Comes with a very narrow way of thinking, when you literally can’t understand why someone disagrees with you, and have no ability to empathize with their points.
I understand conservative viewpoints, and I empathize why they feel the way they do. (Usually fear of the unknown and change). That doesn’t mean I agree with them at all, but I understand why they think that way. A lot of people cannot do that, and refuse to learn why the other side thinks that way.
I don’t know, you tell me. Empathize with their side and tell me what do you think they think. Not propaganda, not talking points, what do you think the other side thinks. Honestly. They obviously have a reason they think that way, what do you think their reasons are?
Probably because the mechanism of American elections makes it a binary choice, and the options are between “more than 30k dead” and “WAY more than 30k dead”. Half-assed, milquetoast hesitation toward genocide is preferable to enthusiastic support for genocide (not to mention enthusiastic support for other genocides), which is the alternative on the ballot. Do you defend the alternative?
Just testing the communities for bot comments, not lookin good for Lemmy lol
And I guess the criteria for bot is “got downvotes” or “comments of disagreement” yeah?
Try truth social instead. Way fewer bots to bother you.
Comes with a very narrow way of thinking, when you literally can’t understand why someone disagrees with you, and have no ability to empathize with their points.
I understand conservative viewpoints, and I empathize why they feel the way they do. (Usually fear of the unknown and change). That doesn’t mean I agree with them at all, but I understand why they think that way. A lot of people cannot do that, and refuse to learn why the other side thinks that way.
Why does the other side defend >30k dead?
I don’t know, you tell me. Empathize with their side and tell me what do you think they think. Not propaganda, not talking points, what do you think the other side thinks. Honestly. They obviously have a reason they think that way, what do you think their reasons are?
Probably because the mechanism of American elections makes it a binary choice, and the options are between “more than 30k dead” and “WAY more than 30k dead”. Half-assed, milquetoast hesitation toward genocide is preferable to enthusiastic support for genocide (not to mention enthusiastic support for other genocides), which is the alternative on the ballot. Do you defend the alternative?