LGBT flags and the Political Left (split from Random Rants LXXIII)

[JohannaK]

since they got in power their intended vote has gone up like 10 points, which at 30% would make it an uncontested win.

 

[choxorn]

Oh their struggle is real, I'm not marginalising it. But I am saying that like it or not the left need to allow different takes on these issues if they want to make an impact. If it's my way or the highway on cultural sosial issues, and they are in the center of attention, they'll continue to lose elections and we're left with Trumps.

While I understand the argument behind not letting social issues dominate the conversation, and I get that there's some places and some times where we can't win every battle on those issues, we shouldn't just abandon talking about them completely, because like you said, they're real issues and real struggles that harm real people.

 

[Cutlass]

Flags are pretty much by definition public statements of affiliation or solidarity, be that communal, national or institutional. They aren't a private code. Else, instead of printing them on five-foot wide squares of colourful textile, they'd be set into signet rings and only visible under ultraviolet light. Which would be pretty cool and all, but for whatever reason doesn't seem to be the direction that the broader LGBTQ+ movement has taken.

If everyone is wearing a secret decoder ring, how does that help them find one another?

 

[Synobun]

While I understand the argument behind not letting social issues dominate the conversation, and I get that there's some places and some times where we can't win every battle on those issues, we shouldn't just abandon talking about them completely, because like you said, they're real issues and real struggles that harm real people.

In general I'm not convinced that the concept of talking about social issues is what convinced people to call Mexicans rapists and vote for a complete buffoon. That's not a thing.

Anyone who tells you that they voted for Trump because of liberalism is telling you that they voted for Trump because they agree with his views. There is no realistic "Gotcha, libs!" involved with building a giant wall, revoking DACA, banning Muslims, etc. And more to the point, I don't believe supporting those things is something born from seeing people talk about pansexuality or the best way to not kill poor people.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I'll be honest, if I'd know that I was going to provoke such strong feelings, I'd have stuck to something less controversial, like what flag to fly over Belfast City Hall.

Ouch. Harsh.

 

[Ajidica]

Oh, totally. Most [LGBT+ flags] are design nightmares.

Almost as bad as this:

 

[cardgame]

trans flag and the rainbow are the only good GSM flags.

asexual is neutral, everything else is bad.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

They probably snarl at others because when they explain it the person just flat-out rejects it.

Maybe so, but there was no excuse for snarling at me.

Life was easier when you could just kill people who weren't the norm.

Cynical, but nowadays it's sometimes expressed in other ways... like a Reformacon Returning Officer trying to find every excuse she can think of, to deny a disabled voter a ballot during a federal election.

It might just be me, but I think you're overreacting.

Did you try the ‘hey I live in a very conservative place where I cannot ask these questions of my neighbours so I have to ask online’ approach?

Let's be clear: I never actually asked anyone about the flag. What happened is that someone was ranting and complaining about how "people" didn't just automatically know what the various flags meant. What I said was, 'Why don't you just explain it to them, then, if they ask?'... and the answer I got was basically, "I don't know what your agenda is, but mind your own business."

So I figured, okay, my attempts to offer constructive suggestions are not appreciated. I will stay out of this issue. After all, signing parliamentary petitions (which are legitimate, provided the signatories are Canadian citizens) and writing letters and advocating for minority voting rights might be taken as an "agenda."

So I'll just keep on advocating for the disabled, and let the rest sort it out for themselves. My attention is clearly not wanted.

Almost as bad as this:
View attachment 500963

Of course that's a bad image. The artist neglected the whiskers over the cat's eyes. It's like drawing someone with no eyebrows.

 

[Arakhor]

Almost as bad as this:

That is one meme I would happily burn with fire.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Let's be clear: I never actually asked anyone about the flag. What happened is that someone was ranting and complaining about how "people" didn't just automatically know what the various flags meant. What I said was, 'Why don't you just explain it to them, then, if they ask?'... and the answer I got was basically, "I don't know what your agenda is, but mind your own business."

so you ended up self-injecting yourself in this discussion because of some incredibly trivial, uninteresting comment that happened on a different forum? luckily this is the raves thread

"Kill yourself" (in the form of kys or neck yourself or drink bleach or eat a bullet or others) has become more or less bog standard internet talk, but you have your day ruined because someone says "mind your own business"? That's just cute

 

[Snerk]

In general I'm not convinced that the concept of talking about social issues is what convinced people to call Mexicans rapists and vote for a complete buffoon. That's not a thing.

Anyone who tells you that they voted for Trump because of liberalism is telling you that they voted for Trump because they agree with his views. There is no realistic "Gotcha, libs!" involved with building a giant wall, revoking DACA, banning Muslims, etc. And more to the point, I don't believe supporting those things is something born from seeing people talk about pansexuality or the best way to not kill poor people.

You're strawmanning things a little but the fact of of the matter is that the populist right is winning the working class, and that trend is not limited to USA, far from it. And it's very much not because they are the best representation of their financial interests. While sosial democrats mostly only seem able to appeal to people with high education. The demography goes something like this. Poor people and/or people with low education votes to the right. People with high education votes to the left. And the very rich votes to the right again.

If the left can't appeal to the working class, the very people they historically have represented, then they're at a dead end and the gallop to an ever increasing inequality of wealth and resource distribution will remain unchecked.

 

[choxorn]

In general I'm not convinced that the concept of talking about social issues is what convinced people to call Mexicans rapists and vote for a complete buffoon. That's not a thing.

Anyone who tells you that they voted for Trump because of liberalism is telling you that they voted for Trump because they agree with his views. There is no realistic "Gotcha, libs!" involved with building a giant wall, revoking DACA, banning Muslims, etc. And more to the point, I don't believe supporting those things is something born from seeing people talk about pansexuality or the best way to not kill poor people.

Yeah, no argument there. The charitable interpretation of those arguments is that the person making the argument just doesn't care at all about those issues because they're straight and white, and stuff about immigrants and transgender bathroom rights doesn't affect them at all, and they really don't care beyond thinking about "how will this affect me," so they dislike hearing about social issues, and for some reason liked what Trump was telling them about Making America Great (TM) and bringing back jobs.

And that's the charitable interpretation, that still is basically "They're being self-centered douchewads who don't care about how their actions affect other people."

The uncharitable interpretation is that they're well aware this argument is ridiculous, and they're making it in bad faith, effectively blaming minorities for their own oppression. "I wouldn't have to hate you if you didn't demand to be treated fairly!"

 

[yung.carl.jung]

The demography goes something like this. Poor people and/or people with low education votes to the right. People with high education votes to the left. And the very rich votes to the right again.

Do you have like, any sources for that? In the case of Germany this somewhat rings true, but not really. People on welfare are more likely to vote far-right, wealthy people often vote Green, and maybe there is a correlation between higher education and voting leftist, but I am unsure of that. The climate in universities is definitely very anti-right, that much is for sure.

This metastudy for example says that FPD (somewhat classic liberalists) have the richest people voting for them, while AfD and non-voters tend to be poorer. The study also confirms your idea that far-right parties are getting a lot of workers' votes (AfD has the highest percentage of worker votes). Another trend is that people in rural areas (ironically) tend to vote more far-right, even thought they are mostly sheltered from refugees.

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/so...u-csu-spd-fdp-gruene-linke-afd-a-1158543.html

 

[Snerk]

Do you have like, any sources for that? In the case of Germany this somewhat rings true, but not really. People on welfare are more likely to vote far-right, wealthy people often vote Green, and maybe there is a correlation between higher education and voting leftist, but I am unsure of that. The climate in universities is definitely very anti-right, that much is for sure.

This metastudy for example says that FPD (somewhat classic liberalists) have the richest people voting for them, while AfD and non-voters tend to be poorer. The study also confirms your idea that far-right parties are getting a lot of workers' votes (AfD has the highest percentage of worker votes). Another trend is that people in rural areas (ironically) tend to vote more far-right, even thought they are mostly sheltered from refugees.

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/so...u-csu-spd-fdp-gruene-linke-afd-a-1158543.html

You should check out some of Piketty's latest work. Very interesting.

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/Piketty2018.pdf

Disclaimer, I have not read the full thing, just articles based on it. Was a very explanatory one in a recent edition of Le Monde Diplomatique.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

so you ended up self-injecting yourself in this discussion because of some incredibly trivial, uninteresting comment that happened on a different forum? luckily this is the raves thread

This is the rants thread.

 

[Lexicus]

Two points as this pertains to the US. One, the Republican Party doesn't have the votes of the "working class," it gets the votes of white people with low levels of education but lower-income voters overall still prefer the Democrats. Two, the reason that white people without college degrees vote Republican has more to do with the Democrats abandoning organized labor and embracing right-wing economics than with people on the internet arguing about sexuality.

 

[Snerk]

Two points as this pertains to the US. One, the Republican Party doesn't have the votes of the "working class," it gets the votes of white people with low levels of education but lower-income voters overall still prefer the Democrats. Two, the reason that white people without college degrees vote Republican has more to do with the Democrats abandoning organized labor and embracing right-wing economics than with people on the internet arguing about sexuality.

It does absolutely not pertain just to the US, it's a much more global trend, Trump or no. Of course there's nuances but the left has de facto been losing lower educated and lower income voters to the populist right for a long time. And that is a problem if they want to win elections, which they are not doing.
There are indeed many factors at play but I think many among the working class will feel alienated by a high focus on lgbt issues in the public conversation on the left.

 

[Lexicus]

It does absolutely not pertain just to the US,

Nor did I claim it does, what I meant by "as it pertains to the US" was that I was speaking to the issue as it exists in the US, and not to other places.

There are indeed many factors at play but I think many among the working class will feel alienated by a high focus on lgbt issues in the public conversation on the left.

Imagine being lgbt and being told to shut up about your issues so the left can win the votes of homophobes

 

[Snerk]

Imagine being lgbt and being told to shut up about your issues so the left can win the votes of homophobes

I'd be well miffed!

Nonetheless, run-away inequality of global wealth and resources, and climate change, are things that will drastically effect all of us, specially those in lgbt communities already struggling for equality. The right don't give a crap, and the left seem incapable of winning elections.

 

[Lexicus]

Portraying lgbtq issue advocacy as somehow incompatible with left positions on economics seems silly to me.

The left "can't win elections" (I think you're overstating this point but w.e) for two major reasons:
1) the political systems of the advanced countries are controlled structurally and completely by the perennial sworn enemy of the left, which is organized rich people
2) as other people ITT have already noted the mainstream parties of the left are not really left anymore on economic issues. Part of that is because of 1), when you are wedded to politics as a profession and politics as a profession depends so thoroughly on the patronage of rich people (again, sworn enemies of the left forever), you aren't going to think that leftism is very useful or good