This is true. We used to have relatively sane Republicans here in New York. I didn’t mind belonging to the party of George Pataki and Michael Bloomberg.
“I suppose it’s possible the “despise Trump but happy Hillary lost” comes from some discernment. You explain WHY you’re happy Trump won, and WHICH anti-Hillary meme made you so opposed to her. Do that, and list examples of your prejudices; then we can discuss your prejudice and/or bigotry.”
So, in your view, anyone not supporting Hillary needs to discuss their bigotry/prejudice? Sounds rather bigoted and prejudicial to me.
There’s a new thread about hating Hillary in Elections; I hope you’ll discuss your own bigotry, if any, against Hillary there. So far the pro-Hillary crowd has contributed “misogny” and “shrill.” One anti-Hillaryist contributed the “takes a village crap” and … GUNS!!
I don’t read fake news, as I don’t get my news from social media. I’m an old-school RSS user. As “memes,” I’m also relatively old-school and don’t regard silly cartoons as memes, unless they actually do become memes.
I don’t think I’m duped; neither of them were good candidates, so I didn’t vote for either one of them. Frankly, anyone who voted for either of them I could call duped, but that’s not a fair word to use, because humans have very different political philosophies that I am capable of accepting, even if I happen to think that they’re wrong.
I never stated that I’m happy the Trump won; I only stated that I’m happy Hillary lost. I would have much preferred my candidate to win.
I guess that unlike you, I’m capable of seeing the world in finer granularity than “black” or “white.”
Agree with TokyoBayer. As an expat since 1980, (the first 14 years in Japan), my reason for going abroad was to see something different, plus the lack of job opportunities at home. I can’t say that I met anyone was actively disliked their home country, although inevitably you get a new perspective on your home turf and there are many things about my native country that could stand improvement. In my experience you tend to find that expats fall into various categories, which tend to be similar everywhere but the proportions vary. However, of the three countries I have experienced, not one of them was a haven for retirees.
Expats also differ according to how long they are away. I would say that the five year mark represented a subtle but significant shift to “I’ll be here longer”. It is a different matter for a retiree, who is usually committed from the start. People who were around for less than a year or two were just tourists, not expats, unless they were businessmen on a foreign posting.
People are a product of their times.
HERE is a good article on Duck Dynasties Phil Robertson and why black people support him even though many black activists (well actually it was more white liberals) hated his comments on how blacks years ago were happy and singing as they left the cotton fields.
Back years ago in many places blacks and whites seldom mixed and Asians and others even more rarely. Gays were seen as an oddity. Even today people pretty much self segregate. So yes, they might have a different view of each other.
So I wouldnt call them “bigoted”. Just a product of their time. They are old and set in their ways but basically harmless. Obama even handwaved away some older friends and relatives un-PC views with “thats just them” and didnt make a big deal out of it.
You need to accept it, look past it, and move on.
I always thought people were retiring to those areas because they were cheap. Like its several million dollars for a house by a beach in the US but cheap in places like central america.
Bullshit. I’m 57. I grew up in a time when all kinds of bigotry were openly expressed and condoned.
But I didn’t arrive in 2019 via a time machine. I lived through the sixties, the seventies, the eighties, the nineties, and the twenty-first century. I’m a product of all of those times. I don’t still hold on to stupid beliefs just because I learned them fifty years ago.
Anyone who’s still a bigot in 2019 has chosen to be a bigot. They had every opportunity and plenty of encouragement to abandon their childhood bigotry during the course of their lifetime. But they chose to cling to it.
Phil Robertson isn’t a product of his times; he’s an asshole who got older without getting better.
You’re using the word “prejudice” all wrong for some of those. For example, it’s not prejudiced to be intolerant of (one assumes, proven) criminals. Ditto proven welfare abusers. If you have a well-defined reasoned backing to your intolerance, or personal experience, it’s just judgement, not* pre*-judgement.
Well said!
This is phrased as though you disagree that FoxNews, Washington Times, etc. (not social media) are Fake News.
You don’t name your candidate — Gary Johnson? (Did I guess right?) — but the real election was between TWO people, not three or more. If you write “I’m happy Hillary lost” without allowing the implication “I prefer Trump to Hillary” then you are simply not using language in a way that promotes rational discourse.
I see shades of gray just fine. If your take on Hillary vs Trump is “They’re both darkish shades of Gray; therefore same-same” then it is you that needs to improve your understanding of shades of gray.
Well Phil is 73. If he was really a bigot he would not have embraced and loved his 2 black grandchildren.
I don’t know or care whether they are or not. I don’t read either of them.
That’s correct. I stand by my use of language, which is entirely rational. I’m sorry that Trump won. I’m glad Hillary didn’t. There’s no contradiction there.
I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils. Stupid people that abide by the two-party system are why we have a two-party system. This is IMHO, so I can’t outright call you an idiot for perpetrating a corrupt system, but I can imply it strongly by stating that you fail to see why you are the problem with this country. Not immigrants, not gays, not the police, but you, septimus are wholly responsible for your poor voting habits.
They’re definitely not the same, and I never implied that. You’re continuing to infer it, though, because you’re willfully blind to other shades. You’re the one making this a Hillary/Trump, binary, black and white discussion.
You think consistency and logic are the hallmark of bigots? Let’s ask any pro-life politician who’s paid for an abortion…
Wait, so someone who feels that strongly about “sexual unnaturalness” moved to Thailand?
I lived overseas for awhile. I think the valid point is that people who isolate themselves from their original society, without the intention to (largely) blend into a new one (a measure which might distinguish ‘expat’ from ‘immigrant’) have a greater tendency to be eccentric. It doesn’t mean every American (for example) living overseas is that way. IME for example financial industry Americans living in HK or London aren’t any different than those in NY. Nor necessarily true of everyone farther from the beaten path. But it’s a tendency I think. Also tends to be true of people who move to ‘end of the road’ remote places in the US they aren’t from. But again a tendency not everybody. And the eccentricity isn’t necessarily prejudicial racial, ethnic, religious group views either.
And the word ‘bigot’ which is one of those suffering a serious crisis in definition. Someone might quote what the ‘bigot’ says and I’d instantly agree to apply the epithet. But nowadays if somebody just says somebody else is a ‘bigot’ without background there’s a lot less common idea of what that actually means, and how uniformly it’s applied among groups.
No, it’s still bullshit. Lots of bigots make mental exceptions for individuals they know while still being a bigot to everyone else. When you think things like “they’re one of the good ones” it means you think most of them are bad ones.
I love how people like you think that if you’re nice to at least 1 non-white person then that is all the proof you need that you’re not racist.
I’m not racist, I have a black person in my family and we haven’t lynched them yet or anything!
It’s almost like you don’t really understand what racism and bigotry really are.
I didn’t know who Phil Robertson was till clicking the link. Which told me he’s the Duck Dynasty guy, but even that only gives me a vague idea who he actually is. Which is just to say, I’ve no idea nor any interest in whether he’s a ‘bigot’.
But I again I think the implication of your last sentence, that there’s any consensus now ‘what racism and bigotry really are’, isn’t true IME. Everyone is entitled to their view on that, but it now seems to vary very widely. In all kinds of ways, for example one way is political views not directly a matter of race which constructively amount to ‘bigotry’ to some people (but not others, whether they disagree with those politics or agree). Another pretty different aspect is whether you judge people based on their best or worst days, their actions or their words, etc. Again at risk of repetition, I’m not applying this to the Duck guy. If it happened on learning more about him (in which I have no interest), I agreed he was a ‘bigot’ it wouldn’t change my point in general.
Bigotry and racism are learned behaviors. Hopefully as a society, future generations will become poorer learners and more accepting of all people.