[Discussion] Police, White Nationalists, and the Rise of Fascism

Great post, Stengah.

Ok. No. I’m not suggesting that you engage with your own personal Chuck in the same way that I do. I don’t believe in one-size-fits-all strategies. All I’m suggesting is that people contain multitudes. You can’t paint every conservative with the same broad brush.

And now I’m repeating myself, which is extra frustrating, because it tells me that you’re not actually considering the ideas I’m putting forth. So I guess I’ll continue to repeat my myself…

As I stated in a previous post, I can’t really talk politics with my uncle, because he gets angry when I disagree with him. His anger eventually turns to belligerence, and that’s something that this dude right here can’t abide. It contrast, Chuck chooses to treat me with dignity despite the fact that we disagree. I have chosen to always treat Chuck with dignity, so long as he doesn’t get out of pocket with me. So far, Chuck has always behaved like a gentleman towards me, even when he was clearly frustrated with my points of view. If any of y’all in this thread cannot perceive the value in treating another person with dignity, despite how vehemently you disagree with their points of view, then I truly feel sorry for you.

If y’all are incapable of maintaining a sense of respect for folks who you disagree with, then I would discourage you from engaging with these people. You’re not cut out for the task. I encourage you to explore new ways of interacting with conservatives in a healthy manner. But please don’t attempt this if you’re incapable of recognizing the worth and dignity inherent in all people.

RawkGWJ wrote:

If any of y’all in this thread cannot perceive the value in treating another person with dignity, despite how vehemently you disagree with their points of view, then I truly feel sorry for you.

If y’all are incapable of maintaining a sense of respect for folks who you disagree with, then I would discourage you from engaging with these people. You’re not cut out for the task. I encourage you to explore new ways of interacting with conservatives in a healthy manner. But please don’t attempt this if you’re incapable of recognizing the worth and dignity inherent in all people.

It's just AMAZING how you endlessly and consistently advocate treating with dignity (an oft-repeated word in your posts) the very people who refuse to try to see the dignity in others not like them. Who revel in the cruelties the state can apply. People who want others dehumanized, thrown into concentration camps and worse, in your view, must always be treated with patience, fair-mindedness, and dignity despite what they inflict on others. And you're the mark, the patsy, the Charlie Brown chasing the football. Meet me in the middle, says the unjust man, and you're *just* the man to do it. It's not even quixotic, because there's a certain poetic nobility in that. This is reaching out to fascists and then sneering at those of us trying in vain to warn you.

RawkGWJ wrote:

Ok. No. I’m not suggesting that you engage with your own personal Chuck in the same way that I do. I don’t believe in one-size-fits-all strategies. All I’m suggesting is that people contain multitudes. You can’t paint every conservative with the same broad brush.

And now I’m repeating myself, which is extra frustrating, because it tells me that you’re not actually considering the ideas I’m putting forth. So I guess I’ll continue to repeat my myself…

As I stated in a previous post, I can’t really talk politics with my uncle, because he gets angry when I disagree with him. His anger eventually turns to belligerence, and that’s something that this dude right here can’t abide. It contrast, Chuck chooses to treat me with dignity despite the fact that we disagree. I have chosen to always treat Chuck with dignity, so long as he doesn’t get out of pocket with me. So far, Chuck has always behaved like a gentleman towards me, even when he was clearly frustrated with my points of view. If any of y’all in this thread cannot perceive the value in treating another person with dignity, despite how vehemently you disagree with their points of view, then I truly feel sorry for you.

If y’all are incapable of maintaining a sense of respect for folks who you disagree with, then I would discourage you from engaging with these people. You’re not cut out for the task. I encourage you to explore new ways of interacting with conservatives in a healthy manner. But please don’t attempt this if you’re incapable of recognizing the worth and dignity inherent in all people.

Oh, I considered what you put forth, I just disagree wholeheartedly. I'm perfectly capable of respecting those I disagree with, at least on other subjects. On the subject of Trump and his fascist followers I refuse to do so, and that's not a weakness or failure of character. To do otherwise sends the signal (to them and more importantly to those they would victimize) that I would be open to finding a compromise. Again, perfectly doable on other matters, but Trumpists aren't the kind of conservatives who just disagree on tax rates or how to fund social programs. They want us to compromise on how many black people we let cops murder, how many refugee children we should separate from their families to keep in cages, and what kinds of discrimination can they freely practice against lgbtq people. There can be no compromise on those, as "none" is not an answer they'll accept. Supporting Trump today means they support those things, and there's no weaseling out if it by claiming ignorance, not after 4 long years of examples. If those were dealbreakers for them, they wouldn't still be Trump supporters, and if those aren't dealbreakers, they're not deserving of our respect. You are free to give them yours, and I'm not saying you're wrong for choosing to to do so, but don't try to chide those that choose differently.

And before it's suggested, I am not saying that because they don't deserve respect that they don't deserve the very rights they seek to strip from others. Everyone deserves those, even people I don't respect.

Edit - I really want to stress that I don't think you're wrong for choosing to treat Chuck with respect, but while you're recognizing his dignity, don't forget all the people whose dignity isn't recognized by those he supports.

Natus wrote:

It's just AMAZING how you endlessly and consistently advocate treating with dignity (an oft-repeated word in your posts) the very people who refuse to try to see the dignity in others not like them. Who revel in the cruelties the state can apply. People who want others dehumanized, thrown into concentration camps and worse, in your view, must always be treated with patience, fair-mindedness, and dignity despite what they inflict on others.

I think we've circled back around to the "not all Republicans" part of the conversation again.

Voting for someone who doesn't believe in dignity for all people does NOT mean that you don't believe in dignity for all people. There are plenty of people who think that a vote for a Democrat means a vote for abortion, which means that you are literally an advocate for murder (in their eyes).

You can buy into parts of the system without buying the whole thing, and you can support the system not because you in any way shape or form advocate what they're trying to do, but because you legitimately think the alternative is worse.

In general I have extremely low levels of sympathy for these people. I don't like what they're enabling. I fight against it when I can. And a vast majority of them DO want exactly what the Party of TrumpTM is advocating for. Those people can, for all I'm concerned, die in a fire. But painting every single person who votes Republican with the broad brush of "evil" is a bit of a stretch.

Just some food for thought:

  • Wilhelm was a commandant in the SS. He wore the armband, hunted down Jews and gypsies and LGBTQ folks and ruthlessly persecuted them. Wilhelm was a Nazi.
  • Hans was a middle-aged businessman in Munich. He didn't go in for all the propaganda and wasn't particularly supportive of going to war, but he did think Germany should be for Germans and generally agreed with the nationalist fervor of Hitler and his party, generally thought they were doing the right thing, and voted for them. Hans was a Nazi.
  • Franz was a private in the German army. He was drafted late in the war. He didn't much care for politics and generally thought that both sides were the same as he didn't see much difference in how politics affected him. Franz wasn't a Nazi, but he was willfully ignorant and his complacency was a contributor to the party's rise to power.
  • Otto was also a private in the German army. He was drafted early in the war. He had voted against the Nazis and even as nationalist fervor and xenophobia took hold of the nation he had been supportive of non-ethnically-German folks. He stopped short of protests and smuggling people out of the nation as he was afraid of painting a target on his family. While serving in the army, he made what efforts he could to avoid firing on Allied troops. Otto was not a Nazi. Arguments can be made for and against him being a "collaborator".

Running out of steam. Just some thoughts on how while there's certainly a sliding scale of culpability, it didn't take being a full-blown jackbooted tattooed thug to qualify as a Nazi.

Keldar wrote:
Natus wrote:

It's just AMAZING how you endlessly and consistently advocate treating with dignity (an oft-repeated word in your posts) the very people who refuse to try to see the dignity in others not like them. Who revel in the cruelties the state can apply. People who want others dehumanized, thrown into concentration camps and worse, in your view, must always be treated with patience, fair-mindedness, and dignity despite what they inflict on others.

I think we've circled back around to the "not all Republicans" part of the conversation again.

Voting for someone who doesn't believe in dignity for all people does NOT mean that you don't believe in dignity for all people.

And here we come to the part where I perhaps repeat myself in saying that while not every MAGA may be a Nazi, they are certainly comfortable with authoritarianism, fascism, and Nazi iconography. So I think you're splitting hairs, with all due respect. The Trump supporter who's not outraged by "Camp Auschwitz" t-shirts is different from those who wear them exactly how? They won't end pulling the trigger at the mass graves, they'll just watch?

Keldar wrote:

There are plenty of people who think that a vote for a Democrat means a vote for abortion, which means that you are literally an advocate for murder (in their eyes).

I don't care what Republicans think.

Keldar wrote:

You can buy into parts of the system without buying the whole thing, and you can support the system not because you in any way shape or form advocate what they're trying to do, but because you legitimately think the alternative is worse.

Absolutely not. Here you are joining Rawk in absolving Trumpists from their own culpability. I don't care why anyone's a Trumpist, I care that they are. My mother is anti-anti Trump from the Left. I don't care what tortured path brought her there or what her justification is.

Keldar wrote:

In general I have extremely low levels of sympathy for these people. I don't like what they're enabling. I fight against it when I can. And a vast majority of them DO want exactly what the Party of TrumpTM is advocating for. Those people can, for all I'm concerned, die in a fire. But painting every single person who votes Republican with the broad brush of "evil" is a bit of a stretch.

I didn't write "evil." But yes, if you voted Republican from the rise of Trump on--and it was bad enough before-hand--you're tarred with that distinction, as well you should be.

There's a lot of talk about whether these people deserve to be treated with respect.

Personally, I find this to be almost irrelevant. The question I worry about is what course of action can change the direction this country is headed in when we have such a huge chunk of the population eager for a Republican fascist state. Sadly, right now I'm having a hard time seeing a different end result whether we angrily denounce these people or try to sway them and meet them in the middle. It feels like we’re screwed either way.

Trump Supporters at Iowa Rally See 'Civil War Coming,' Say He Will 'Save the World'

"They're establishment. They don't care about the American people because they're in their elite little tower," she said. "So we're just sick of it, you know, and we're not going to take it anymore. I see a civil war coming. I do. I see civil war coming."

Rawk and others who have good friends who support Trump, what do they think about this? Would they side with these Iowan Trump supporters if a civil war actually happened? If not, why do they support Trump at all?

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Trump Supporters at Iowa Rally See 'Civil War Coming,' Say He Will 'Save the World'

"They're establishment. They don't care about the American people because they're in their elite little tower," she said. "So we're just sick of it, you know, and we're not going to take it anymore. I see a civil war coming. I do. I see civil war coming."

Rawk and others who have good friends who support Trump, what do they think about this? Would they side with these Iowan Trump supporters if a civil war actually happened? If not, why do they support Trump at all?

You’ll probably be offended by how feel about this. I’m apologizing in advance for hurting your feelings. I’m sorry.

The person who made that statement is thinking along very similar lines to to how Stengah, Natus, and apparently C Mao is thinking, only their point of view is from the right. The person quoted wants a civil war to happen, as do some who post in this thread. The idea of a civil war is much easier to understand and accept than the idea that a person who you vehemently disagree with is a human being worthy of dignity.

The thing is… Cognitive dissonance is a bitch. If you can’t accept how someone who voted for Trump can be worthy of the most basic human rights, then you are suffering from a very dangerous form of cognitive dissonance.

If you believe that every Trump voter is a monster, you are engaging in dehumanizing behavior.

Most Trump voters aren't Wilhelms, they're Hans'es. Wilhelm was a monster. Hans supported monsters.

This is open to everyone.

Fill in the blank

__________ conservatives are deserving of basic human rights.

No
Some
Many
Most
All

All humans (conservative, liberal, hateful racist, hippie-dippy free love type, even people who chew loudly with their mouth open while sitting behind me in a movie theater) are deserving of basic human rights.

Even monsters like Wilhelm.

Conservatives are deserving of the same human rights they give the people they hate.

OG_slinger wrote:

Conservatives are deserving of the same human rights they give the people they hate.

That’s a cop out. I challenge you to take a stand and answer the question.

RawkGWJ wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Trump Supporters at Iowa Rally See 'Civil War Coming,' Say He Will 'Save the World'

"They're establishment. They don't care about the American people because they're in their elite little tower," she said. "So we're just sick of it, you know, and we're not going to take it anymore. I see a civil war coming. I do. I see civil war coming."

Rawk and others who have good friends who support Trump, what do they think about this? Would they side with these Iowan Trump supporters if a civil war actually happened? If not, why do they support Trump at all?

You’ll probably be offended by how feel about this. I’m apologizing in advance for hurting your feelings. I’m sorry.

The person who made that statement is thinking along very similar lines to to how Stengah, Natus, and apparently C Mao is thinking, only their point of view is from the right. The person quoted wants a civil war to happen, as do some who post in this thread. The idea of a civil war is much easier to understand and accept than the idea that a person who you vehemently disagree with is a human being worthy of dignity.

The thing is… Cognitive dissonance is a bitch. If you can’t accept how someone who voted for Trump can be worthy of the most basic human rights, then you are suffering from a very dangerous form of cognitive dissonance.

If you believe that every Trump voter is a monster, you are engaging in dehumanizing behavior.

I sympathize with a lot of what you are saying, Rawk. And I totally agree they are deserving of every right given to every American under the Constitution. But I never said I wanted a civil war, and to be clear I don't. I will not be the one to fire the first shot. But if it happens, all I'm asking is, which side will a Trump supporter who claims not to be a Nazi, or a white supremacist, stand on? Because the only ones on Trump's side in a civil war will be those two types of people.

I am so confused by this tread at this point.

I would say most conservatives in the US have basic human rights assuming we us the US definition where healthcare is not a right. Sure some conservatives are women or minorities or poor or what have you and they may or may not have basic rights based on their location.

What bothers me with this is the focus on a few good individuals and their willingness to personally talk to other on the "other side" as right now I think everyone has enough crap going on without a group doing an insurrection and looking for violence.

Based on my little corner of the US the conservative plan is always "they are coming to get you". With the they being swapped out for whatever is currently the big topic, the gays, the libs, the schools, the doctors, and so on. The argument is always the same and the response is always the same. "In order to protect my gun/freedom of speech/ America F yeah rights we must remove the rights of this other group.

Right now we are trying to limit voting rights to ensure that all voting rights are fair. Are they limiting the voting rights of the old white people or the minorities? I bet you all know the answer. We have all seen this song and dance before.

So while I know a number of my republican representatives know this is crap we still must look to actions and words. When the crazy GQP people and representatives all start screaming gibberish that is easily disproven how many normal GOP members stand up and say, "stop that is wrong"? So far only a handful, most just stand silently behind the crazies. Then we get the articles that an anonymous survey shows most of them don't agree with or know all of the talking points are false. Yet they all still say nothing openly.

At this point GOP, GQP and MAGA members are kind of like cops. I know there are some good apples in there but unless I personally know who they are I am going to assume they may just try to kill me or take my rights away illegally because I am the enemy/in the way.

I wish you luck with bringing your friend fox feedback loop. I miss the days when the biggest issue I had with conservatives in my group was tax rates. At this point I am just filtering people out of my life if they open the conspiracy theory door.

Minor personal complaint: I must have a GQP face as the number of times some random white guy will just start talking to me in a store about the libs/slur of your choice are all (some conspiracy nonsense) is getting unsettling. Can we go back to it being church members that want to reassure me everything will be alright and that I am always welcome at their church? While that was annoying that at least probably come from a good place.

RawkGWJ wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

Conservatives are deserving of the same human rights they give the people they hate.

That’s a cop out. I challenge you to take a stand and answer the question.

Why don't you ask your friend that same question about immigrants, gay people, Democrats, college professors, non-Christians, etc. and get back to us with his answers?

Since he's such a good guy that donates to a prison education charity, why not ask him to explain why so many of the prisoners he helps are Black. Does he think it's because America is a racist ass country with a racist ass law enforcement and legal system or does he just think that Black people are naturally more violent and inclined to crime?

And I'm still waiting to hear how he viewed January 6th: a bunch of patriots rightfully expressing their First Amendment rights to protest *waves hands* or does he see that it was a violent assault on the very foundation of our democracy that very nearly succeeded?

How he (and others like him) deserve to be treated depends entirely on how he answers those questions because his answers tell me what rights he thinks people like me deserve.

I don't think anyone here is calling for a civil war. But we recognize that conservative are, that they've already committed acts of political violence, attempted to overthrow our democracy, and are busy changing laws and suppressing votes so the next time they try to overthrow our democracy it'll be nice and legal.

As the great Maya Angelou said, "When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."

OG_slinger wrote:
RawkGWJ wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

Conservatives are deserving of the same human rights they give the people they hate.

That’s a cop out. I challenge you to take a stand and answer the question.

Why don't you ask your friend that same question about immigrants, gay people, Democrats, college professors, non-Christians, etc. and get back to us with his answers?

Since he's such a good guy that donates to a prison education charity, why not ask him to explain why so many of the prisoners he helps are Black. Does he think it's because America is a racist ass country with a racist ass law enforcement and legal system or does he just think that Black people are naturally more violent and inclined to crime?

And I'm still waiting to hear how he viewed January 6th: a bunch of patriots rightfully expressing their First Amendment rights to protest *waves hands* or does he see that it was a violent assault on the very foundation of our democracy that very nearly succeeded?

How he (and others like him) deserve to be treated depends entirely on how he answers those questions because his answers tell me what rights he thinks people like me deserve.

I don't think anyone here is calling for a civil war. But we recognize that conservative are, that they've already committed acts of political violence, attempted to overthrow our democracy, and are busy changing laws and suppressing votes so the next time they try to overthrow our democracy it'll be nice and legal.

As the great Maya Angelou said, "When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."

I’m getting the feeling that the reason you won’t honestly answer the question is because you’re conflicted and you’re incredibly uncomfortable with your gut reaction. At this point I’m not expecting you to give your answer here.

But please take some time to mull this over in private. I think it’s an important question for everyone to consider.

RawkGWJ wrote:

But please take some time to mull this over in private. I think it’s an important question for everyone to consider.

What makes you think I haven't been pondering this sh*t since Trump rode the escalator down six years ago?

Stealthpizza wrote:

Minor personal complaint: I must have a GQP face as the number of times some random white guy will just start talking to me in a store about the libs/slur of your choice are all (some conspiracy nonsense) is getting unsettling. Can we go back to it being church members that want to reassure me everything will be alright and that I am always welcome at their church? While that was annoying that at least probably come from a good place.

Actually both of those groups are about the same right now. The evangelical GQP

RawkGWJ wrote:

The person who made that statement is thinking along very similar lines to to how Stengah, Natus, and apparently C Mao is thinking, only their point of view is from the right. The person quoted wants a civil war to happen, as do some who post in this thread. The idea of a civil war is much easier to understand and accept than the idea that a person who you vehemently disagree with is a human being worthy of dignity.

That's utter BS. None of the three of us have said they want a civil war. The Left not only doesn't want one, they think it's a right-wing fever dream. It's Chuck the Saintly Trumpist and his ilk who are buying more weapons and yearning for first shot at Fort Sumter or the modern equivalent.

RawkGWJ wrote:

The thing is… Cognitive dissonance is a bitch. If you can’t accept how someone who voted for Trump can be worthy of the most basic human rights, then you are suffering from a very dangerous form of cognitive dissonance.

As for treating conservatives well, what the hell do you think progressive politics are? The MAGA choads you weep over want to drop us from helicopters, and we want to give them universal health care, universal pre-K, a fair minimum wage, water and land that hasn't been poisoned by corporations, and a way of tackling the climate crisis. Do you see how batsh*t insane your question is? MAGA wants a nation-wide Night of the Long Knives + Kristallnacht, and the Dems are staying up all night worrying how we can get an infrastructure bill passed. We're operating in two different universes.

There's a difference between how people should be treated by the government under the law, and how much respect, dignity, or compassion they should be shown for having disgusting and abhorrent viewpoints by regular people in everyday situations. Otherwise they will think it's OK to be awful and vote for other awful people.

Mixolyde wrote:

There's a difference between how people should be treated by the government under the law, and how much respect, dignity, or compassion they should be shown for having disgusting and abhorrent viewpoints by regular people in everyday situations. Otherwise they will think it's OK to be awful and vote for other awful people.

In my experience being sh*tty to people for holding abhorrent viewpoints only drives them deeper into those beliefs. It’s easier for them to demonize their opponents when the opponents feed into the demonization. This thread is a pretty good example of how that works.

RawkGWJ wrote:

This is open to everyone.

Fill in the blank

__________ conservatives are deserving of basic human rights.

No
Some
Many
Most
All

Mods have been keeping an eye on this thread because it's getting heated and treading close to personal attack territory, and sometimes you folks sort yourselves out just fine.

I don't think this is a fair question because, for one, it's a leading question without enough specificity to make it able to be argued that any of the answers unproblematic in some way? And two, it's an open invitation to question one another's characters, which this thread already has enough of, is off-topic, and treads ever closer to personal attack territory?

There is a ramping up of personal emotion here and people are not impartial.

Also, he did answer your question, you just didn't like the answer. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read that as "Conservatives deserve the same human rights as everyone else... until they start impeding on someone else's basic human rights." How is that a cop-out or, furthermore, a dishonest answer? That kind of retort is unfair and feels like it's coming from a place of defensiveness.

If there's a little blood in the water, too many among us become sharks, so I can see the reason for the defensiveness. I think it makes things complicated when reasonable exchanges are intermixed with barbed and pointed questions about one another's character and change the tone of the discussion, rendering any constructive exchange signals lost in the noise.

People dropping in to do drive by's to egg on people who are in an exchange but aren't contributing anything constructive to the conversation are exacerbating an already delicate topic, and I would encourage those of you who habitually do this to consider that you're the opposite of helping to assist in maintaining a respectful discourse.

Edit: I accidentally deleted one comment, so I deleted both so as not to appear partial and avoid pm's asking about fair treatment.

ruhk wrote:
Mixolyde wrote:

There's a difference between how people should be treated by the government under the law, and how much respect, dignity, or compassion they should be shown for having disgusting and abhorrent viewpoints by regular people in everyday situations. Otherwise they will think it's OK to be awful and vote for other awful people.

In my experience being sh*tty to people for holding abhorrent viewpoints only drives them deeper into those beliefs. It’s easier for them to demonize their opponents when the opponents feed into the demonization. This thread is a pretty good example of how that works.

Treating them like it's okay to be awful also emboldens them, so damned if you do...

And anyway, we can worry about hurting the bigots feelings after we make white crime illegal again and save Democracy.

“You want to drink the blood of babies!”
“That’s pants-on-head crazy and and you’re a loon for thinking it.”
“Well now I’m just going to think it harder, and you’re a dick besides!”
??

Mixolyde wrote:

There's a difference between how people should be treated by the government under the law, and how much respect, dignity, or compassion they should be shown for having disgusting and abhorrent viewpoints by regular people in everyday situations. Otherwise they will think it's OK to be awful and vote for other awful people.

ruhk wrote:

In my experience being sh*tty to people for holding abhorrent viewpoints only drives them deeper into those beliefs. It’s easier for them to demonize their opponents when the opponents feed into the demonization. This thread is a pretty good example of how that works.

Are we really having this argument again after having the above talking points debunked SO many times during the last five years?

IMAGE(https://images.dailykos.com/images/574802/story_image/1350.png?1533664371)

ruhk wrote:
Mixolyde wrote:

There's a difference between how people should be treated by the government under the law, and how much respect, dignity, or compassion they should be shown for having disgusting and abhorrent viewpoints by regular people in everyday situations. Otherwise they will think it's OK to be awful and vote for other awful people.

In my experience being sh*tty to people for holding abhorrent viewpoints only drives them deeper into those beliefs. It’s easier for them to demonize their opponents when the opponents feed into the demonization. This thread is a pretty good example of how that works.

I'm curious: What's the solution, then?
I'm not going to be not-sh*tty to someone with abhorrent viewpoints?

Skip to paragraph 3 onward re: the Pardox of Tolerance, surely this has come up many times in this thread already.

If we're at a place where the viewpoints are already abhorrent...bye.
I'm so far off the left of the spectrum I'm off the map, 9/10's of a leftist stereotype down to the pronouns. I've been spat at, glared at, space invaded, told I'm making poor choices or I'm a joke, etc... (most assume I'm an extremely butch lesbian, I think). I don't question their humanity but the ones that feel the need to approach me unprompted like this sure have opinions about the value of mine.

Sure, not EVERY conservative will go to those extremes. However I don't see the value in "not all conservatives" the people who still choose to affilite with the ones that do. If they're not openly in support of it, maybe they are privately, who knows. If they don't privately, maybe they disagree, but not enough to separate themselves from the ones that are extreme. There's a million excuses we could come up with here but I'm not sure any of them matter to me, I just know that there are certain behaviors and attitudes that make me avoid certain people and areas as a personal safety concern. (Churches, protests, etc).

It's the association they're clinging to the conceit that they're the party of traditional values that I feel is the issue. I think many live under the delusion that they're not complicit in the role that conservatism plays in preserving a fascist white patriarchical corpratoctracy and that they're not in a position to salvage a reputation that has been consistently earned by the worst actors in the group they choose to associate with.

Aaaaand still topical. Matt Bors 4ever! But last one, I promise!

IMAGE(https://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/comics-matt-bors-51-5fb259ec35528__700.jpg)