XSI wrote:
Right wing politics focus more on tradition and self-sufficiency(Whether individual or per family/community). You can't be self-sufficient in a city, there just isn't the land or resources for it. So right wing ideologies are more common in rural areas and smaller towns.
Left wing politics are more focused on collectivism by force of numbers. Which is easier to accept when you're in a place with a lot of people. If you have no choice but to rely on other people for everything in your life and there is no space or resources to be self-sufficient, then social pressure will naturally make many people accept the view in that area for their own good.
This is interesting, because my experience with social conservatism has been that it's very "fit in or fuck off" in that Australian sense. Collectivist, conformist and anti-individualist. The social pressure you describe leftism as having is defining of my experience with social conservativism, and well-established on sites like 4chan where people who go against the values of the majority face severe social repercussions. Not just the posters who usually have limited exposure due to the anonymity, but anyone who has caught the eye of the site and whose threads gain traction.
From my experience I agree with the emphasis placed on "self-sufficiency", but you present it as living off the land in a libertarian or isolationist way which doesn't represent what I've seen in which traditional employment (e.g. wageslavery) and doing your fair share (which often amounts to not much, but only needs to be holding a "real" job) are critical and failure to do so is extremely shameful.
The same problems you have with leftism are the reasons I hate conservatives.
XSI wrote:Somewhat recently people(Mainly corporate and financial organisation related) became aware of this and began to wield that social pressure as a weapon to try to shape the activist movements into ones that are less harmful to their interests(Even into ones that they could actively profit off), and to aim them at parts of society that they do not consider useful and would rather see less powerful. This is not just a left wing problem either.
I agree with this. Woke capitalism is an example of it. The overton window is a related concept. Fierce debate is provoked within safe boundaries to keep people distracted by things that don't threaten the real interests of the people in power.
Trump is a great example of a grifter on the right taking advantage of the discontent of stupid people for his own gain and the gain of other wealthy people without doing anything to meaningfully improve their lives.
Stickymayhem wrote:Horza wrote:Stickymayhem wrote:cacogen wrote:>Big cities are often very left-wing
And how do you explain that?
Exposure to diversity breeds tolerance. If you work with many races, lifestyles and so on, you'll begin to tolerate them.
This post is like the textual form of falling down some stairs and hitting every step with my head.
regretfully i was highposting
reading it back it's all correct though i am physically incapable of being wrong about anything
So XSI was saying how the majority of academics are either leftist or pretending to be leftist because universities and many jobs that require a university education are in big cities which are often very left-wing. He was using this to dismiss the idea that the majority of academics are leftist because academia requires intelligence.
He didn't explain why cities were very left-wing, though. So I wanted to know why he thought that was, because to me it's because the higher cost of living requires higher paying jobs which usually require higher levels of academic achievement which requires higher levels of intelligence. I believe being right-wing is for cruel, dishonest cheaters and people who lack the intelligence necessary to deal with the complexity of the world.
But according to you it's because diversity breeds tolerance and something about being retards who don't read real journalism and according to him it's because you can't be self-sufficient in a city which means reliance on other people which necessitates conformity to the overwhelming social view.
I've never lived in a big city and my experiences in them have been limited so I can't verify either of these things but I will say though that growing up in a small town there was still plenty of diversity and not a lot of tolerance, and as I said in my replies to XSI there was no lack of social pressure, collectivism or a lack of real self-sufficiency.
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.
If I were one of your internet debate opponents in this thread I would put this in my signature.
" liberals. Don't get me started on "in the leftist commune im gonna be leading theory discussion on some days, and making clothes from scraps and lattes as needed 
