American Left Need Conservative Marketing.

[martins name]

There was a study done where they asked American conservatives if they care about the environment. Most said no.

They asked others "America has some of the greatest nature on earth. Would you be willing to make a sacrifice for our great nation?". Most said yes.

I think the same appeal to national greatness / stage blue values can be done for other issues as well. Sell universal college as a means to have the smartest population in the world and universal healthcare as a means to have a healthy population.

Also, point out how Americans are falling behind the world on these metrics and how America should be number one and can be if you choose it.

National programs are conservative things, it's just in America that nationalism and neo-liberalism have an unholy alliance. National programs can be sold to conservatives you just have to market it right and remove the stage green stench. You don't have to signal to greens because they are already on board.

Only a stage yellow person could pull this off.

[Recursoinominado]

Of course.

One of the big problems with the left is that we are not as business savvy, ruthless, and power-driven as the right tends to be. The difference in ego development can explain this. The left is resistant to business and marketing because it is mostly seen as manipulative and low consciousness. One of the consequences of that is less resources.

This is a BIG disadvantage. 

 

[Nilsi]

Meh, I think most liberalists would defect such a claim by referring to game theory: „they (e.g. China) don’t sacrifice for nature, so why should we do it?“

Also, high level lefties are just as power-literate as their right-wing counterparts, so that’s not the issue. 

What you have to understand is that there is a massive internal struggle for power in politics, so these people have to constantly appeal to party lines and ideology. 

The kind of rhetoric you’re proposing may just cost you your head, as far as support from the far left goes.

[martins name]

3 hours ago, Nilsi said:

The kind of rhetoric you’re proposing may just cost you your head, as far as support from the far left goes.

It requires balancing a line. It's possible and has been done. Marrianne Williamson uses such retorics from time to time with no backlash.

4 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

One of the big problems with the left is that we are not as business savvy, ruthless, and power-driven as the right tends to be.

This is true but not the problem here. The problem is that this requires stage-yellow thinking to speak to people where they are at. Liberals and conservatives are not able to do this either.

[Recursoinominado]

2 hours ago, martins name said:

The problem is that this requires stage-yellow thinking to speak to people where they are at.

No, it doesn't.

Low-consciousness figures like Trump are masters at speaking with people where they are at to manipulate them.

[martins name]

@Recursoinominado Ha can speak to blue/red/pathological orange because he is there. He can't speak to healthy orange or green. I'm talking about a rhetoric that can speak to blue, orange and green at the same time.

[Bobby_2021]

On 1/12/2024 at 1:20 AM, martins name said:

Sell universal college as a means to have the smartest population in the world and universal healthcare as a means to have a healthy population

This will only result in decreasing the quality of graduates. You need to be a lot more clear in what you mean by free college. I don't want to make STEM education free at all. Maybe some scholarships for students from poorer backgrounds or waving fee for outstanding students inside college are good moves.

Also making healthcare free for all across the board may result in you not getting any treatment at all. When conservatives fear monger against these they are not doing to to block your conscious policies. There are serious problems with the implementation.

I don't want to make it free at the degradation of it's quality. I want a meritocratic system with incentives for high performers of various kinds. We should not incentivise unproductive behaviours. 

[Yimpa]

11 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Also making healthcare free for all across the board may result in you not getting any treatment at all.

Quote

I don't want to make it free at the degradation of it's quality. I want a meritocratic system with incentives for high performers of various kinds. We should not incentivise unproductive behaviours. 

Ah, felt. The best mental health therapists I’ve seen have been out of pocket; they didn’t accept my insurance. Sure, my insurance technically covers therapy sessions. However, from my experience, the ones that were “free” really didn’t help with my treatment effectively. 

I still respect therapists that spread themselves out by being part of the complex insurance system; they have a role in helping those who legitimately don’t have the funds to cover therapy. But the truth of the matter is this: Not locking yourself in a rigid system leads to autonomy and higher quality care for both the therapist and the patient.

[Bobby_2021]

3 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

Ah, felt. The best mental health therapists I’ve seen have been out of pocket; they didn’t accept my insurance. Sure, my insurance technically covers therapy sessions. However, from my experience, the ones that were “free” really didn’t help with my treatment effectively. 

I still respect therapists that spread themselves out by being part of the complex insurance system; they have a role in helping those who legitimately don’t have the funds to cover therapy. But the truth of the matter is this: Not locking yourself in a rigid system leads to autonomy and higher quality care for both the therapist and the patient.

Why would the best therapists lower themselves to the standard of someone with a basic psych degree who don't know what they are doing. 

But if you want free therapy, then there should be a seperate section that offers that, which would obviously be of lower quality.

Also we forget that all the free stuff that we are enjoying right now are NOT the result of your petty politics or your policies.

It's all due to capitalism and scientific/technological breakthroughs. So if you want more free stuff, that's where you should be looking.

The solution to the problem will not be in the problem plane itself.

That's where I am personally looking forward to. 

Find a breakthrough that would make cancer drugs easy to manufacture. Invest more to research and development of Nuclear fusion and quantum computing. All these may be fads, but if they pay off, we would be much better off that any of your conscious politics. 

Conscious politics can solve problems that technology has already solved but politicians are lagging behind due to their degeneracy.

For eg  not forgiving student loans while bailing out big corporations.

Not lowering the prices of cheap drugs.

You should put your focus on stuff that you can solve within the realm of politics. And leave the rest to tech bros. 

[martins name]

@Bobby_2021 follow the European model. Collage admitions are based on highschool grades. Hospitals would still need client to survive. People choose which hospitals they go to so they still have to satisfy a market.

[BlueOak]

 @martins name

The left is a diverse collection of voices and opinions, that's the point. Its teaching people that all of these need to be in balance and understood within you. That no one opinion is solely correct, and that the suppression of too many of these diverse voices leads to disaster. The step after that is obviously to also take the conservative opinions and values, as you are doing here in part. Then socialist, then authoritarian. The order isn't really important, only the more you allow in the formulation of your ideas, the greater your perception and potential strategies or conclusions can become.

What you are asking for is more intelligent and capable political parties. Which many of us advocate for or try to bring about. Sadly that cycles back into the general population, education, cultural values, lifting suppression of these things, media interests and reinforcement, ideology, healing traumas, history, and so on, in an eternal cycle of human development. People can only perceive what they are capable of perceiving, and things are made to represent the population's perception at that time.

Allowing room for alternate opinions is crucial. Trump stretches the liberal acceptance of what life is. Every time he shocks you. No matter how much you hate it, now the small things seem less hard to deal with, having had years of exaggerated absurdity. Also, morality becomes insufficient alone to respond with, as you are seeing, pushing people to reach for more in their responses than just moral indignation. Yes, there are obvious downsides to this trend, as we are now just a few steps away from fascism.

So what is a stage yellow institution? Its not the left or the right.

It would be every political ideology in balance or at least as many as you can form. 
It would be every mind you could integrate into the whole. So that it becomes something they support, and benefit from.
It would not be a single organization, party or institution. It would be designed as an interconnected whole. The party would not be designed separately from the environmental agency, or the highways agency, or the police force, for governance, one would be an extension of the other. (Though this is leaning turquoise). They would still need to reflect popular sentiment and allow for different expressions of it.

I realise this is what people try to do now, but in reality, it's a fractured set of individual and sometimes competing organizations or institutions still. It would be a final acceptance that there is just one government (getting rid of the illusion of separation), while still maintaining many parties or receivers for the population's concerns, and real demonstrable changes when those concerns are raised. - This might initially seem like a dictatorship, not at all it could be a council, or a multi-party system, only with the recognition/systemic design that they are all working as a whole.

AKA - Less reliance on conflict, or individualism to get things done.

However, the world as a whole isn't there yet. Space is not being held for this yet. Instead its conflict and people losing, a face changing every few years, to reinforce a difference is made when concerns are voiced. Individualism. The world likes to believe that things are disconnected, that things don't directly affect each other. Not everywhere, in some places actual achieved policies or changes are highlighted, rather than winning over a face/name, and these connections are more recognized.

Edited January 16 by BlueOak

[Bobby_2021]

On 1/15/2024 at 0:03 AM, martins name said:

follow the European model. Collage admitions are based on highschool grades.

I wonder how much would this work in the US where a lot of college students are foreign nationals. It would end up giving free education to asians and some whites.

Scholarship for meritorious students is a good thing. Also a lot of funding is needed for R&D. How much of that would come from a free college system. Would students pay for R&D funding? 

You can't just imitate all the policies from the Europe just because it works in Europe. 

[Danioover9000]

@BlueOak

On 15/01/2024 at 0:11 AM, BlueOak said:

 @martins name

The left is a diverse collection of voices and opinions, that's the point. Its teaching people that all of these need to be in balance and understood within you. That no one opinion is solely correct, and that the suppression of too many of these diverse voices leads to disaster. The step after that is obviously to also take the conservative opinions and values, as you are doing here in part. Then socialist, then authoritarian. The order isn't really important, only the more you allow in the formulation of your ideas, the greater your perception and potential strategies or conclusions can become.

What you are asking for is more intelligent and capable political parties. Which many of us advocate for or try to bring about. Sadly that cycles back into the general population, education, cultural values, lifting suppression of these things, media interests and reinforcement, ideology, healing traumas, history, and so on, in an eternal cycle of human development. People can only perceive what they are capable of perceiving, and things are made to represent the population's perception at that time.

Allowing room for alternate opinions is crucial. Trump stretches the liberal acceptance of what life is. Every time he shocks you. No matter how much you hate it, now the small things seem less hard to deal with, having had years of exaggerated absurdity. Also, morality becomes insufficient alone to respond with, as you are seeing, pushing people to reach for more in their responses than just moral indignation. Yes, there are obvious downsides to this trend, as we are now just a few steps away from fascism.

So what is a stage yellow institution? Its not the left or the right.

It would be every political ideology in balance or at least as many as you can form. 
It would be every mind you could integrate into the whole. So that it becomes something they support, and benefit from.
It would not be a single organization, party or institution. It would be designed as an interconnected whole. The party would not be designed separately from the environmental agency, or the highways agency, or the police force, for governance, one would be an extension of the other. (Though this is leaning turquoise). They would still need to reflect popular sentiment and allow for different expressions of it.

I realise this is what people try to do now, but in reality, it's a fractured set of individual and sometimes competing organizations or institutions still. It would be a final acceptance that there is just one government (getting rid of the illusion of separation), while still maintaining many parties or receivers for the population's concerns, and real demonstrable changes when those concerns are raised. - This might initially seem like a dictatorship, not at all it could be a council, or a multi-party system, only with the recognition/systemic design that they are all working as a whole.

AKA - Less reliance on conflict, or individualism to get things done.

However, the world as a whole isn't there yet. Space is not being held for this yet. Instead its conflict and people losing, a face changing every few years, to reinforce a difference is made when concerns are voiced. Individualism. The world likes to believe that things are disconnected, that things don't directly affect each other. Not everywhere, in some places actual achieved policies or changes are highlighted, rather than winning over a face/name, and these connections are more recognized.

   This is a great post. Reminds me of the problems with BLM not having a centralized system and headquarters instead of decentralized throughput America. Just look at the funds they received from donations and fund me, the female leader split them to fund other LGBTQ groups, and a larger chunk on her private properties and family members, while a fraction just goes to black community it's supposed to represent and prioritized over the others and ANTIFA.