Shitlibs in deep red areas are more brazen, because they have the backing of powerful external forces that could crush their small red town. It's a flex.
They are also far nastier, wanting to ensure that everyone knows he is intellectually and morally superior to his redneck neighbors.
I just don’t think that’s true at all. There is no asymmetry here — in the rural red area I used to frequent the most (hence the one I know best), anyone with a Kamala poster would have been run out of town.
They would have received the exact inverse treatment this article depicted; people assume you hate the Democrats by default, and the idea of your neighbor voting for Kamala would be unthinkable.
As it happens, I’m a moderate conservative with no love for the Democratic Party. It’s not like I ever felt repulsed by these towns and their inhabitants. Nevertheless they do exist, and the culture is just as repressive and hostile to their political enemies as the blue city monoculture I’ve experienced in places like Portland, OR.
I live in one of the largest hard-red voting cities in the country and yet there are rainbow flags and IN THIS HOUSE signs all over the place and nothing happens. I went to a museum fundraiser the other night and there were both churchy people and men in makeup. It was fine. No one is running anyone out of town. I have never been anywhere, large or small, where progressives were afraid to wear their political and social beliefs on their sleeves or faced any real consequences for doing so (not that I'm arguing that they should).
In a large city? No, because by definition even the reddest large cities (Jacksonville, Phoenix, Dallas, Tucson, etc) vote ~40% or more for Democrats. Large cities are at most purple. You’re not describing a conservative area.
Yes, and many have commented elsewhere in this thread, myself included, that nowhere even in the country are liberals even close to as pressured to hide their views as conservatives are in the city, in the academy, and in most of the corporate world.
I think there is an asymmetry of one type or another, but not due to some delusion that Liberal Annie in Red Town USA thinks she can call on the state to crush the bigots. That type shares a similar contrarian, freak flag flying, yard art loving, political in-your-face mirror in the Trump House Guy who lives on some street in Seattle. There is a symmetry of this type of contrarian who likes to be seen as special and confront their neighbors.
The asymmetry is in the Kitten-equivalent in Red Tribe, USA. Kitten is not a Trump Guy who owns a Trump House and likes to piss off his hoity-toity neighbors. The liberal professional teacher, doctors, lawyers in Red territory are able to earn a respect of the populace despite their political positions. Maybe their Biden sign gets pulled up at least once an election cycle by good ol' boy teens out for a rip, but they don't share the same pressures as the presumed politics in Blue cultural spaces. Red tribe knows the teacher/doctor/lawyer is a bleeding heart liberal pansy, but has other axes to judge their value and contributions. Whereas in Kitten's type of case enough people presume you're A Good Person with all the implications that entails. The social pressure to confirm and conform is overwhelming and the costs more consistently applied.
I would not say Blue people in Red spaces don't face self-censor pressure, but they self-censor to a lesser degree. I believe there's some support of asymmetrical social pressures/conformity in social science research. Although people here likely know how much to trust social science.
Yes, this is all absolutely true. I meant to correct the widespread claim in this comment section, which is that an extreme fringe with violent tendencies only exists on the left, and that this is asymmetrical.
Whenever someone starts with "believe me" and ends with "So that thing you think is true just isn't real", I know I'm being gaslight.
The question is why it needs doing, and why you think it's going to work.
For example, it could just be a vested interest: The US bourgeois are under crushing pressure, left, right and center. But that's me talking out of my hat.
If we were real people sharing a cup of java, not internet ghosts, we'd be able to tell if the other was telling a story he honestly believed, and get to the assumptions, and be peaceable for Christian charity's sake; for the opportunity to learn and increase in understanding.
Thank you (and Mr. Kitten) for giving me some more to think about.
I’m not sure there’s anything I can do to convey my sincerity as just some guy on the internet. I’ve lived in blue areas, I’ve lived in red areas. I’m just trying to turn down the temperature by pointing out that everybody thinks their enemies are more hostile and more violent than they actually are.
98% of all Americans are willing to tolerate their neighbors. The 2% that don’t are both on the right and the left.
On the internet, no. Especially not gas-lighting the right. They are not, percentage-wise (even if including the Muslims and South Americans (predominantly Catholic), and that kid who shot 3 Antifa pedos; these are *not* the ones taking the gold, or even the silver, in the brutalize the political Other right now. Or historically. There's a one-way line from the anarcho-commies who slaughtered McKinley, through Alinski, to now.
In other words, having won the Days of Rage, infiltrated all our institutions under the aegis of openness, and mercy--literally weoponizing our trad charitable morality against ys--only to, once in a position of authority, become the stupidest, most tiresome tin-pot dictatorship imaginable.
In other words, all of the Blue-Skyers and possibly adjacent pals have a serious, serious trust problem that no amount of both-sides-ism is going to address.
Again, thank you for the courteous and informative reply.
I’m a conservative. I’m just trying to ensure that people see reality for what it actually is. The internet perverts and distorts the picture and teaches us to hate by focusing on the most extreme elements. That makes things worse for everybody. In real life, the political fringe elements are very rare.
All we can do is love our neighbors; love those that hate you. Mormons have already raised $250,000 for the family of the man who horrifically shot up an LDS church in Michigan. What could be more Christian than that?
Not sure I believe you: "frequently visiting" is not the same as living in, and being a part of.
If you've lived in deep red Oregon for years, and throw up some "In This House" pool-noodlery and a Kamala sign you're going to get mocked, yes. If you've got an I Castrate Kids For Narrative Points flag, you'll be avoided by anyone with kids. But you're still a neighbor. The Ordinary Decent Citizens will stop anyone trying it on.
But let a long-tme Portlander put up a Jesus Saves and a Trump sign, and if he's lucky a neighbor will just pull one of them down. If one of his neighbors, or just a passer-by, is part of the local Freicorps: they'll come at night to set them on fire, and burn half his garage with it.
In Good Liberal places speaking up *will* cost you your business and your career. Or worse. Ask Dr. Malone. Ask anyone who spoke up for sanity and human rights during the Covid Panic. So I do appreciate those with hostages to fortune who are afraid to, and can't escape.
But one reason for this is that all the ODCs in Portland are "Good Washingtonians." They're the ones who never speak up, never object, and will look the other way, until one day the nissei who couldn't pass, are rounded up and sent to Manzanar.
I used to live in a deep red city in Idaho, and I would spend a lot of time traveling to adjacent (even deeper red) rural areas in central, eastern, and southern Idaho. These are some of the most conservative areas in the country, so please believe me when I say I know what I’m talking about.
Anyway, this is exactly what I’m talking about in terms of fantasizing about people you don’t know. I was just in downtown Portland two months ago (I have family there), as it happens, and amidst all the pride flags and “In this house” signs I did spot a couple houses with Trump flags. I’m sure their leftist neighbors probably aren’t happy with them, but it’s still better than even odds that no one does or says anything confrontational.
In 2020 and 2021, during the height of the liberal overreach, speaking up would absolutely cost you socially and occupationally. I’m grateful that time period is over.
I understand the desire to believe the worst of your opponents — it’s just not the case that red areas have a code of neighborly ethics that makes them more moral and upright and tolerant of their outgroup. Everyone is just sort of muddling through and resenting those who don’t belong to the same tribe. It’s the same everywhere you go.
There are some horrible people on the left, but I think conservatives just don't see the horrible people on their own side. The horrible people (both sides) stand out because they are more vocal and more confrontational, but you don’t see the ones on your own side because they are not confrontational to you.
If wanted to be respectful to my political opponents, I wouldn't call them ‘shitlibs’ — but this is just a small example of disrespect. There are plenty of liberals who would be rude like this too, but most don’t. You just see the ones who stand out.
I've been around rural hillbillies throwing n bombs with abandon. They didn't have a fraction of the malice your average leftist has. Modern progressivism is a deeply evil religion that warps the minds of its adherents. Like Muslims, some can still be relatively nice people, but the underlying poison remains.
What? What external forces could I call on to crush the small red town of my uncle while the family is going on and on about eight wing political stuff?
Substack thought it was really important to show me this post, so I wandered down to the comments in the wild hope that it would be interesting and not the mirror-reflection of the angry conformity the author is complaining about. Oh well, maybe next time.
I live in a red village in a red state. People from blue states are pouring in building houses and raising prices as they flee the crime and high prices in their home states. They feel absolutely no compunction in trumpeting their views and trying to change the way things are. Whilst calling us violent and ignorant, they know deep down that our values do not allow us to exercise the kind of violence their ilk do and so absolutely open proclaim their righteousness and our deluded state.
I moved to a more conservative city, and as a conservative I came knowing I’d become part of the existing community and add to it. The leftists that come, always come complaining about how they’re here to make this place less racist and they need to find allies and stand up to the whatever it is that stands in the way of progress. They’re like a locust swarm.
"Do progressive-minded people in deep red areas feel the same need to hide from social reproach?"
I don't think so. I lived in South Carolina, the reddest of of red states, back in the '90s. The vast majority of my friends were extremely conservative and/or religious, and I was a bleeding-heart liberal. No one shunned me, no one wished me dead, no one cut me off from friendship because I had different views. I think most of them just regarded me as a bit nutty in some ways, maybe a bit naive. Very different from the anger and vitriol my blue-state liberal friends seem to have for conservatives, evangelical Christians, and Trump voters (or what they imagine those types of people would be like, which is heavily based on caricatures gleaned from movies and TV).
The 90s were a pretty different time. I grew up in a very red area and while some conservatives were really, really cruel towards liberals the temperature of everything was generally pretty low. Clinton wasn't a polarizing figure the way Trump is, even for people who disliked him.
His NAFTA policies sure were polarizing. But I get your drift. The "liberals" of the 90's would be "far right" now. I watch old videos of him and Hilary and chuckle at how that shtuff wouldn't fly at the DNC these days.
I don’t think this started until Trump. Only the hysterical pundit class was able to muster any enthusiasm for viciously going after Romney voters. Most people just didn’t have the visceral reaction to him that they did to Trump and his new generation of the GOP.
There were a handful of Tea Party guys and a smattering of leftist activist types who implicitly advocated for violence, but it was all an order of magnitude less than now.
People who say this probably weren’t particularly connected to politics prior to Trump. Liberals, particularly in their enclaves, have been like this my entire life of almost 40 years. It’s gotten more brazen with social media for sure but the left has always been insane with a veneer of wanting to physically harm those they disagree with.
Yeah there’s always been some. When I was young, idealistic, and very, very naive, I worked on Obama’s 2008 primary campaign. I recall going to my extremely liberal church in my hometown wearing an Obama t shirt and being accosted after the service by a super progressive lady for whom Obama was too conciliatory. I said I thought he could unite the country. She said “I don’t want unity with those people!” 😂
Edit: I forgot to add that she later showed up at the tiny Democratic caucus in her extremely rural village and proceeded to exasperate both the local chair person and my poor volunteer precinct captain with vexatious claims that the vote (which she lost) wasn’t conducted properly. They both thought she was completely nuts, she was acting so unhinged.
The left despised Reagan from the start. The treatment of Bork was awful and woke up a lot of Republicans. The left completely lost their s**t when W prevailed in the 2000 election.
Don’t forget Biden saying that black people would be back in chains if Mitt fucking Romney was elected president. Im not really a fan of Romney but anybody who genuinely believed that shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Yet tens of millions did.
Yes, I am going first. I decided a few years ago to come out more, both by challenging progressive complacency and by actively raising HBD etc talking points where relevant. But it's easier for me because I am a) self-employed and b) autistically low in agreeableness.
Go be the first, stop self-censoring. You’ll find out that there are others in your circle that feel the same way.
I lost half of my “friends” when I “came out” (I was not arrogant about it, just expressed my disagreement), it stung for a while but I feel better about myself and I grew closer with the ones who remained.
One advice: don’t get into long arguments. Much of the Left are fundamentalists who are not open to facts and logic that contradict their beliefs.
So there’s a term coined by Charlie Kirk for libs in red areas: “hicklib.” And yes, I’m in North Texas, and there’re many proud hicklibs. They aren’t closeted one bit and are more than happy to write me off as a total idiot for my conservatism.
I’ve probably missed out on job opportunities by writing under my real name. It normally doesn’t come up when I work because, like you, I don’t want politics to come between me and others. Oh well, the readers in my circle can look me up and get mad.
Covid was a moment when politics seriously broke up friendships. My lefty friends dumped me and thought I was spreading lethal misinformation about the virus by pointing out contradictions. It wasn’t mutual, and I wasn’t happy about it. I proved to be right, and they were wrong, but these friendships are done now.
It’s really the media feed that does it. Leftwing people can’t escape their bubble. They can’t question narratives. It’s a kind of psychosis that can only be fixed by physically removing people from their screens. Arguments never get anywhere.
Definitely a shame but I think most people have broken up with friends or become estranged from family members they were previously close with in the past 10 years.
My cousin regularly spams his contacts with thousand-word anti-Trump screeds. He assumes that everyone he knows agrees with him. I feel like telling him to start a Substack where people can opt in.
I could respond and debunk his rants, but why bother? I'm not going to write him out of my family life. Easier to delete his emails unread.
Im in a group chat with some college friends and have come to a similar conclusion. 90% of the topic of conversation is about families and sports but they become unhinged lunatics when politics comes up. I used to push back some but then it just turned into an hours long back and forth argument that I just don’t have the time to do anymore.
"""And because this sadly does need to be said, it is wrong to cut friends or family out of your life due to differences in political beliefs, and if you do so you’re a bad person."""
This depends very, very much on just what those differences are. If the "difference" is a matter of tax rates, sure. But if it's whether anyone who doesn't support transgenderism should be executed, then no, that's not a "live and let live" difference.
It is precisely the vague language that lumps all of these things together as "politics" that is killing us right now. There are absolutely things that are outside the Overton Window of Civilization, and what we call "left-wing people" generally live there.
Personally have been on both sides of this, and in my view conservatives (and disaffected liberals) are treated much worse by libs than the inverse. When I was living in a right-evangelical suburb, and I started drifting left, the responses I’d get for dissenting were skeptical but never mean. Certainly never got the sense that they’d stop being my friends over it. Once I moved to a big blue metro and started palling around with lefties, I quickly realized that my bad habit of questioning in-group dogmas was actually quite unwelcome among the self-described rebels and freethinkers. In disposition, the libs are conservative and the cons are liberal. I can freely describe myself as a disaffected lib among conservatives and get only minor shit for it. But if I say anything remotely positive about (gasp) the Trump administration in front of liberals then I am immediately accused of being a turncoat.
"Do progressive-minded people in deep red areas feel the same need to hide from social reproach?" I don't think so. I know these people well and while they may not have lawn signs, they are not shy about sharing their beliefs. This has changed a lot over the past 30 years, at least in the parts of rural America of which I am familiar.
I keep seeing this idea (that conservatives don’t report to political violence, unlike progressives) in the comments and I’m truly baffled as to how you could come to that conclusion. I’ve personally lived in both deep blue (Portland) and deep red (central Idaho) areas within the past few years and both places had a similar proportion of people who fantasized about violently repressing their opponents.
I now live in a different blue area (Northern VA) and, if anything, I’ve seen much less of a monoculture since the 2024 election. I know plenty of libs and plenty of conservatives here, and it seems like the Republicans generally feel much more able to express their views than they did a year ago.
I'm truly baffled as to how you could confidently claim that anyone, anywhere, gets "run out of town" for having a HARRIS WALZ sticker on their car. Yeah, if you live in Crow's Ass, Missouri, pop. 2056, the churchgoing grandpas might think you're a kind of a dumbass, but no one is going to throw bricks through your front window or boycott your business. As you yourself noted, if you live in a larger but still red city, you certainly are not going to be bothered in any way, no one is going to try to get you fired from your job [unless you are quite extreme and hostile in your politics/activism and are public-facing, such as a teacher/doctor/first responder], and you will have lots of likeminded company. The "progressives have to hide too!" thing is just not a thing. There are lots of happy and confident progressives in blue urban areas, and there are lots of loud and unafraid hicklibs in red rural areas.
To the exact same extent that someone would get run out of Williamsburg, Brooklyn (or any other deep blue area) for having a TRUMP VANCE sticker, yes. That is to say that the political hostility was comparable, just with the opposite ideological valence. You’re just as — if not more — likely to get a yard sign stolen or hostile graffiti on a business.
I have no idea why you seem so committed to the idea that there are no areas in which progressives would have to “hide.” Again, the proportion of such areas is pretty similar to those where the opposite is true. I’ve certainly met a couple “hicklibs” living in deep red areas, just as I’ve met a couple loud and proud MAGA types living in deep blue areas, but in both cases these people are the exception to the rule and suffer social consequences.
Personally, I've enjoyed some of the times when I've subverted someone's expectations, and I've decided I'm going to push back on the blurting out random progressive talking points.
One that has always stuck out in my mind was way back when Obama was running for the first time, and a coworker (who happened to be black) asked me to confirm I was voting for him. When I said I wasn't, her response was "But Marty, you're not racist!" I then explained that I wasn't voting for McCain either, at which point she went, "There's other candidates?"
The vast majority of what's wrote here is excellent. Very human. Effectively conveyed without feeling overly forceful.
But there is one section here I take some issue with, and want to express a differing perspective on.
"And because this sadly does need to be said, it is wrong to cut friends or family out of your life due to differences in political beliefs, and if you do so you’re a bad person. It’s wrong in both a moral sense and in a utilitarian analysis: it will make you unhappy to do so. You are not a righteous person with a purer social group, you are a foolish person with a smaller, less interesting one. You are poorer, for no reason other than your own vanity."
Some of my closest friends are on the left. I've been friends with them for a long time. It used to be that we could talk a lot about our shared interests without delving much into politics. Election years, like last year, can be a bit more tense, but I took comfort in "knowing" that at some point things would cool back down.
I put "knowing" in quotation marks because while this was true for a long time, it ceased being true in 2025. This year, my leftist friends just can't stop talking to me about politics. I try to change the topic, I tell them I don't want to talk about it, but it's a real struggle to persuade them to let it go. They're not mean about it, really, but it's like they're desperately trying to turn me woke. What Trump has done since starting his 2nd term seems to have radicalized them more than they were before. 2025 has felt like an election year in my friendship circles that include leftists.
I find myself self-censoring more and more, and there's a deepening sense that my leftist friends and I don't just disagree on some issues, but live in different moral universes.
I've considered ending these friendships, largely for the sake of my mental health. Does that make me a bad person? I get your arguments, but at some point, if *friendships* are causing more conflict than good times or even mutual support, are they worth continuing?
"This year, my leftist friends just can't stop talking to me about politics."
My (very lib!) wife has commented on the same thing with her mother-no matter how much she tries to change the thing they're talking about, it always come back to politics.
I have often been struck by how much of the beliefs and energies of the left have a millenarian or even apocalyptic tone; one wonders if they can't let it go because at this point they have invested (and sacrificed) too much to so.
To let it go would to admit they’re wrong and most people who are on the left just can’t seem to do that. A part of leftism that isn’t nearly as pronounced with people on the right is having your entire personality be about being “progressive”. That makes up a disturbing number of people, particularly in major cities. The type of people who can’t go 15 minutes without talking about Trump or some sort of absurd racial grievance nonsense they saw on Reddit.
I get that. If you back away after a time of patience and tolerance without experiencing the same respect in return, you'd be justified in making some distance. I think that approach is more nuanced and humane than the knee-jerk reaction the author deplores.
See the third footnote: "Sometimes people cut off relationships for abusive behavior that takes the form of political harangues, which isn’t the same thing." If your friends won't agree to disagree with you and respect your right to hold different beliefs then that's just disrespectful. It's totally reasonable to cut off friends for being disrespectful. Just make sure that you very clearly articulate your boundaries to them first, as in: "I don't like being constantly harangued by you over politics. Either stop it or I'm going to cut you out of my life. I mean it." And then give them 3 strikes.
The better solution is to be good enough at arguing that they're the ones who don't want to bring it up.
Very much enjoyed this because it expresses so well what many of us who " were of the left" now feel. And not exclusive to the USA by any means, I’m talking about Britain and France for example as well- we’re Brits who’ve lived in France for many years . Retired now, I’m not worried about the potential consequences of stating my views .Not fallen out with anyone yet but people do seem a bit surprised when we don’t express blind allegiance to "the current thing". Maybe I shouldn’t have been but I was truly shocked by some of the awful reactions to Charlie Kirks’s death.
The reactions you note only served to prove to me who we struggle against. There are people in this society that are amoral and cannot be dealt with civilly, nor can we dwell peacefully among. There is no middle ground with such evil. They must be eliminated from the body politic. How they got that way is of course a topic for another discussion.
They feel the same way about you. And both of you are wrong. We can deal with them civilly, we can dwell peacefully among them, and there clearly is a middle ground.
There's not enough difference between your high drama "they must be eliminated from the body politic" and "hahaha Charlie Kirk's dead" performative nonsense to shake a stick at. Both sides are full of shit when they engage in this sort of idiocy. And neither side means it. It's bold talk on a teeny tiny forum.
Nonsense. By the way, I mean it. We are regaled in the news everyday by those I speak of in positions of authority who can barely annunciate their views and speak such ignorance as to be dangerous. They are put into power by the “democratic” process which allows all who can fog a mirror to participate. These people also need to be removed from the franchise.This of course is why the present concept of the democratic process will—and is—failing.
Left or Right, it matters little to me. There is no middle ground with such people. As to this forum, are you saying I should change forums? You, who tout democracy would attempt to silence me through shame/vindictive—“…performative nonsense…”. Got a problem with my posting? Perhaps you should look in the mirror and start there with such ire.
Ah, more invective. You are indeed an emotional crank and a good example of whom I speak about. Thanks for the clarification.
Pro tip: As to my limited understanding of "Substack World", I believe it's a simple matter for you to block me from further reading/interaction. For your peace of mind, I suggest you do so.
I wasn’t in the least shocked by their reaction. I lived in DC during the first Trump term and I saw first hand how misinformed, grotesque and awful these people truly are. On three separate occasions I had people I was previously friendly with try to fight me for not being properly anti-Trump enough. It’s only gotten worse since then.
This is such an interesting piece for me to read, because it is what I have felt about people around me and yet no one seems willing to admit. I joke I'm the 'black sheep' of my family - a left of center (I have no idea what I'd actually be called as I'm not married to the Democratic party - progressive? liberal?) I guess 'not conservative' would be the best description, while nearly my entire extended family and that which I married into is conservative and definitely voted for Trump, both times. I'm acutely aware of who my audience is when I bring up issues that I find troubling, when I voice my disdain for the ways Trump has acted or E.O.s he has written and I voice them aloud on purpose specifically to try and start the conversation - because I recognize that while the media paints 'libtards' (to use your charming turn of phrase) and 'conservatives' (should we use conservetard?) as enemies and unable to reconcile, obviously that can't be true because here are people I love and care about voting for a man that in my eyes brings nothing but embarrassment to the country. But obviously from their perspective, I voted for a woman that...well, I don't know what they think. Because they don't talk about it.
I think it's vital for everyone to discuss their views, not to 'out' themselves but because if you just say 'I voted for Trump' - that creates a very specific narrative in some people's minds versus explaining exactly why you voted for Trump. My instinct when I hear someone voted for Trump is that you voted for families to lose their SNAP benefits, you want people to lose healthcare access when they lose their Medicaid, and you are happy to watch people violently arrested and torn from their homes by ICE. Because that's what I see Trump and his immediate political supports doing and being happy to do it.
But if we had conversations, and if conservatives weren't afraid to voice their opinions, I imagine we could build a different narrative. Obviously there is something that my family saw when voting for Trump that I didn't - there's nothing I can think of that could've made me vote for him, but I think not sharing those views and opinions has done far more harm to the country and the political climate than good. Because if the people we know won't explain why, then the social media narrative and the media is all too happy to explain for them - in a way that paints it as an act of hate and stokes the flames of division.
So yes, people from every political perspective needs to be okay with talking about their opinions or even pushing back - and that means being okay with being pushed back on as well - because it's only then that we are all able to refine our opinions and understand maybe even more clearly why we vote and think the way we do. I've refined my own opinions and stances after conversations I've had where someone who thinks differently than me asked questions I never even thought of and forced me to confront whether my stance was actually able to be defended or if it fell apart. Conversation - not debate, not arguments - is what builds a robust democracy.
I haven’t had to deal with my leftist friends’ reaction to the Charlie Kirk killing because I’m deployed with the military. But just from that statement, I assume you know I’ll sympathize.
I always have. When I was in active duty twenty years ago, I was on the left. Of course I didn’t make it part of normal conversation most times, although I also wasn’t afraid to when the talk went that way. I’ve had friends on both sides through my decades of being political. But because I’ve been on the left and am now on the right, and they both required this self censorship, I’ve had to do some serious reflection to know with confidence that I’m not just a contrarian.
I’m not. I have a lot of reasons and experiences to back that up, but it is important to know that while I am a fairly mild mannered person in normal life, I’m not afraid of ideological confrontation. I’m good at it. I can smell when someone is being confrontational for reasons that have nothing to do with telling the truth, and it’s a waste of time.
But I do think it’s important to note that I’m not afraid, still, even with the recent violence. The vast majority of people can be apoplectic at your wrongness while still going nowhere near committing a felony over it. So if you feel the urge to come out, no matter your politics, you should know that your expression likely won’t change the world, but also likely won’t get you killed, or hurt, or even fired if you keep your head on straight. Just have a point.
I've lived overseas for about 20 years. I go home to Australia once a year or so. Over the years, I noticed more and more politics coming up in ordinary conversation. Circa 2005 it used to come up a bit, usually ending in the consensus that politicians suck, but it wasn't a big deal. Then it became more common, heated and moral. Only bad people vote for the other side.
I gradually became quieter on the topic and now avoid it like I do discussions about bowel health or marital sex life.
No one seems to have noticed.
As an aside, I now live in a place with many American expat retirees. Local restaurants have recently put signs up saying 'no politics please' as both tribes are here and it leads to trouble.
As another data point to the discussion about whether this problem is reciprocal, it is here. Drunk ex-marines tell every Canadian they meet that the US should annex them, as an opening gambit. Strong selection bias though: every foreigner here is nuts.
Shitlibs in deep red areas are more brazen, because they have the backing of powerful external forces that could crush their small red town. It's a flex.
They are also far nastier, wanting to ensure that everyone knows he is intellectually and morally superior to his redneck neighbors.
I just don’t think that’s true at all. There is no asymmetry here — in the rural red area I used to frequent the most (hence the one I know best), anyone with a Kamala poster would have been run out of town.
They would have received the exact inverse treatment this article depicted; people assume you hate the Democrats by default, and the idea of your neighbor voting for Kamala would be unthinkable.
As it happens, I’m a moderate conservative with no love for the Democratic Party. It’s not like I ever felt repulsed by these towns and their inhabitants. Nevertheless they do exist, and the culture is just as repressive and hostile to their political enemies as the blue city monoculture I’ve experienced in places like Portland, OR.
I live in one of the largest hard-red voting cities in the country and yet there are rainbow flags and IN THIS HOUSE signs all over the place and nothing happens. I went to a museum fundraiser the other night and there were both churchy people and men in makeup. It was fine. No one is running anyone out of town. I have never been anywhere, large or small, where progressives were afraid to wear their political and social beliefs on their sleeves or faced any real consequences for doing so (not that I'm arguing that they should).
In a large city? No, because by definition even the reddest large cities (Jacksonville, Phoenix, Dallas, Tucson, etc) vote ~40% or more for Democrats. Large cities are at most purple. You’re not describing a conservative area.
Yes, and many have commented elsewhere in this thread, myself included, that nowhere even in the country are liberals even close to as pressured to hide their views as conservatives are in the city, in the academy, and in most of the corporate world.
Sugar, I’m not remotely interested in becomingness or victimhood or whatever. Just pointing out that the both sides take is BS. Which it is.
I think you’re doing the thing where you equate what people say will happen with what happens.
I think there is an asymmetry of one type or another, but not due to some delusion that Liberal Annie in Red Town USA thinks she can call on the state to crush the bigots. That type shares a similar contrarian, freak flag flying, yard art loving, political in-your-face mirror in the Trump House Guy who lives on some street in Seattle. There is a symmetry of this type of contrarian who likes to be seen as special and confront their neighbors.
The asymmetry is in the Kitten-equivalent in Red Tribe, USA. Kitten is not a Trump Guy who owns a Trump House and likes to piss off his hoity-toity neighbors. The liberal professional teacher, doctors, lawyers in Red territory are able to earn a respect of the populace despite their political positions. Maybe their Biden sign gets pulled up at least once an election cycle by good ol' boy teens out for a rip, but they don't share the same pressures as the presumed politics in Blue cultural spaces. Red tribe knows the teacher/doctor/lawyer is a bleeding heart liberal pansy, but has other axes to judge their value and contributions. Whereas in Kitten's type of case enough people presume you're A Good Person with all the implications that entails. The social pressure to confirm and conform is overwhelming and the costs more consistently applied.
I would not say Blue people in Red spaces don't face self-censor pressure, but they self-censor to a lesser degree. I believe there's some support of asymmetrical social pressures/conformity in social science research. Although people here likely know how much to trust social science.
Yes, this is all absolutely true. I meant to correct the widespread claim in this comment section, which is that an extreme fringe with violent tendencies only exists on the left, and that this is asymmetrical.
Whenever someone starts with "believe me" and ends with "So that thing you think is true just isn't real", I know I'm being gaslight.
The question is why it needs doing, and why you think it's going to work.
For example, it could just be a vested interest: The US bourgeois are under crushing pressure, left, right and center. But that's me talking out of my hat.
If we were real people sharing a cup of java, not internet ghosts, we'd be able to tell if the other was telling a story he honestly believed, and get to the assumptions, and be peaceable for Christian charity's sake; for the opportunity to learn and increase in understanding.
Thank you (and Mr. Kitten) for giving me some more to think about.
I’m not sure there’s anything I can do to convey my sincerity as just some guy on the internet. I’ve lived in blue areas, I’ve lived in red areas. I’m just trying to turn down the temperature by pointing out that everybody thinks their enemies are more hostile and more violent than they actually are.
98% of all Americans are willing to tolerate their neighbors. The 2% that don’t are both on the right and the left.
On the internet, no. Especially not gas-lighting the right. They are not, percentage-wise (even if including the Muslims and South Americans (predominantly Catholic), and that kid who shot 3 Antifa pedos; these are *not* the ones taking the gold, or even the silver, in the brutalize the political Other right now. Or historically. There's a one-way line from the anarcho-commies who slaughtered McKinley, through Alinski, to now.
In other words, having won the Days of Rage, infiltrated all our institutions under the aegis of openness, and mercy--literally weoponizing our trad charitable morality against ys--only to, once in a position of authority, become the stupidest, most tiresome tin-pot dictatorship imaginable.
In other words, all of the Blue-Skyers and possibly adjacent pals have a serious, serious trust problem that no amount of both-sides-ism is going to address.
Again, thank you for the courteous and informative reply.
I’m a conservative. I’m just trying to ensure that people see reality for what it actually is. The internet perverts and distorts the picture and teaches us to hate by focusing on the most extreme elements. That makes things worse for everybody. In real life, the political fringe elements are very rare.
All we can do is love our neighbors; love those that hate you. Mormons have already raised $250,000 for the family of the man who horrifically shot up an LDS church in Michigan. What could be more Christian than that?
"What could be more Christian than that?"
Nothing! Thank you so much for sharing that. This is the way.
"Conservative" is not a kindly epithet in my home.
Thank coronachan.
Not sure I believe you: "frequently visiting" is not the same as living in, and being a part of.
If you've lived in deep red Oregon for years, and throw up some "In This House" pool-noodlery and a Kamala sign you're going to get mocked, yes. If you've got an I Castrate Kids For Narrative Points flag, you'll be avoided by anyone with kids. But you're still a neighbor. The Ordinary Decent Citizens will stop anyone trying it on.
But let a long-tme Portlander put up a Jesus Saves and a Trump sign, and if he's lucky a neighbor will just pull one of them down. If one of his neighbors, or just a passer-by, is part of the local Freicorps: they'll come at night to set them on fire, and burn half his garage with it.
In Good Liberal places speaking up *will* cost you your business and your career. Or worse. Ask Dr. Malone. Ask anyone who spoke up for sanity and human rights during the Covid Panic. So I do appreciate those with hostages to fortune who are afraid to, and can't escape.
But one reason for this is that all the ODCs in Portland are "Good Washingtonians." They're the ones who never speak up, never object, and will look the other way, until one day the nissei who couldn't pass, are rounded up and sent to Manzanar.
I used to live in a deep red city in Idaho, and I would spend a lot of time traveling to adjacent (even deeper red) rural areas in central, eastern, and southern Idaho. These are some of the most conservative areas in the country, so please believe me when I say I know what I’m talking about.
Anyway, this is exactly what I’m talking about in terms of fantasizing about people you don’t know. I was just in downtown Portland two months ago (I have family there), as it happens, and amidst all the pride flags and “In this house” signs I did spot a couple houses with Trump flags. I’m sure their leftist neighbors probably aren’t happy with them, but it’s still better than even odds that no one does or says anything confrontational.
In 2020 and 2021, during the height of the liberal overreach, speaking up would absolutely cost you socially and occupationally. I’m grateful that time period is over.
I understand the desire to believe the worst of your opponents — it’s just not the case that red areas have a code of neighborly ethics that makes them more moral and upright and tolerant of their outgroup. Everyone is just sort of muddling through and resenting those who don’t belong to the same tribe. It’s the same everywhere you go.
There are some horrible people on the left, but I think conservatives just don't see the horrible people on their own side. The horrible people (both sides) stand out because they are more vocal and more confrontational, but you don’t see the ones on your own side because they are not confrontational to you.
If wanted to be respectful to my political opponents, I wouldn't call them ‘shitlibs’ — but this is just a small example of disrespect. There are plenty of liberals who would be rude like this too, but most don’t. You just see the ones who stand out.
I've been around rural hillbillies throwing n bombs with abandon. They didn't have a fraction of the malice your average leftist has. Modern progressivism is a deeply evil religion that warps the minds of its adherents. Like Muslims, some can still be relatively nice people, but the underlying poison remains.
I think you just don’t see the hillbillies with malice, Alan.
“We don’t have malice”… “they follow an evil religion that’s poisoning their minds”
Wouldn’t you think it had a bit of malice if someone told you you are following an evil religion that poisons your mind?
You’re not exactly disproving the point buddy. A little self awareness can go a long way.
Actually glibtards works better now, but maybe I'm proving your sentiments.
Indeed.
They are not fucking conservatives! They are BACKWARDS Reactionaries
I think that may depend on the state government.
What? What external forces could I call on to crush the small red town of my uncle while the family is going on and on about eight wing political stuff?
What does that even mean?
Substack thought it was really important to show me this post, so I wandered down to the comments in the wild hope that it would be interesting and not the mirror-reflection of the angry conformity the author is complaining about. Oh well, maybe next time.
Midwest, your mileage may vary.
I live in a red village in a red state. People from blue states are pouring in building houses and raising prices as they flee the crime and high prices in their home states. They feel absolutely no compunction in trumpeting their views and trying to change the way things are. Whilst calling us violent and ignorant, they know deep down that our values do not allow us to exercise the kind of violence their ilk do and so absolutely open proclaim their righteousness and our deluded state.
I moved to a more conservative city, and as a conservative I came knowing I’d become part of the existing community and add to it. The leftists that come, always come complaining about how they’re here to make this place less racist and they need to find allies and stand up to the whatever it is that stands in the way of progress. They’re like a locust swarm.
They ruined Colorado. They’re absolutely an invasive species.
Yeah, Colorado is such a beautiful place. I’m sorry about that.
They're literally colonisers.
They're not fleeing, they're annexing.
"Do progressive-minded people in deep red areas feel the same need to hide from social reproach?"
I don't think so. I lived in South Carolina, the reddest of of red states, back in the '90s. The vast majority of my friends were extremely conservative and/or religious, and I was a bleeding-heart liberal. No one shunned me, no one wished me dead, no one cut me off from friendship because I had different views. I think most of them just regarded me as a bit nutty in some ways, maybe a bit naive. Very different from the anger and vitriol my blue-state liberal friends seem to have for conservatives, evangelical Christians, and Trump voters (or what they imagine those types of people would be like, which is heavily based on caricatures gleaned from movies and TV).
The 90s were a pretty different time. I grew up in a very red area and while some conservatives were really, really cruel towards liberals the temperature of everything was generally pretty low. Clinton wasn't a polarizing figure the way Trump is, even for people who disliked him.
Yeah, much of the cruelty of this seems downstream from the Big (not the Great!) Sort, which only really starts in earnest in the 90s.
His NAFTA policies sure were polarizing. But I get your drift. The "liberals" of the 90's would be "far right" now. I watch old videos of him and Hilary and chuckle at how that shtuff wouldn't fly at the DNC these days.
The liberals of the 90s would not be “far right” right now. Please stop spreading nonsense on the internet and being delusional
Clinton wanted increased border security and passed a landmark crime bill, did photo ops in front of shackled black prisoners
I don’t think this started until Trump. Only the hysterical pundit class was able to muster any enthusiasm for viciously going after Romney voters. Most people just didn’t have the visceral reaction to him that they did to Trump and his new generation of the GOP.
There were a handful of Tea Party guys and a smattering of leftist activist types who implicitly advocated for violence, but it was all an order of magnitude less than now.
No, it started before Trump.
People who say this probably weren’t particularly connected to politics prior to Trump. Liberals, particularly in their enclaves, have been like this my entire life of almost 40 years. It’s gotten more brazen with social media for sure but the left has always been insane with a veneer of wanting to physically harm those they disagree with.
Yeah there’s always been some. When I was young, idealistic, and very, very naive, I worked on Obama’s 2008 primary campaign. I recall going to my extremely liberal church in my hometown wearing an Obama t shirt and being accosted after the service by a super progressive lady for whom Obama was too conciliatory. I said I thought he could unite the country. She said “I don’t want unity with those people!” 😂
Edit: I forgot to add that she later showed up at the tiny Democratic caucus in her extremely rural village and proceeded to exasperate both the local chair person and my poor volunteer precinct captain with vexatious claims that the vote (which she lost) wasn’t conducted properly. They both thought she was completely nuts, she was acting so unhinged.
Agreed, there has always been a fringe on the left like that. Much like the right.
It started with the personal destruction of Robert Bork by Ted Kennedy. That’s when things started to get personal and ugly.
The left despised Reagan from the start. The treatment of Bork was awful and woke up a lot of Republicans. The left completely lost their s**t when W prevailed in the 2000 election.
In the early 2000s they were calling Bush and Nazi.
Don’t forget Biden saying that black people would be back in chains if Mitt fucking Romney was elected president. Im not really a fan of Romney but anybody who genuinely believed that shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Yet tens of millions did.
I despised Bush voters. They voted R for Religion, Guns, and lower taxes for the rich. (The poors still believed in trickle-down then)
This is my childhood memory of growing up in Indiana with blue state lib parents. Mystification, mild amusement. No hate
Yes, I am going first. I decided a few years ago to come out more, both by challenging progressive complacency and by actively raising HBD etc talking points where relevant. But it's easier for me because I am a) self-employed and b) autistically low in agreeableness.
Go be the first, stop self-censoring. You’ll find out that there are others in your circle that feel the same way.
I lost half of my “friends” when I “came out” (I was not arrogant about it, just expressed my disagreement), it stung for a while but I feel better about myself and I grew closer with the ones who remained.
One advice: don’t get into long arguments. Much of the Left are fundamentalists who are not open to facts and logic that contradict their beliefs.
So there’s a term coined by Charlie Kirk for libs in red areas: “hicklib.” And yes, I’m in North Texas, and there’re many proud hicklibs. They aren’t closeted one bit and are more than happy to write me off as a total idiot for my conservatism.
I’ve probably missed out on job opportunities by writing under my real name. It normally doesn’t come up when I work because, like you, I don’t want politics to come between me and others. Oh well, the readers in my circle can look me up and get mad.
Covid was a moment when politics seriously broke up friendships. My lefty friends dumped me and thought I was spreading lethal misinformation about the virus by pointing out contradictions. It wasn’t mutual, and I wasn’t happy about it. I proved to be right, and they were wrong, but these friendships are done now.
It’s really the media feed that does it. Leftwing people can’t escape their bubble. They can’t question narratives. It’s a kind of psychosis that can only be fixed by physically removing people from their screens. Arguments never get anywhere.
And so the polarization will continue…
Definitely a shame but I think most people have broken up with friends or become estranged from family members they were previously close with in the past 10 years.
My cousin regularly spams his contacts with thousand-word anti-Trump screeds. He assumes that everyone he knows agrees with him. I feel like telling him to start a Substack where people can opt in.
I could respond and debunk his rants, but why bother? I'm not going to write him out of my family life. Easier to delete his emails unread.
Im in a group chat with some college friends and have come to a similar conclusion. 90% of the topic of conversation is about families and sports but they become unhinged lunatics when politics comes up. I used to push back some but then it just turned into an hours long back and forth argument that I just don’t have the time to do anymore.
A strong man practices restraint. “Cast not thy pearls before swine…”
What would you do if it were a friend? I get not cancelling family but friends are not family.
Likely the same.
I tell these kinds of people (whether pro or anti) that they should start a movie theater chain with all that projection.
"""And because this sadly does need to be said, it is wrong to cut friends or family out of your life due to differences in political beliefs, and if you do so you’re a bad person."""
This depends very, very much on just what those differences are. If the "difference" is a matter of tax rates, sure. But if it's whether anyone who doesn't support transgenderism should be executed, then no, that's not a "live and let live" difference.
It is precisely the vague language that lumps all of these things together as "politics" that is killing us right now. There are absolutely things that are outside the Overton Window of Civilization, and what we call "left-wing people" generally live there.
Ignoring this problem lets it grow.
Personally have been on both sides of this, and in my view conservatives (and disaffected liberals) are treated much worse by libs than the inverse. When I was living in a right-evangelical suburb, and I started drifting left, the responses I’d get for dissenting were skeptical but never mean. Certainly never got the sense that they’d stop being my friends over it. Once I moved to a big blue metro and started palling around with lefties, I quickly realized that my bad habit of questioning in-group dogmas was actually quite unwelcome among the self-described rebels and freethinkers. In disposition, the libs are conservative and the cons are liberal. I can freely describe myself as a disaffected lib among conservatives and get only minor shit for it. But if I say anything remotely positive about (gasp) the Trump administration in front of liberals then I am immediately accused of being a turncoat.
"Do progressive-minded people in deep red areas feel the same need to hide from social reproach?" I don't think so. I know these people well and while they may not have lawn signs, they are not shy about sharing their beliefs. This has changed a lot over the past 30 years, at least in the parts of rural America of which I am familiar.
I keep seeing this idea (that conservatives don’t report to political violence, unlike progressives) in the comments and I’m truly baffled as to how you could come to that conclusion. I’ve personally lived in both deep blue (Portland) and deep red (central Idaho) areas within the past few years and both places had a similar proportion of people who fantasized about violently repressing their opponents.
I now live in a different blue area (Northern VA) and, if anything, I’ve seen much less of a monoculture since the 2024 election. I know plenty of libs and plenty of conservatives here, and it seems like the Republicans generally feel much more able to express their views than they did a year ago.
I'm truly baffled as to how you could confidently claim that anyone, anywhere, gets "run out of town" for having a HARRIS WALZ sticker on their car. Yeah, if you live in Crow's Ass, Missouri, pop. 2056, the churchgoing grandpas might think you're a kind of a dumbass, but no one is going to throw bricks through your front window or boycott your business. As you yourself noted, if you live in a larger but still red city, you certainly are not going to be bothered in any way, no one is going to try to get you fired from your job [unless you are quite extreme and hostile in your politics/activism and are public-facing, such as a teacher/doctor/first responder], and you will have lots of likeminded company. The "progressives have to hide too!" thing is just not a thing. There are lots of happy and confident progressives in blue urban areas, and there are lots of loud and unafraid hicklibs in red rural areas.
To the exact same extent that someone would get run out of Williamsburg, Brooklyn (or any other deep blue area) for having a TRUMP VANCE sticker, yes. That is to say that the political hostility was comparable, just with the opposite ideological valence. You’re just as — if not more — likely to get a yard sign stolen or hostile graffiti on a business.
I have no idea why you seem so committed to the idea that there are no areas in which progressives would have to “hide.” Again, the proportion of such areas is pretty similar to those where the opposite is true. I’ve certainly met a couple “hicklibs” living in deep red areas, just as I’ve met a couple loud and proud MAGA types living in deep blue areas, but in both cases these people are the exception to the rule and suffer social consequences.
I just left nova and I would not characterize it the way you do. It’s insane, and everyone getting fired by Trump reignited it.
Sure, anything seems better than 2020.
Interesting perspective. I wonder if there’s an element of there being a generational difference.
Personally, I've enjoyed some of the times when I've subverted someone's expectations, and I've decided I'm going to push back on the blurting out random progressive talking points.
One that has always stuck out in my mind was way back when Obama was running for the first time, and a coworker (who happened to be black) asked me to confirm I was voting for him. When I said I wasn't, her response was "But Marty, you're not racist!" I then explained that I wasn't voting for McCain either, at which point she went, "There's other candidates?"
The whole “disagreeing with Obama makes you a racist!” charge made me embrace the label “racist.”
Now “racist” means “doesn’t agree with progressives,” which I’m also happy to embrace.
The vast majority of what's wrote here is excellent. Very human. Effectively conveyed without feeling overly forceful.
But there is one section here I take some issue with, and want to express a differing perspective on.
"And because this sadly does need to be said, it is wrong to cut friends or family out of your life due to differences in political beliefs, and if you do so you’re a bad person. It’s wrong in both a moral sense and in a utilitarian analysis: it will make you unhappy to do so. You are not a righteous person with a purer social group, you are a foolish person with a smaller, less interesting one. You are poorer, for no reason other than your own vanity."
Some of my closest friends are on the left. I've been friends with them for a long time. It used to be that we could talk a lot about our shared interests without delving much into politics. Election years, like last year, can be a bit more tense, but I took comfort in "knowing" that at some point things would cool back down.
I put "knowing" in quotation marks because while this was true for a long time, it ceased being true in 2025. This year, my leftist friends just can't stop talking to me about politics. I try to change the topic, I tell them I don't want to talk about it, but it's a real struggle to persuade them to let it go. They're not mean about it, really, but it's like they're desperately trying to turn me woke. What Trump has done since starting his 2nd term seems to have radicalized them more than they were before. 2025 has felt like an election year in my friendship circles that include leftists.
I find myself self-censoring more and more, and there's a deepening sense that my leftist friends and I don't just disagree on some issues, but live in different moral universes.
I've considered ending these friendships, largely for the sake of my mental health. Does that make me a bad person? I get your arguments, but at some point, if *friendships* are causing more conflict than good times or even mutual support, are they worth continuing?
"This year, my leftist friends just can't stop talking to me about politics."
My (very lib!) wife has commented on the same thing with her mother-no matter how much she tries to change the thing they're talking about, it always come back to politics.
I have often been struck by how much of the beliefs and energies of the left have a millenarian or even apocalyptic tone; one wonders if they can't let it go because at this point they have invested (and sacrificed) too much to so.
To let it go would to admit they’re wrong and most people who are on the left just can’t seem to do that. A part of leftism that isn’t nearly as pronounced with people on the right is having your entire personality be about being “progressive”. That makes up a disturbing number of people, particularly in major cities. The type of people who can’t go 15 minutes without talking about Trump or some sort of absurd racial grievance nonsense they saw on Reddit.
I get that. If you back away after a time of patience and tolerance without experiencing the same respect in return, you'd be justified in making some distance. I think that approach is more nuanced and humane than the knee-jerk reaction the author deplores.
See the third footnote: "Sometimes people cut off relationships for abusive behavior that takes the form of political harangues, which isn’t the same thing." If your friends won't agree to disagree with you and respect your right to hold different beliefs then that's just disrespectful. It's totally reasonable to cut off friends for being disrespectful. Just make sure that you very clearly articulate your boundaries to them first, as in: "I don't like being constantly harangued by you over politics. Either stop it or I'm going to cut you out of my life. I mean it." And then give them 3 strikes.
The better solution is to be good enough at arguing that they're the ones who don't want to bring it up.
Very much enjoyed this because it expresses so well what many of us who " were of the left" now feel. And not exclusive to the USA by any means, I’m talking about Britain and France for example as well- we’re Brits who’ve lived in France for many years . Retired now, I’m not worried about the potential consequences of stating my views .Not fallen out with anyone yet but people do seem a bit surprised when we don’t express blind allegiance to "the current thing". Maybe I shouldn’t have been but I was truly shocked by some of the awful reactions to Charlie Kirks’s death.
The reactions you note only served to prove to me who we struggle against. There are people in this society that are amoral and cannot be dealt with civilly, nor can we dwell peacefully among. There is no middle ground with such evil. They must be eliminated from the body politic. How they got that way is of course a topic for another discussion.
They feel the same way about you. And both of you are wrong. We can deal with them civilly, we can dwell peacefully among them, and there clearly is a middle ground.
There's not enough difference between your high drama "they must be eliminated from the body politic" and "hahaha Charlie Kirk's dead" performative nonsense to shake a stick at. Both sides are full of shit when they engage in this sort of idiocy. And neither side means it. It's bold talk on a teeny tiny forum.
Nonsense. By the way, I mean it. We are regaled in the news everyday by those I speak of in positions of authority who can barely annunciate their views and speak such ignorance as to be dangerous. They are put into power by the “democratic” process which allows all who can fog a mirror to participate. These people also need to be removed from the franchise.This of course is why the present concept of the democratic process will—and is—failing.
Left or Right, it matters little to me. There is no middle ground with such people. As to this forum, are you saying I should change forums? You, who tout democracy would attempt to silence me through shame/vindictive—“…performative nonsense…”. Got a problem with my posting? Perhaps you should look in the mirror and start there with such ire.
Lot of nonsense invented there. I never said anything about democracy, nor was I referring to this forum, nor was I saying you should leave.
Good thing no one takes you seriously.
Ah, more invective. You are indeed an emotional crank and a good example of whom I speak about. Thanks for the clarification.
Pro tip: As to my limited understanding of "Substack World", I believe it's a simple matter for you to block me from further reading/interaction. For your peace of mind, I suggest you do so.
You and Ed are both extremely irascible. Which is fine, but you shouldn't expect to agree. And if you want to keep fighting, please do it elsewhere.
I wasn’t in the least shocked by their reaction. I lived in DC during the first Trump term and I saw first hand how misinformed, grotesque and awful these people truly are. On three separate occasions I had people I was previously friendly with try to fight me for not being properly anti-Trump enough. It’s only gotten worse since then.
This is such an interesting piece for me to read, because it is what I have felt about people around me and yet no one seems willing to admit. I joke I'm the 'black sheep' of my family - a left of center (I have no idea what I'd actually be called as I'm not married to the Democratic party - progressive? liberal?) I guess 'not conservative' would be the best description, while nearly my entire extended family and that which I married into is conservative and definitely voted for Trump, both times. I'm acutely aware of who my audience is when I bring up issues that I find troubling, when I voice my disdain for the ways Trump has acted or E.O.s he has written and I voice them aloud on purpose specifically to try and start the conversation - because I recognize that while the media paints 'libtards' (to use your charming turn of phrase) and 'conservatives' (should we use conservetard?) as enemies and unable to reconcile, obviously that can't be true because here are people I love and care about voting for a man that in my eyes brings nothing but embarrassment to the country. But obviously from their perspective, I voted for a woman that...well, I don't know what they think. Because they don't talk about it.
I think it's vital for everyone to discuss their views, not to 'out' themselves but because if you just say 'I voted for Trump' - that creates a very specific narrative in some people's minds versus explaining exactly why you voted for Trump. My instinct when I hear someone voted for Trump is that you voted for families to lose their SNAP benefits, you want people to lose healthcare access when they lose their Medicaid, and you are happy to watch people violently arrested and torn from their homes by ICE. Because that's what I see Trump and his immediate political supports doing and being happy to do it.
But if we had conversations, and if conservatives weren't afraid to voice their opinions, I imagine we could build a different narrative. Obviously there is something that my family saw when voting for Trump that I didn't - there's nothing I can think of that could've made me vote for him, but I think not sharing those views and opinions has done far more harm to the country and the political climate than good. Because if the people we know won't explain why, then the social media narrative and the media is all too happy to explain for them - in a way that paints it as an act of hate and stokes the flames of division.
So yes, people from every political perspective needs to be okay with talking about their opinions or even pushing back - and that means being okay with being pushed back on as well - because it's only then that we are all able to refine our opinions and understand maybe even more clearly why we vote and think the way we do. I've refined my own opinions and stances after conversations I've had where someone who thinks differently than me asked questions I never even thought of and forced me to confront whether my stance was actually able to be defended or if it fell apart. Conversation - not debate, not arguments - is what builds a robust democracy.
Would that more liberal/progressive people took your position seriously.
Warning, this will be long-ish.
I haven’t had to deal with my leftist friends’ reaction to the Charlie Kirk killing because I’m deployed with the military. But just from that statement, I assume you know I’ll sympathize.
I always have. When I was in active duty twenty years ago, I was on the left. Of course I didn’t make it part of normal conversation most times, although I also wasn’t afraid to when the talk went that way. I’ve had friends on both sides through my decades of being political. But because I’ve been on the left and am now on the right, and they both required this self censorship, I’ve had to do some serious reflection to know with confidence that I’m not just a contrarian.
I’m not. I have a lot of reasons and experiences to back that up, but it is important to know that while I am a fairly mild mannered person in normal life, I’m not afraid of ideological confrontation. I’m good at it. I can smell when someone is being confrontational for reasons that have nothing to do with telling the truth, and it’s a waste of time.
But I do think it’s important to note that I’m not afraid, still, even with the recent violence. The vast majority of people can be apoplectic at your wrongness while still going nowhere near committing a felony over it. So if you feel the urge to come out, no matter your politics, you should know that your expression likely won’t change the world, but also likely won’t get you killed, or hurt, or even fired if you keep your head on straight. Just have a point.
Good essay.
I've lived overseas for about 20 years. I go home to Australia once a year or so. Over the years, I noticed more and more politics coming up in ordinary conversation. Circa 2005 it used to come up a bit, usually ending in the consensus that politicians suck, but it wasn't a big deal. Then it became more common, heated and moral. Only bad people vote for the other side.
I gradually became quieter on the topic and now avoid it like I do discussions about bowel health or marital sex life.
No one seems to have noticed.
As an aside, I now live in a place with many American expat retirees. Local restaurants have recently put signs up saying 'no politics please' as both tribes are here and it leads to trouble.
As another data point to the discussion about whether this problem is reciprocal, it is here. Drunk ex-marines tell every Canadian they meet that the US should annex them, as an opening gambit. Strong selection bias though: every foreigner here is nuts.