i'm so fucking tired of nuance fetishist liberals acting like any given political issue is just "too complex" to understand
i'm so fucking tired of nuance fetishist liberals acting like any given political issue is just "too complex" to understand
shut the fuck up. "the israeli-palestinian conflict is centuries long and sooo complicated, none of us americans can understand it" no it isn't, the israelis stole the land that palestinians have lived on for thousands of years, committing a genocide in the process. they are unambiguously evil and all palestinian violence against them is justified self defense. simple as that
"oh my god climate change is such a complicated problem, how can we possibly balance the health of the planet with the needs of businesses" shut the fuck up, profit is anti-social behavior and should be reduced to zero wherever possible, and literally nothing is more important than the health of the planet we fucking live on. simple as that
in conclusion, shut the fuck up liberals. sorry to rant like this lol
Death to America
"The issue is very complex"
"I know for a fact that my argument doesn't even pass a basic sniff test but PLEASE keep backing the status quo anyway""It's just too hard to know for sure"
"It's just common sense"
“It’s just human nature”
"Things are complicated and that's why we just can't possibly talk about things because they're just so hard to understand."
Okay, so, what about US electoralism?
"Oh that's not complicated at all vote blue no matter who there's no reason to talk about that because it's so uncomplicated that everyone can easily understand it instantly"
Okay libs, sure, whatever you say.
"Fun" fact: the State of Israel banned Yiddish-language theater and periodicals in 1949 and continued to enforce severe restrictions on Yiddish-language media through the 1950s, and founding father David Ben Gurion even once referred to Yiddish as a "grating, foreign language", despite the existence of a distinctive Palestinian Yiddish dialect which had evolved among sections of the Old Yishuv since the 16th century. You might not be surprised to learn that active state suppression of the Yiddish language, as well as physical violence and psychological torment towards Yiddish speakers by fanatical Hebraist Zionists pre-1948, contributed greatly to the Yiddish language's current endangered status...
...Hmmm, I wonder, what exactly do liberals call a state and movement with a long history of using physical violence, intimidation, harassment, propaganda, and other forms of torment, as a means with which to systematically and methodically destroy a centuries-long facet of Jewish culture?... Geez, I dunno, the word escapes me at the moment for some reason. This conflict is just too gosh durn complex!
They also forcefully sterilized thousands of black Ethiopian jews when they exercised their "right of return" to Israel. What do you call a nation that systematically enforced racist forced sterilization on a facet of jewish culture?
Israel is genuinely one of the most anti-Semitic states of modern history
What, the state founded on the idea that Jews are perpetual foreigners in any other country, and that antisemitism is an eternal force that cannot be effectively resisted? Say it ain't so!
Every issue is very complex when you're a fucking moron who doesn't understand anything at all
It's not even difficult to understand though, a young child can easily grasp it. They don't want to understand
Liberals want complete paralysis. Any framework of the world other than an assumption of totally atomized individuals is considered too simplistic. They have an ideology of inaction. Allow what exists now to exist in perpetuity.
Moralists don't really have beliefs. Sometimes they stumble on one, like on a child's toy left on the carpet. The toy must be put away immediately. And the child reprimanded. Centrism isn't change -- not even incremental change. It is control. Over yourself and the world. Exercise it. Look up at the sky, at the dark shapes of Coalition airships hanging there. Ask yourself: is there something sinister in moralism? And then answer: no. God is in his heaven. Everything is normal on Earth.
Class war is very complex and nuanced, but at the end of the day liberals need to erase all distinction between property owners and workers.
"It will take a lot of work to discover the answer and the answer might make me uncomfortable so I'm not going to bother and just pretend that it's an unknowable factor like 'what happens after we die' and 'how do magnets work.'"
They have endless admonition for any whiff of a deviation from the status quo, counselling sagely that it will lead to disaster, but are curiously silent when the status quo leads to disaster. It's why I hate the term "extremist". What could possibly be more extreme than the course of self-annihilation we're already on?
I've been looking for a word to describe why I avoid anyone who brings up "freakonomics". Nuance fetishist is perfect
Reading that book made me feel smart... when I was literally 11.
I was at least 14/15 and I felt pretty smart too
There's a phrase I've used to describe this liberal tendency as the "Freakanomic Counter-intuition Complex"
this is unironically very flattering, thank you
Death to America
They’re partially right though, neoliberalism as an ideology purposefully obfuscates the most simple ideas so people can’t understand them
Permanently Deleted
"Nuance fetishist"... when somebody wants to actively take part in a conversation they no little about...
My tendency to seek always more nuance is always in conflict with my desire to have strong moral stances. I think sometimes the nuance is a good tool when you’re one of the people solving a problem. But in lieu of larping as some architect of society, I’m much happier erring on the side of morality. Moral intuition shouldn’t always go unchallenged or unquestioned, but there’s a time to shit or get off the pot. And finding that line is a skill that can be developed.
As a former nuance-fetishist liberal, this is almost always a cover for not knowing enough about a thing to have an opinion, and defaulting to the middle because of the false belief that 2 antagonistic points of view are equally dishonest.
In my particular case, I grew up with a lot of TV shows and cartoons that had a Rashomon-style POV ep where 3 people all told incredibly slanted stories and the truth was always somewhere in the middle.
They're just embarrassed Israel supporters and anti-Palestinian racists. As others have pointed out, the whole 'it's too complex' thing is a convenient excuse to continue the status quo. What goes unspoken in their line of thought is that we're already intervening but on the side of supporting the genocide. It's not inaction that they want, but the maintenance of current actions
"Uhh actually homelessness I more nuanced than you think" no it really isn't. The solution a child thought of is actually just the best solution, there is no nuance, give people homes, it's that easy. "Uhh but the market... People don't wanna live where the house is" yes they do, give them a functioning house, give them a functioning society, give them transport and none of this matters and the economy does better and also fuck the market.
"Uhh actually climate action is more nuanced" no it isn't, we're all going to fucking die unless we do drastic shit right now. Your mickey-mouse-model of sustainable living isn't nuanced, it's bullshit.
"Uhhh the Israel Palestine conflict is nuanced" no it isn't, the Israelis are creating an ethnostate, and if you really think they should have one, carve it out of Germany - now THAT would be nuanced
I see you also listen to Death is Just around the corner
never heard of that, is it good?
Death to America
My favorite podcast. in a recent episode he discussed liberals obsession with nuance. And how everything now is just events and issue that are made into be the natural order of how they had to happen and nothing we do could have changed the outcome all the while using their obsession with nuance to defend the atrocities.
It's $5/mo. On Patreon, but he's also been on True Anon. Michael S. Judge
It's speaking in behalf of others instead if just saying "I'm too ignorant to have an opinion'. It's not that it's universally too complex, they don't get to decide that. They're just telling you they're big dumb babies.
another excellent phrase!