Summary
With Donald Trump’s 2024 election win, young Gen Z voters like Kate, Holly, and Rachel are grappling with deepening divides with their Trump-supporting parents.
For many, these conflicts go beyond policy disagreements, touching on core values and morality. Parents once focused on fiscal conservatism have, in some cases, embraced conspiracy theories, creating painful rifts.
Studies suggest political divisions are increasingly seen as moral judgments, fostering a “mega-identity” where political views signify personal decency.
For these young adults, maintaining family connections amidst such ideological fractures has become challenging.
Socially ostracizing them is dealing with it. People aren’t sticking their heads in the sand here. They’re telling these people that their actions have consequences, and one of those consequences is exile. Cutting people out of your life is just one part of dealing with these people.
Let me ask you this, if your kid ends up in a way not acceptable to you, will you “socially ostracize” them? Simply say “there’s nothing i can do” and cut them out of your life?
If so, then I am sad for you. Not pity, just sadness.
If not, then why not feel the same for your parents? Because they’re old or something like that?
I don’t know. It’s just… eh, can’t even use ‘weird’ anymore… maybe ‘lame’ works. It’s lame to be so decisive in giving up, yet still flower it up as some sort of moral punishment.
Yeh, people are dumb. Yeh, people can be evil. And yeh, some people are irremediable with too much wrongdoing to be forgiven. But it’s important to know the difference between these aspects and treat them accordingly. Otherwise, it’s just being lazy about it.
Do you not understand the concept of compounding events or something?
This isn’t coming from nowhere and it’s not the first action people are taking.
This is coming from 10-20 years of dealing with these people. The drunk uncle going on about “the darkies” every Thanksgiving since Reagan was in office. The in-laws making comments about how they respect you as a person, they just can’t support your “gay lifestyle.” The mother or father asking why you can’t just be a feminine gay man instead of trans. People who have had years of their cognitive dissonance pointed out to them as they repeatedly vote for politicians who want to hurt their friends and family.
And now, as the thugs are donning their jackboots and people are saying, “Enough is enough, you’re a danger to my life and right to freedom,” you’re wondering why the abuser doesn’t deserve to be in their victims’ lives?
The path of least resistance.
We often walk it without even realizing it.
The drunk uncle. Alcohol is called liquid courage for a reason. Has anyone tried since Reagan to teach him throughout the year he’s got nothing to fear or was he left to stew with only a propaganda channel as company and then only rebuked at Thanksgiving?
In-laws. Nosy relatives are a staple of large family gatherings. They usually don’t really care about your “gay lifestyle”, they just want to nag, nitpick and compare. “Look at me and my kids! We’re all proper and shit! Nyeh nyeh nyeh!” Even if you shut them down on one thing, they just move on to something else. The cunts. But that’s just how some social contracts work.
Parents. The biological urge to reproduce is often times a contest of wills that the urge tends to win. Parents want biological grandchildren. When the possibility of getting one drops to zero, it’s a shock to the system. Does not compute. “Feminine gay man” is a fucking win in the face of that.
You want people to make difficult decisions because they’re the right thing to do, but you don’t care to understand how or why these type of decisions are difficult to them. Because it harms you, it harms others. Well guess what, harm comes in different shapes and forms, often unnoticed and unchallenged.
If you’re unwilling to understand the difficulty in changing who you are, who you’ve been for a large part of your life without a constant impetus to push forward that change, then do you really deserve that type of understanding from others? To clarify further, you’re the impetus. Without you there to push them towards acceptance, who exactly are you expecting to do that for them? Fox news?
It’s hard, very hard, so hard that many just pack up and run. And that’s fine. It’s completely fine. But it ain’t the right thing to do, it’s the left one.
Now you’re just justifying the actions of abusers. Your speculated scenarios are as likely to be accurate as they are to be completely off the mark. Just like your assumption that the people cutting extremists out of their lives never put any effort into changing their beliefs.
The same exact words apply to your own argument. You might as well be saying, “Abusive parents deserve to be in their grandchildrens’ lives because it’s harmful to them to not be allowed to see their grandkids.”
Your problem is that you believe their actions aren’t supposed to be justified. But that’s the wrong approach. “Every action has consequences” is just bullshit on its own. The web of reaction is as old as the universe and us picking which action deserve a certain reaction is nothing more than personal whim.
We’re flawed beings, all of us. I can’t be right for every situation, but neither can you. And the difference between us is that I want to try and treat each individual as an individual. You may see this as excusing an abuser, I see it as fighting against abuse.
I won’t protect everyone and i can’t protect everyone, but just like any other kind of death row decision, it has to be earned. Each degree of punishment has to be fair. The chance for redemption has to be given. Punishment should be for the purpose of rehabilitation. And if we can’t do it at an individual level, how can we expect it to be done for a better society.
Being just is hard work. And if you can’t do it, why expect it of others?
It’s not that I don’t believe their actions are supposed to be justified - I don’t believe that they are justifiable. They can try to justify them all they want, but that doesn’t make them just, right, or reasonable when they support a man who has spent 8 years telling everybody exactly who he is and what he intends to do. It means that they either support him in his bigotry and intention to destroy American democracy, or at the very least, they find it acceptable enough to ignore it. The calls for state sanctioned violence against minorities aren’t a bridge too far for these people. Nor are his calls for terrorism against minorities from his supporters.
I have a saying: There are conservatives, and there are Republicans, and these are not the same thing. I have watched Republicans since 9/11. I saw how the attacks on Jews tripled in the 24 hours after the towers fell, how the attacks on black people doubled, and how Muslim parents asked their kids if they wanted to change their names to something more American so they wouldn’t get attacked at school. I have tried to reason with Republicans since I was 14 and had to hide my sexuality and pretend to fit in with cis straight white people. I saw how my former coworker voted for Trump the first time and became a staunch Democrat after seeing what he did. I watched as the racist jokes kids made on 4chan became their actual beliefs. I heard over and over again on live TV Republicans complain about how they were being censored when people reacted poorly to their publicly broadcasted hatred and bigotry.
Refusing to talk to people isn’t censorship or a “death row decision,” as you put it. It’s the conclusion to decades of attempting to reason with these people. It’s accepting the fact that they have shown that when the chips are down, they won’t have your back and may even turn you over to SS themselves. This is about survival now. Cutting the people who voted the fascists in out of your life is harm reduction. When the new administration is openly calling for the genocide of people like you, wagging your finger at the people who voted him in as you’re carted off to the camps isn’t going to cut it.
There are people who can be saved, the young people especially, but Trump is a cult, and one thing about dealing with cultists is that after a certain point, 99% of them will double down rather than accept that they’re wrong. Because to admit that they’re wrong is to admit that everything they’ve done up to this point - everything that they’ve believed - wasn’t justified.
So you can go ahead and wax poetic about the injustice of not talking to the men with rifles all you want. It sure as hell looks like self-defense from the other end of the gun here.
I get it. Your perspective is completely normal. But you’re talking out of fear. While it’s fine to take note of it and make plans in case of worse outcomes, allowing fear to take charge of your decisions will only cause you to fall deeper into it.
Most people don’t know what you think they know. Take any family and you’ll almost always find gaps in their shared facts. Our presence here on Lemmy is deceiving us in what is supposed to be common sense that is often not. But at the same time, the fediverse is a good example of how many topics and interests we don’t share or know of at all.
And besides, if these gun wielding maniacs are so widespread, why would running away help? You’ll just meet them everywhere you go. Makes no sense to trade the danger you know with others you don’t. Call it survival, but it’s really waltzing away with limited resources and knowledge into the great unknown.
Less fear, more reason. Or you’ll just drive yourself crazy with worry.