this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
559 points (96.2% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
8436 readers
1342 users here now
Rules:
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
- Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
- If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this.
- Posts should use high-quality sources, and posts about an article should have the same headline as that article. You may edit your post if the source changes the headline. For a rough idea, check out this list.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
- Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
- This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out:
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In truth that jackass probably had no idea what any of it meant until it applied to her.
Every conservative voter ever. And to make matters worse, they'd probably say there should be an exception for them but other women in an identical condition should have to risk death.
Critical thinking and empathy are both foreign concepts to them.
This is the problem with these people. This won't lead to some epiphany because they still refuse to accept that they actually voted for this.
She didn't actually bother to read any of the flyers and just came up with her own interpretation of what was being promised. Then voted for that imagined reality.
As a general rule conservatives can't imagine how horrible a situation is until it applies to them. This is why empathy should be taught in school.
Some people lack empathy. Its not something you can teach unfortunately. They should be identified young so that they are never allowed to have any power of any kind. Its a disability worse than blindness or deafness. It is invisible but allows these people to be cruel and manipulate people without any guilt. It why we are in the situation in the world where these people have gained power. They manipulate the stupid people and those who are like them enjoy the pain and suffering they spread around. Until its their pain and suffering and suddenly its a problem.
Oh, are we doing eugenics again?
Empathy can be taught. Some are better at it than others. Like literally everything else.
The exception might be with psychopaths, but that is such a small percentage and wouldn't swing an election.
Maybe republicans are all psychopaths? Maybe not so rare?
Studies show they have larger amygdalas which contribute to their enhanced fear and "fear of other" responses.
No its not eugenics. Its keeping unsafe people from harming others. I didn't say they can't breed. Pretty telling statement from you that you went there first. You cannot teach empathy if the person doesn't have it naturally. That is just plain stupid. You can of course teach them to lie about it. It will be imperfect and they will only use it to manipulate people.
Most psychopaths are productive non violent and non victimizing citizens. Its apples and oranges. Many doctors have clear psychopathic tendencies. It doesn't make them pedo rapists or abusive. Like a clear lack of empathy does. It doesn't cause them to play games with peoples emotions for nothing more than their own entertainment. The two are nothing alike and like all human mental conditions there is some overlap.
The lack of empathy mostly overlaps with a cluster B diagnosis. Particularly NPD. Those are the people who say empathy isn't real or its learned.
Ok, let me clarify.
You don't "learn empathy". Almost everyone (except some seriously broken minds) has empathy, even if only for their immediate family. Even Republicans. You can see this in the way they care about family and realize things are bad when it affects them.
What you CAN learn is that empathy shouldn't apply just to your family. Or just to your race. Or just to your species. It's a skill you can grow and refine. You weren't born caring about people you've never met. Your mind couldn't conceive of it. Now it can. You learned.
Plus, doing all the things you mentioned would lower those people's chance of mating. Eugenics. Or "eugenics light" if you're feeling particularly offended.
Yup, super naive.
Sure she did. ‘Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.’
Her misunderstanding was in not realizing which group she was in. She thought those laws applied to those other people, not her.
I disagree. These people are literally too stupid to think of any other scenario than “slut fucks a bunch of men until she inevitably gets pregnant, we gotta punish her” until it happens to them.
They are not conservatives. They call themselves that not knowing or understanding what the word means. They are regressives. They are some of the least personally conservative people in most respects. Especially in the material and monetary sense. They always want the best clothes and devices. The newest cars. They are a sham people and if they didn't do so much harm I could pity them. They are pitiful but in no way deserve pity.
The old in group thing is not just conservatives. That old thing is in play all over the world with a wide variety of names. Its Communism in the CCP. its Zionism in Palestine/israel. Its many other things in many places. It is in no way just a thing in the US. The one thing they have in common is there is some 'magical' word that shields them from their hypocrisy. Its the morally weak pretending they are morally superior while doing horrible things.
The Conservative movement wasn’t started to conserve money. It was started in Europe around the French Revolution as a way to conserve the power of the ruling class.
Around that time, the ruling class had a bit of an existential crisis; they had always believed that bloodline was what determined who was part of the In Group and who wasn’t. But during the French Revolution they started to think that perhaps bloodline wasn’t the way to judge who was Deserving of being in their little In-Group clique, or at least it might not be the only component of who should have access to it.
So they settled on money as their new main determining factor. It’s also why they (or those aspiring to the class) always want the best, shiniest new clothes and devices; it showcases their wealth and thus their eligibility for joining the In Group.
You can't seem to separate what they call themselves from what they are. They stole the word conservative which I consider myself a genuine conservative. Part of being a real conservative is not judging or involving yourselves in others lives. If they don't impact my life I care not what others do. Its taking changes slowly and in this world that is watching expenditures carefully. Its a lot of things. None of these are things what the majority calling themselves conservative today are.
You need to back up to the french revolution? Keep going. You can go back to the building of the pyramids and see the same thing. But I'm not talking about ancient Egypt much less the french revolution that quickly became just as In group as what they replaced. Just to be clear, fuck the french. I'm talking about the US today and don't need to muddy the waters.
The magats are not conservative today. They just call themselves that. They are regressive. You are just playing their game insisting on making this morass about in groups and other useless comparisons. You are a useful tool for them. Like I said the scam you describe is ongoing all over the world right now. Has been for nearly all of human existence. Its seems that you can't get past that. You keep talking about in groups like its some revelation when its just the way societies have always worked. If they were instantly gone today some new system just like it would spring up. Hell they might call themselves conservative but probably they would call themselves woke and would become just as corrupt quicker than you think.
Yes, there have always been people trying to create the in-group out-group dynamic, I never said there wasn’t. But in the past the in-group was determined solely by bloodline. Allowing anyone in as long as they have enough cash is a fairly recent development.
I’m going back to the French Revolution because that’s where the modern movement started. It was crafted largely by Prince Kelmens von Metternich of Vienna as a response to the rising tide of proletariat revolutions and movements towards demanding more commoner’s representation in government.
I hate to say it, but you’re the one who’s been taken in by the bullshit they spout to make themselves appear legitimate. All that stuff they say about saving money and taking things slow is a smokescreen. You’ll notice none of the leaders of conservative movements have ever paid more than lip service to those ideals.
But because they want an in-group and an out-group, the conservative movement attracts regressives and other assholes who want to get special treatment without doing anything to deserve it, I agree. It’s useful for conservatives; it means that those people help support their push for power in the hopes they can be allowed into the ‘in-group’.
What you do though is steal their words back. Just look how offended they get about rainbows now. I've quit calling them conservatives. Let them call themselves what they want. Let call them what they are. Stupid racist bigoted fascist regressives. But not conservatives or christians.