r/TrueUnpopularOpinion • u/letaluss • 19h ago
Political Republicans don't understand what makes America great.
Republicans ITT:
"America is great! Except the immigrants, the rights for sexual and racial minorities, higher education, public research institutions, social services, lack of manufacturing jobs, fair and impartial courts, and the ability for anyone to succeed regardless of race, sex, creed, or national origin."
The Republican party policy has been to take American greatness for granted, and then post-factually attribute our world-power status to a mixture of 'the natural superiority of white men' and prosperity gospel.
In reality, America is the greatest country in the world because we provide the tools necessary for ambitious, intelligence, self-directed people to succeed and prosper regardless of class or social prestige.
It's very difficult to be uneducated in America. You will see opportunities going to everyone except yourself, you will see your friends and family out-earn you, and you will find yourself being left behind by a cultural zeitgeist more interested in critical self-examination than nationalist pandering.
The 'correct' answer of course, is to move to another country, or learn some skill so that you can contribute to the greatest nation in the history of the world. But there is another path, the Republican path, where you sit at home drinking beer, throwing cans at your TV whenever a successful black person walks on the screen.
TL;DR: Republicans are mad that America is too meritocratic, and that not enough people are automatically disqualified from professional success by their class, race, gender, religion, etc.
•
u/Adorable-Writing3617 18h ago
Meh, "greatest" exists on a gradient. It's not the same as "place I'd rather live". I think plenty in other countries are doing just fine.
•
u/letaluss 18h ago
Totally legitimate.
I guess that I should be more careful to not project my beliefs about American greatness.
•
u/amongusmuncher 18h ago
Republicans are mad that America is too meritocratic
Even the founding fathers themselves didn't believe in meritocracy.
•
u/letaluss 18h ago
The Naturalization Act of 1790 did not make the USA a world power.
•
u/amongusmuncher 18h ago
Then what did? You claim that
"America is the greatest country in the world because we provide the tools necessary for ambitious, intelligence, self-directed people to succeed and prosper regardless of class or social prestige"
but this wasn't a thing for most of America's history. Until 1965, European immigration was heavily favored over immigration from Africa, South America, and Asia. We became an industrial giant, won two world wars, and invented nukes, all of this while our immigration policy was 'closed.'
We are not a superpower because anyone in the world can come here, we were a superpower far before that.
•
u/letaluss 18h ago
Then what did?
Embracing Liberalism and free-trade, instead of monarchism and mercantilism.
We became an industrial giant, won two world wars, and invented nukes, all of this while our immigration policy was 'closed.'
Except for all of those refugees that fled from War-torn Europe being persecuted for their religion, race, ethnicity, etc.
We are a superpower because anyone in the world can succeed here.
FTFY.
•
u/amongusmuncher 17h ago
Embracing Liberalism and free-trade, instead of monarchism and mercantilism.
Historically illiterate. Monarchism + Mercantilism countries (Spain in 1500/1600's, France 1600's/1700's, Britain 1600's/1700's) were wildly successful. Meanwhile today their are liberal, free-trade countries like Ghana, Liberia (which is modeled after the US), and Malawi which are impoverished.
Except for all of those refugees that fled from War-torn Europe being persecuted for their religion, race, ethnicity, etc.
Yes, Whites built the US, thanks for proving my point.
Anyways, care to answer as to when the US became a superpower?
•
u/letaluss 17h ago
Monarchism + Mercantilism countries (Spain in 1500/1600's, France 1600's/1700's, Britain 1600's/1700's) were wildly successful.
...Which is why they are still Mercantile monarchists, right? :P
Yes, Whites built the US, thanks for proving my point.
I was making a kinda-joke, but okay.
Also, I don't think that Jews were considered white during WW2. But hey, maybe I'm wrong? It's nice to know that anyone can become white so long as they have a scientific/cultural contribution white people want to appropriate. :P
Anyways, care to answer as to when the US became a superpower?
Arguably, The cold world era where the US was able to make the world safe for liberalism and create several paths for the smartest, most capable people in the world to come to America and contribute to our institutions.
When/why do you think the US became a superpower?
•
u/amongusmuncher 16h ago
...Which is why they are still Mercantile monarchists, right? :P
Again, that opinion is historically illiterate. There are innumerable things that were game changers in their day that, for one reason or another, aren't in use today. Mercantilism became outdated with global industrialization. And there were many aspects of the 'liberal free trade' US you praise that were mercantile in nature. Tariffs, subsidies for infrastructure, seizing land and selling it cheaply to settlers. The US didn't get into free trade until about the mid 20th century.
Also, I don't think that Jews were considered white during WW2.
Who said anything about jews? 80-90% of refugees from Europe during WW2 were Whites.
Arguably, The cold world era where the US was able to make the world safe for liberalism
The fact that the US was able to make the world "safe for liberalism" implies they were already a superpower by that point.
and create several paths for the smartest, most capable people in the world to come to America and contribute to our institutions.
So smart and capable, that they were incapable of building such institutions in their own countries, and had to come to ours.
•
u/letaluss 15h ago
Mercantilism became outdated with global industrialization
...Which was a consequence of Liberal economics and a system of international trade.
The US didn't get into free trade until about the mid 20th century.
You should realize that America was a Liberal nation that relied on free trade and private ownership of capital at it's founding. There were policies we might call 'economically protectionist', but IMO the USA has refined itself to be more Liberal over the 18th and 19th centuries, since you know, most politicians recognized that Liberalism was making America great.
subsidies for infrastructure
Do you think all state involvement in the economy is Mercantile? I don't think of the Build Back Better Plan as being consistent with a Mercantile economy.
The fact that the US was able to make the world "safe for liberalism" implies they were already a superpower by that point.
You asked a 'when' question, I gave you a 'when' answer. The way that the USA was able to become a world-power was through embracing Liberalism, which set them up to dominate the world after the monarchists/fascists of Europe spent 30 years trying to kill each-other. It's kind of like saying "The fact William the Conquerer was able to unite England under his rule implies that he was already a king." Like, what?
So smart and capable, that they were incapable of building such institutions in their own countries, and had to come to ours.
Correct. Countries that are aliberal typically treat their scientists/intellectuals/capable people terribly, which makes them retreat to a country where they will actually be valued for their abilities.
When/why do you think the US became a superpower?
•
u/Breakpoint 18h ago
Not everyone moving here takes up these "tools", some prefer to be assisted for life by others
•
u/Daltoz69 19h ago
I’d advise you to go talk to an actual conservative
•
u/letaluss 19h ago
There are lots of conservatives in the Democratic party.
That's why I said "Republican", not "Conservative".
•
u/Daltoz69 18h ago
Okay, sorry. I meant talk to a non-socialist
•
u/calicoowouwu 18h ago
I be peeping on y’alls little reddit groups just so i can watch you call each other socialists, liberals, and “fellow conservatives” whenever u disagree on anything 😭
•
u/Daltoz69 17h ago
I’m not conservative
•
u/calicoowouwu 17h ago
Try talking to a real conservative 😩🫵🏻
•
•
•
u/letaluss 18h ago
I didn't make a socialist argument here.
Capitalism/Liberalism made America the greatest country in the world. My criticism of Republicans aren't that they're too capitalist, it's that Capitalism has left Republicans behind and they feel entitled to American greatness.
Also, there are lots of non-socialists in the Democratic party.
•
u/Daltoz69 17h ago
Well I can only assume if you’re calling today’s Democrats conservative
•
u/letaluss 17h ago
Only if you look at their party platform and the vast majority of Democratic policy-makers, but w/e.
•
u/Daltoz69 17h ago
Yes, and from where I sit. I wouldn’t call any of them conservative
•
u/letaluss 17h ago
I didn't know that free trade, balancing the federal budget, reducing deficits, and increasing police funding were leftist policies. TIL.
•
u/Daltoz69 17h ago
No, but taxing millionaires to no end, taxing unrealized gains and subsidizing grocery stores sure are
•
u/letaluss 17h ago
But taxing millionaires to no end
TIL that 50s and 60s tax policy was irresponsibly liberal.
"Democrats are socialists!"
"Why do you believe that?"
"Because some of them want to place a tax on unrealized gains on securities!"
Do you not understand how economically illiterate this sounds?
subsidizing grocery stores
What do you think farmer subsidiaries are designed to do?
→ More replies (0)•
u/Plenty_Potential_908 17h ago edited 17h ago
This sounds like something a leftist would say pretending to be a Republican, so imo you definitely started out with that, even though you said “I didn’t make the socialist argument”
"America is great! Except the immigrants, the rights for sexual and racial minorities, higher education, public research institutions, social services, lack of manufacturing jobs, fair and impartial courts, and the ability for anyone to succeed regardless of race, sex, creed, or national origin."
•
•
u/Dangime 18h ago
Well, first off, for whites as a group to be jealous of blacks as a group, blacks as a group would actually have to be successful.
There are a lot of individually successful black people, which is awesome, but as a group, a lifestyle of government assistance, free housing, free food, and a steady stream of lifestyle drugs is not "black people being successful" it's just the democratic party funding the underclass vote in an effort to stay in power. That's just people getting bought off.
In fact no one I knows makes this argument because no one cares if you get rich unless you're directly fucking someone over. You might have a point where there are angry white people that pay taxes that don't want unsuccessful black people to get free money for doing nothing...but you didn't even try to make that argument.
•
u/letaluss 18h ago
Well, first off, for whites as a group to be jealous of blacks as a group, blacks as a group would actually have to be successful.
I didn't say anything like this. Republicans love the 'blacks as a group' so long as they're out of sight, don't ask for more rights, and don't threaten the 'white monopoly on power'. Even the KKK loves that version of 'blacks as a group'.
•
u/Dangime 18h ago
"America is great! Except the immigrants, the rights for sexual and racial minorities, higher education, public research institutions, social services, lack of manufacturing jobs, fair and impartial courts, and the ability for anyone to succeed regardless of race, sex, creed, or national origin."
You can divie up all these groups.
Sexual minorities? Everyone just wants their 90s gay people back that just want to share their health insurance and visit each other in the hospital, and not try to turn public schools into drag shows.
Racial minorities? Literally no one cares unless you're on the dole, actively committing crimes, etc.
Fair and Impartial Courts? So, you mean activist judges and selectively not prosecuting minorities for "social justice" reasons?
Manufacturing jobs is a major problem. The global supply lines to get even something basic made like antibiotics now run through hostile foreign powers that can cut them off anytime it suits them as seen during COVID. Imagine trying to fight a war, but all the steel and aluminum is made in some 3rd world country that hates you and happily cuts off trade just to watch you burn.
The ability for anyone to succeed regardless of race, sex, creed, or national origin?
No one talks like this. It's not like white people would choose white meth heads over successful minorities. Do you think whites would rather preside over a giant pure white methed out trailer park nation rather than let a few rich minorities make it? If so, who gave you this idea?
•
u/letaluss 18h ago
and not try to turn public schools into drag shows.
This isn't worth responding to.
Racial minorities? Literally no one cares unless you're on the dole, actively committing crimes, etc.
If you hold minorities to a different standard than white people, that's literally racism, but whatever.
Fair and Impartial Courts? So, you mean activist judges and selectively not prosecuting minorities for "social justice" reasons?
This is something the D.A. would do, not 'activist judges'. The D.A.'s ability to choose which crimes to charge is important to avoid political prosecution.
Manufacturing jobs is a major problem. The global supply lines to get even something basic made like antibiotics now run through hostile foreign powers that can cut them off anytime it suits them as seen during COVID.
The global supply chain is what stops the US from going to war with 'hostile powers', encourages those 'hostile powers' to move towards Economic Liberalism, gives those citizens opportunity.
The entire premise of Liberalism is "People are able to be more productive if they're allowed to specialize".
It's not like white people would choose white meth heads over successful minorities.
Talking about Republicans here, not white people.
•
u/Dangime 17h ago
If you hold minorities to a different standard than white people, that's literally racism, but whatever.
Did I tell you to hold hands and sing kumbaya with white welfare recipients?
This is something the D.A. would do, not 'activist judges'. The D.A.'s ability to choose which crimes to charge is important to avoid political prosecution.
It's more like rewarding it's voter base by decriminalizing their normal illegal behaviors.
The global supply chain is what stops the US from going to war with 'hostile powers', encourages those 'hostile powers' to move towards Economic Liberalism, gives those citizens opportunity.
Yes, 2004 would like it's foreign policy back. China is no more liberal than then, if anything they are more of a crazy dictatorship than ever with daily threats to invade Taiwan.
The entire premise of Liberalism is "People are able to be more productive if they're allowed to specialize".
Sure, I'll specialize in making war machines and you specialize in making youtube videos and we'll see who wins the next war.
Talking about Republicans here, not white people
So, you literally think republicans want white meth heads over successful minorities? Troll post?
•
u/letaluss 17h ago
Literally no one cares unless you're on the dole, actively committing crimes, etc.
Well literally no one cares when white people are on the dole or actively committing crimes so yeah, it's a bit of a double-standard.
It's more like rewarding it's voter base by decriminalizing their normal illegal behaviors.
At first you thought that it was activist judges declining to charge people with crimes. I don't think you know very much about this process.
Yes, 2004 would like it's foreign policy back. China is no more liberal than then, if anything they are more of a crazy dictatorship than ever with daily threats to invade Taiwan.
I wonder why they haven't invaded Taiwan. Also, please consider what a state like China would do if it didn't have business relationships with the western powers to consider. :P
Sure, I'll specialize in making war machines and you specialize in making youtube videos and we'll see who wins the next war.
Not sure how this is related to the conversation, but whatever.
Also please remember that America lost Vietnam despite an arbitrarily large budget because of popular opposition, and Russia funds anti-Ukraine youtubers. So yeah, ignoring Youtube is going to be a losing strategy in any modern military conflict. :P
So, you literally think republicans want white meth heads over successful minorities? Troll post?
Depends what you mean by 'want', but basically yes. If you ban immigrants from Muslim-majority countries, but not from Europe, you are saying "A white meth-head from Norway deserves more consideration when immigrating, than the smartest and most qualified people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen."
•
u/Dangime 16h ago
I think you're just objectively wrong here. White welfare moochers if any there held to a higher standard of disgust. The only time you see people not care about welfare consumption is when it is so rare and it's use is socially frowned upon and has a minimal burden to the tax payer. So, you're seeing a different reaction to say a welfare state in Finland almost no one uses and one being generationally road into the ground in the USA.
Oh it can totally be both judges, DAs, and a criminal voter base.
I think China hasn't invaded Taiwan because we've poured trillions of dollars into protecting the first island chain.
I don't think American lost in Vietnam due to free trade? So what's your point? You don't seem to have one. You seem to think any industry no matter how basic can be exported to hostile foreign powers.
Do we have a big Norwegian meth head problem though? Do Norwegians commit terrorism at 60 times the rate of Americans like Muslims do? I mean, for a problem to be considered it ought to really exist?
•
u/letaluss 16h ago
I think you're just objectively wrong here. White welfare moochers if any there held to a higher standard of disgust.
The only time you see people not care about welfare consumption is when it is so rare and it's use is socially frowned upon and has a minimal burden to the tax payer.
IDK. If there is evidence of this, I have not been exposed to it.
I don't think American lost in Vietnam due to free trade? So what's your point? You don't seem to have one. You seem to think any industry no matter how basic can be exported to hostile foreign powers.
A free press is considered an element of free trade. If the USA was a monarchist or authoritarian nation, they could have easily suppressed the anti-war movement.
Do Norwegians commit terrorism at 60 times the rate of Americans like Muslims do?
So in America, we judge individuals based off of their individual merits, not based off of their religious/ethnic/gender group. If you want to discriminate against entire groups without nuance, there are plenty of countries you can move to with racist/sexist/religionist public policy.
•
u/powypow 18h ago
You don't really interact with a lot of Republicans do you
•
•
u/Sonofdeath51 19h ago
thanks for sharing!