to.

A lot of people have this tendency to put the cart before the horse when it comes to media influence. It isn't primarily the media which shapes the political opinions of the average person, rather, it is the opinions of the average person that shapes the media they consume via market forces.

Everything should be taken with a grain of salt and no one from a homeless man on the street to mutiple PhD people should be considered as speaking in anyone's best interest other than their own until fact checked and proven otherwise.

I would agree that nothing should be taken at face value, but I think you are overestimating the effectiveness of fact-checking in the hands of most laypeople. In order to know if an expert is truly wrong about something, you have to first be knowledgeable enough to meet them at their level, otherwise, how are you supposed to go about fact-checking their claims? If I gave you the PhD thesis of a post-graduate researcher for a highly technical subject you had absolutely no expertise in, would you feel confident to fact-check it?

I understand the desire to democratize information and afford no privilege in discussions to people based upon their level of education, but if we're being realistic here, I think we both know that this attitude has it's limits in practice. When you're a layperson with no background in something, it makes logical sense to afford more deference to an expert in the field than you would to some random person on the street, and the only kind of person who would suggest otherwise is someone who doesn't see any value in education or expertise to begin with.

one news network on the right vs. a dozen on the left?
a bunch of rush limbaugh tier radio clowns on the right vs. the entirety of the holllywood movie machine on the left?
some campy tv meme preachers on the right vs. almost all public schools and the entirety of academia on the left?

they do exist and they do play a part in polarizing people, but to compare their little bit of influence to the monstrous institutional power that the left controls is laughable.

Control and power are two different things. Who 'controls' Hollywood and academia is largely irrelevant if they wield little to no power when it comes to influencing the opinions of ordinary people, and I think there is ample evidence to suggest that they don't really influence them.

 

[Al Gulud]

Lmao I don't think the discourse will ever stop which could honestly be seen as a good thing tbh. A healthy amount of opposition to other ideas is always a good thing and besides that I doubt anyone who is actively engaging in this shit online will do anything irl.

 

[Crunchy Leaf]

even if you only look at economic issues, the answer is no

one side wants medicare for all, other side thinks that people should pay their own way and nobody's tax dollars should be going to help someone else...how do you come to a middle ground?
one side wants unions...the other side wants right to work...how do you come to a middle ground?
one side thinks supply side economics is bad...the other side thinks supply side economics is good...how do you come to a middle ground?
they're on the complete opposite sides and nobody is going to want to compromise.

 

[DNJACK]

even if you only look at economic issues, the answer is no

one side wants medicare for all, other side thinks that people should pay their own way and nobody's tax dollars should be going to help someone else...how do you come to a middle ground?
one side wants unions...the other side wants right to work...how do you come to a middle ground?
one side thinks supply side economics is bad...the other side thinks supply side economics is good...how do you come to a middle ground?
they're on the complete opposite sides and nobody is going to want to compromise.

if experience is any help:
-medicare for all but everyone has to pay for their own insurance
-people get unions that only protect what no one wants to do.
-implement supply economics but make sure supply is heavily crippled by retaliatory international tariffs instead

the compromise is always to implement something that is worse than any side would come by on their own.
Politicians love to do something, even if it's mostly making things worse.

 

[Commander Keen]

All this alarmism, lulz. People think discourse in the states is bad? Really? It’s quite tame compared to ye olden tymes. We used to gun each other down and no one really batted an eye.

Wasn’t too long ago federal troops fired on protestors. Political discourse in the new world isn’t “bad”, it’s just the current participants are people who cannot handle an opposing opinion or the notion that they can “lose”. If they “lose” then the opponent cheated. How could they lose? They never lose! Never!

So whenever battle lines are drawn and people grab their guns I’ll agree that the political discourse in America has reached the point where it’s “bad”. All this crap is just weak banter and mudslinging. Angry people hammering at keyboards trying to get the hint of a boner when they pwn some liberal or alt-right kid.

And there is no compromise. Anyone who tells you they are going to work with the opposition is not on your team in the first place.

 

[Joan Nyan]

What's wrong with it? It's good that the parties are becoming more distinct. Alexandrea Googly-Eyes Cortez and Donald Drumpft better represent the diversity of viewpoints in the US compared to say, Hillary Clinton and Jeb! Bush who were basically the same person. Voters finally have a voice, not an echo. And it's fun too. Like that Shen comic where he gets his bike stolen, owning libs/cons is more fun than the negativity felt by the owned lib/con who doesn't actually care, so, whatever.

 

[mrdk_04]

What's wrong with it? It's good that the parties are becoming more distinct. Alexandrea Googly-Eyes Cortez and Donald Drumpft better represent the diversity of viewpoints in the US compared to say, Hillary Clinton and Jeb! Bush who were basically the same person. Voters finally have a voice, not an echo. And it's fun too. Like that Shen comic where he gets his bike stolen, owning libs/cons is more fun than the negativity felt by the owned lib/con who doesn't actually care, so, whatever.

I'm either deluded, dumb or both.
The current polarization, shitflinging, ever increasing agitating of eachother, the riots, echoes of the black bloc, white nationalist demonstrations, Trump Derangement Syndrome, the pathetic attempts of the Democrats to cover up their failure, the drop in quality of media outlets, social media's destructive influence, distrust of experts, the rise of near vitriolic movements like #metoo, the inability of Democrats to set clear limits to their doctrine, etc.

There is no problem with the 2 parties becoming more distinct, what IS a problem is that they will screw eachother over at every turn if they get the chance. The Republicans have been known to do this with Obama and now, Democrats wholeheartedly supported that sham of a court case against Kavanaugh<;
For a country that has to switch parties every 2 years, I fear we might soon have a "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" situation on our hands.

As for owning libs and cons, it's one thing when we laugh at it, it's another when there are entire compilations of destroying the other's arguments and current media relishes the chance at taking down, calling out, or downright destroying the reputation of at times innocent people.

There is a time and place for hate and owning snowflakes, but it has been going for well over 3 years now, with no end in sight. That isn't healthy.

 

[Joan Nyan]

I'm either deluded, dumb or both.
The current polarization, shitflinging, ever increasing agitating of eachother, the riots, echoes of the black bloc, white nationalist demonstrations, Trump Derangement Syndrome, the pathetic attempts of the Democrats to cover up their failure, the drop in quality of media outlets, social media's destructive influence, distrust of experts, the rise of near vitriolic movements like #metoo, the inability of Democrats to set clear limits to their doctrine, etc.

There is no problem with the 2 parties becoming more distinct, what IS a problem is that they will screw eachother over at every turn if they get the chance. The Republicans have been known to do this with Obama and now, Democrats wholeheartedly supported that sham of a court case against Kavanaugh<;
For a country that has to switch parties every 2 years, I fear we might soon have a "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" situation on our hands.

Why shouldn't you screw the other party over? They're wrong and it's fun.

 

[mrdk_04]

Why shouldn't you screw the other party over? They're wrong and it's fun.

Because, ideally, they would have to work together on some level, or at least agree to disagree from time to time.
It bothers me immensely how spiteful both sides have become in the current year +3.
I'll assume you're just shitposting.

 

[Commander Keen]

Because, ideally, they would have to work together on somelevel, or at least agree to disagree from time to time.
It bothers me immensely how spiteful both sides have become in the current year +3.
I'll assume you're just shitposting.

No. We do not live in a proportional representation system of government where coalitions are formed to make up the ruling government. We live in a first past the post style of government. If you have more seats, you have all the power. That’s how it works.

The only reason to compromise is when there are rogue agents who aren’t in lock step due to pressures from their electorate and the voters have said they’ll vote said rogue agent out of office if they do this or that.

There is no reason to compromise or work together with the opposition. None.

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

they do influence them though
why do you think that, for example, the major US tech companies are filled to the brim with hardcore leftists?

Because they appeal to the left and they recruit from the left. This doesn't invalidate anything I have said. The fact remains that mainstream America continues to be very far removed from academia and Silicon Valley.

 

[DNJACK]

Because they appeal to the left and they recruit from the left. This doesn't invalidate anything I have said. The fact remains that mainstream America continues to be very far removed from academia and Silicon Valley.

especially the blacks and hispanics.

 

[queerape]

Yes, of course it can. The current state of affairs has been a long time coming. My then-boyfriend, God bless his soul, said in 2008 that he could see polarization going so far by 2016 that we'd have Nazis vs hyper pc. But I would add it's a long time going too. Nothing lasts forever in politics. It's the very nature of things to change.

As to how will it change, that's less clear. But I can imagine that it'd involve people becoming more war of what they read on the internet, after being burned repeatedly by fake news. Better education may also play a role. But the single most important factor I see is the millenial/ gen Z coming of age. Once you hit about age 25, executive function matures, and by then you have at least some degree of nuance and life experience. Political views will follow. They will realise edgy alt right/ tumblr SJW views are untenable in the real world, and their politics will mature with it. As such, they will stop following and supporting that content, instead boosting more nuanced thinkers. Since they influence a lot of social media, this will have ramifications throughout, especially as they step into positions of power.