https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlson-guest-complains-schools-give-children-free-healthcare-free-food-and
REBECCA FRIEDRICHS (GUEST): We should look to the past. So, let's just take the free lunch program that we have in our schools. It started out being pushed by the unions and their friends for poor children. Well, 28 years ago, I had two students in my class on free lunch. Today almost every single child is on free breakfast and free lunch. So what the unions are trying to do, they've pushing something called community schools. And in these community schools, we're giving children free health care, we're are giving them free food, free emotional support, and by the way free political indoctrination for their parents. And so, if these unions and their friends, their politicians, get their way, they would like our schools to be open 24/7. They want to replace the family and families raising their children with our own virtues, they want to replace that with the state. With union-controlled government-run schools. That's dangerous. That's communism when you think about it.
I am not sure how in here is polemic, but I doubt the conscious ideological stance (unconscious stance, see the following) of conservatives is making children starve or something. If conservatism was purely hate and contempt alone, it couldn't hold on to legitimacy. I think the reasoning goes more like being upset at the judeo-bolshevik-coded strawpeople turning their kids reliant on an overreaching state instead of keeping the responsibility within the nuclear family unit, thus leading to ""cultural/societal decay"". Obviously the quiet part is that poor parents and kids deserve their fate, but most conservatives are not really aware of this hypocrisy. Moralism and "deserved poverty" is baked into this stuff way more than "god wants kids to starve", which some people already pointed out with calvinism. But it is not Calvinism exclusive in my opinion. Rather disgust for weakness/need in general (bc you don't wanna admit it could hit you and you want to numb your empathy) being the underlying emotion here, not so much an intellectual argument. Maybe I am getting the discussion wrong and everybody meant that, God knows best...
yeah this is more a paternalistic moral concern that handouts will make them weak or some shit. It's very dumb and frankly horrible and nasty but I don't think she wants kids to starve I think she is very childish and genuinely believes that without these programs their parents would start a small business and achieve the American dream because conservatives don't understand systemic problems
it's like how Rishi Sunak genuinely seems to believe that if everyone in the UK does well in their A level maths the entire country can get jobs in finance and it will all be ok
I think it's darker than that. They don't think everybody can start a small business and be successful but they think that since everybody has the possibility to do so, then it must be people's own fault if they don't do.
I think it's a little column A a little column B
You sure about that? We're not talking about forever here. We're talking about the mask off chuddery since
blazed a trail for the rest of the hogs. That wasn't quite a decade ago.
Generally, no, the GOP isn't big on intellectual arguments except when their talking heads wave words like "LOGIC" and "FACTS" around like carved idols.
I have experienced extremely conservative people with burning hatred for some people, but enough fake affection for "kin" and social facade. Maybe amerikans are indeed satanic enough. I am not saying there is no hate, nor that this incident shouldnt be exploited. More that thinking that is how their brains are wired 100% misses some points
Honestly, Amerikan conservatives are on a wholly different level of evil, i could absolutely see an overwhelming desire to abuse children as their main political motivator. Whether we're talking trans rights, were the GOP's main angle of agitation is to force trans kids through the wrong puberty, or the school to prison pipeline, or the troubled teen industry, or the practice of child brides that's so abhorrently widespread in the US, or the fight against kids being allowed abortions after SA, or this fight against any social support for kids at all, or the absolutely batshit move back to child labor that is sweping red states - i can't help but find that the US chud feels the most bruning hatred for children and is of the firm believe that underage people are nothing but the property of their parents.
It doesn't help what i hear from queer Amerikans in regards to their parents - i'm used to heartbreaking, gut wrenching stories from queer folks struggling with their homophobic and transphobic parents, but the level of open contempt, emotional abuse, manipulation, blackmail, direct physical attacks and how common it is to be homeless as a queer kid because your parents kicked you out, that's hard to wrap my head around.
I believe you. My own experience involves knowing a few people like that, but also knowing a few people of
age that are so bitter, so petty, so full of spite and contempt that they don't even care about "kin" or social facades unless they involve banding together to hate someone else.
If you've met a Qanon cultist, you've already known a few of those. The only community left for them is the anti-community of wanting to see others suffer and die horribly as a petty revenge for their own personal frustrations.
For a somewhat younger skewing crowd (the senior caste there is in its late 40s and early 50s), 4chan's /pol/ is very similar in a hate-as-social-glue structure.
I mean, if you ever were powerless, being able to hit back harder is a pretty relatable goal and nurturing grudges is not so demonic to me. I mean, how many people in here wouldn't like to see some certain people in society
Not saying they are good guys. Besides the two conspiracists I know where not so ragefilled as more empathetic. Like the one guy cried over 9/11 being on Bush (I didn't disagree with him that much over 9/11). Qanon is not big here. Not as.
I don't think it's faked. Someone can have bad and even cruel opinions and not be ontologically evil
As I experience it, these people handwave the social consequences of their politics away with "personal responsibility". The system they envisage is good and fair by definition so if children are starving you should blame the parents for being lazy/smoking cigarettes/being irresponsible.
It's kind of a moral version of the well-known economic principle of privatising profits and socialising losses. Instead here any averse effects are explained by moral shortcomings of individuals.
Sending kids to bed without diner, which is torture conservatives love.