Best explanation I've ever read about Republican mindset and messaging

[Saoirse9]

[link:https://medium.com/@_EthanGrey/the-message-of-the-republican-party-dont-tread-on-me-i-tread-on-you-936037958bce|]

"Here is the Republican message on everything of importance:

They can tell people what to do.
You cannot tell them what to do.

Let’s start with the COVID-19 pandemic. We were told by experts in infectious diseases that to control the spread of the pandemic, we had to socially distance, mask, and get vaccinated. So, in a general sense, we were being told what to do. Guess who had a big problem with that. All Republicans saw were certain people trying to tell them what to do, which was enough of a reason to make it their chief priority to insist that they will not be told what to do. Even though what they were told to do could save lives, including their own.

As you can see, this is a very stunning commitment to refusing to be told what to do. So much so that it is not in fact “pro-life.” But Republicans will nevertheless claim to be the “pro-life” party. That is because they recognize “pro-life” can be used to tell people what to do. The reason they say they are “pro-life” when they are trying to tell pregnant women and other pregnant people what to do with their bodies is not out of genuine concern for human life, but because they recognize that in this position, they can tell pregnant women and other pregnant people what to do with their bodies.

That’s why when you use that same appeal — “pro-life” — when you ask Republicans to do something about gun violence in schools, it doesn’t work. Because you are now in the position of telling Republicans what to do. That’s precisely why they don’t want to do anything about it. So gun violence in schools is not a problem, but their children having to wear masks in schools is. Because somebody is telling their children what to do. Dead children don’t bother them, but telling their children what to do? Only they should do that.

The reason Republicans are so focused on the border isn’t because they genuinely care about border security, it’s because they recognize it as the most glaring example of when they can tell other people what to do. This is why it’s their favorite issue.

“You want in? Too bad. Get out.”

If Republicans could do this in every social space — tell the people who aren’t like them “Too bad, now get the fuck out” — I’m here to assure you that would be something resembling their ideal society.

Link to Twitter thread from the author, because after 5 tries I can't get the link to the article to post correctly:

Link to tweet

?fbclid=IwAR0l6ah9TW3WBxayOJVffrIb0a16TpKl3Nx21-CmQwpZlgAC6nkwRriJgLU

[cilla4progress]

1. Well and this was precisely borne out in yesterday's hearing, Saoirse9!

Great catch!

Did you hear the convo between Jacobs (pence aide) and Eastman where Jacobs asked him - do you want Kamala to have this authority (to select slate of electors) in 2024? And should Al Gore have had it in 2000?

To both, Eastman fascistically said no, but we should have it, today.

You are exactly right!

[Saoirse9]

3. The author is right

But I agree with him 100%.

God the arrogant attitude is appalling.

But I suppose it helps to know what we are dealing with even as we hate it.

[Thomas Hurt]

2. Exactly, conservatism is the ideology of maintaining individual power. Preferrably for lots of money

[overleft]

4. Or the old "keep the sides divided" routine.

[ms liberty]

5. I saw this piece the other day and lost it. Bookmarked now, lol! Thanks. K&R n/t

[Saoirse9]

9. Yes!!!! I lost it too

It enrages me but I know it is true.

[H2O Man]

6. Recommended.

Very interesting. Thank you for this.

I do think that for many republicans, the border is an issue in large part because they are not comfortable with a growing population of brown-skinned people. There may be a hint of religious concern, for the majority are Catholics, although conservative Catholics are kind of okay. Yet it still plays into the "replacement theory," in which they assume that when non-white people are the majority, they will treat white folks like whites have treated non-whites for centuries.

[Saoirse9]

8. Definitely.

I think replacement theory is batshit crazy but I know 100% that rethugs believe it in their heart.

[H2O Man]

11. They are paranoid.

It is true, without question, that non-white people will soon outnumber white people in the US. That is no reason for concern, unless one is convinced that white people are somehow superior. Many years ago, this type of white person was okay with the program "The Jeffersons" moving into their television "neighborhood." But today, they see a black woman on the Supreme Court. Black women in Congress. Black journalists calling into question the racism of Trump etc. Asian-American university professors. Hispanic co-workers that they have to watch what they say in front of. And the list goes on -- I could list a hundred things. These overwhelm their sense of superiority from being white.

[andym]

7. Republicans tend to be self-interested, selfish, and want to lead, not follow

Your point is that they want to be in charge, telling people what to do and not listening. Basically the want to be free to control others. Their desire to lead is easily subverted by a strong tendency toward hierarchy and for them to follow perceived strong leaders. The idea of a common good does not motivate then. These days they are willing to set aside skepticism for any idea that appeals to their world view, which makes them susceptible to liars like Trump or Carlson.

[Saoirse9]

10. You may have come to the root cause of their love of TFG

perceived strong leaders

How they can have believed he was strong is not something I understand very well. But then I have despised TFG since I was about 19 years old and I am 62. So I have years of understanding just what a loon he is. And how terribly weak. For that reason I believe he would be so much worse than Hitler if he ever came to power again. Because he's so insecure, any tiny slight would end in the person slighting him to be killed.

[andym]

12. Despised Trump-- good for you. Many folks in NY thought Trump a fool for years

as he was gossip page material in the daily newspapers, making ever more outlandish claims as a businessman. When he was elected, we wondered what mischief this dangerous fool would create, and indeed it was impressive-- especially his mishandling of the pandemic, his big lie about the election, and the insurrection he helped plan and inspire. In the end, he may have illustrated the road to authoritarianism and fascism for his successors in the GOP.

[Saoirse9]

20. He was always delusional

and always in the news for all the worst reasons. Cheating on his wife, beating on his wife, swindling people, exaggerating his financial and personal worth.

Never has been any substance to anything he says.

Still surprised me a bit just how far he was willing to go to be "right" but it shouldn't have surprised me. I had been experiencing his delusion and grift for years before he was president.

[cilla4progress]

13. "It's the patriarchy..."

Now - I am not including all men in patriarchy; likewise, I'm not excluding all women.

Patriarchy is a system, not a gender, typically led by males. But, in my definition, not necessarily.

In fact, the last sentence of the article is: "Anyway, I composed this piece mostly because I realize that the press has a “messaging problem.” Namely, in the sense that they seem extremely averse to explicitly identifying the message of the Republican Party. It’s called white male supremacy. Thanks for reading."



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy


Patriarchy is an institutionalized social system in which men dominate over others, but can also refer to dominance over women specifically; it can also extend to a variety of manifestations in which men have social privileges over others to cause exploitation or oppression, such as through male dominance of moral authority and control of property.[1][2][3] Patriarchal societies can be patrilineal or matrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male or female lineage respectively.

Patriarchy is associated with a set of ideas, a patriarchal ideology that acts to explain and justify this dominance and attributes it to inherent natural differences between men and women. Sociologists hold varied opinions on whether patriarchy is a social product or an outcome of innate differences between the sexes. Sociobiologists have argued that the roots of inequality were set in humanity's earliest period and are primarily due to genetic and reproductive differences between men and women. Aligned closely with evolutionary psychology, this theory posits that gender inequity is an inherent part of human social structures.

Social constructionists contest this argument, arguing that gender roles and gender inequity are instruments of power and have become social norms to maintain control over women. Constructionists would contend that sociobiological arguments serve to justify the oppression of women.[4]

Historically, patriarchy has manifested itself in the social, legal, political, religious, and economic organization of a range of different cultures.[5] Most contemporary societies are, in practice, patriarchal.[6][7]

[Saoirse9]

16. I love this

This kind of discussion is why I love DU so much.

Social constructionists contest this argument, arguing that gender roles and gender inequity are instruments of power and have become social norms to maintain control over women. Constructionists would contend that sociobiological arguments serve to justify the oppression of women.[4]

This is what I believe to be true. And maybe part of the crazy "replacement theory" we're reading so much about. They are not just afraid of being replaced by brown people. They are afraid of being replaced by women, and horrified of being replaced by brown women.

[cilla4progress]

24. Exactly!

Here's the part of the wiki I think about:

Historically, patriarchy has manifested itself in the social, legal, political, religious, and economic organization of a range of different cultures.[5] Most contemporary societies are, in practice, patriarchal.

How we got into this mess, in my opinion!

[Saoirse9]

25. Yes if women ran the world it would be peaceful

but the patriarchy is so deeply entrenched I can't see that happening. However many of us have a seat at the table and for now I guess it has to be enough.

[cilla4progress]

26. And, to me,

not necessarily women, but a feminine model, and all that inheres.

[Saoirse9]

27. You're right

even a man with a feminine influence would be more gentle, reasoned, sensitive, and logical.

Logic, real logic, is entirely missing from the patriarchal approach. Any logic that runs contrary to the patriarchal mindset is dismissed out of hand. I found this article I liked about how women are inherently more logical:

[link:https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-mens-brains-are-wired-differently-than-women/|

The research, which involved imaging the brains of nearly 1,000 adolescents, found that male brains had more connections within hemispheres, whereas female brains were more connected between hemispheres. The results, which apply to the population as a whole and not individuals, suggest that male brains may be optimized for motor skills, and female brains may be optimized for combining analytical and intuitive thinking.

"On average, men connect front to back [parts of the brain] more strongly than women," whereas "women have stronger connections left to right," said study leader Ragini Verma, an associate professor of radiology at the University of Pennsylvania medical school. But Verma cautioned against making sweeping generalizations about men and women based on the results.

and this:

Roughly speaking, the back of the brain handles perception and the front of the brain handles action; the left hemisphere of the brain is the seat of logical thinking, while the right side of the brain begets intuitive thinking. The findings lend support to the view that males may excel at motor skills, while women may be better at integrating analysis and intuitive thinking.

"It is fascinating that we can see some of functional differences in men and women structurally," Verma told LiveScience. However, the results do not apply to individual men and women, she said. "Every individual could have part of both men and women in them," she said, referring to the connectivity patterns her team observed.

[Midnight Writer]

14. Spot on.

[highplainsdem]

15. I have a MAGA relative in another state who often tries to lecture me on

politics (even though I majored in politics and got much better grades, too). But he can't handle it if I respond to anything he says. First he'll start screaming, and then he'll hang up. I've told him lots of times in the past that I don't want to discuss politics with him since he can't discuss that subject at all rationally. He keeps bringing it up anyway, no matter what we were discussing earlier. He seems to think he's "enlightening" me. Idiot.

I was going to say that he can discuss most subjects fairly rationally. Well, family stuff, anyway, which is what I try to keep the conversation on.

But now that I think about it, he usually isn't happy if it turns out any advice I've given him is right, that he'd been doing something wrong -- even if he (or his pets) had benefited from the advice. Often it's health advice, which is another subject I know more about than he does. He doesn't get quite as upset as he does discussing politics. But he's apparently incapable of thanking anyone for giving him facts he needed. Even if he'd have saved a lot of money on health care costs (for himself and his pets) if he'd bothered to get the facts earlier.

Authoritarian mindset. Not willing to learn since it means admitting having been wrong earlier.

[Saoirse9]

17. Yes I have MAGA relatives who are exactly the same

This guy Ethan Frame helped me understand them.

Helps to understand even if I hate it.

[maxsolomon]

18. I've been thinking about this since I 1st saw it.

"Rules for thee, but not for me".

At its core, Conservatism may simply be Adult-Onset Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

[Saoirse9]

21. Exactly

I wonder what H2O Man would say about that -- I'm sure he would agree with you.

[Caliman73]

19. It is all about the "natural order"

Conservatives thrive on hierarchy, simplicity, and authority. They say they value the "individual" and liberty, but that is a lie. They value conformity to the norms set by those at the top of the hierarchy.

They think that liberals have corrupted the natural order by using government to put people into places where they should not be on the hierarchy. Any power gained by people they see as illegitimate is profane and needs to be stamped out.

When liberals talk about "elites" in a negative sense, we are usually talking about the people with the money and power who can purchase politicians and policy.

When Conservatives talk about elites, they mean people who study and use the scientific method to acquire information and knowledge. People who challenge the status quo.

[Saoirse9]

23. Yes Calimary this is a very good explanation!

It sucks but this is their truth.

[demigoddess]

22. exactly!