Can one be bigoted towards a political ideology

According to the merriam-Webster dictionary, a bigot is defined as:

: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Click to expand...

And bigotry is defined as

obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices : the state of mind of a bigot

Click to expand...

Bigot | Definition of Bigot by Merriam-Webster

Recently I have been pondering a question that came to my mind while trying to understand what is driving political tribalism in the United States. The question I had was this: can one be bigoted towards a political ideology or people who identify with that political ideology?


Thoughts?

Absolutely. Exactly what you describe is institutionalized in China, Cuba and North Korea.

we see it in every comment on every thread right here in DP

Unitedwestand13 said:

According to the merriam-Webster dictionary, a bigot is defined as:



And bigotry is defined as



Bigot | Definition of Bigot by Merriam-Webster

Recently I have been pondering a question that came to my mind while trying to understand what is driving political tribalism in the United States. The question I had was this: can one be bigoted towards a political ideology or people who identify with that political ideology?


Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Yes, they can be. See dismissing someone's views based upon them being a member of a political group without hearing them out is a form of bigotry. However, it gets into murky waters when you reach the inevitable debate on the virtues of giving the Nazi viewpoint a seat at the table.

Unitedwestand13 said:

According to the merriam-Webster dictionary, a bigot is defined as:



And bigotry is defined as



Bigot | Definition of Bigot by Merriam-Webster

Recently I have been pondering a question that came to my mind while trying to understand what is driving political tribalism in the United States. The question I had was this: can one be bigoted towards a political ideology or people who identify with that political ideology?


Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Definitely. I would have never thought to use the word bigot, but it fits. We do have many on the left that are intolerant of those political views on the right and vice versa. I suppose we always have had that to a certain extent. But today the intolerant views of others who have a different political ideology or belong to a different political party have hit a high to include most of our political elected leaders of both parties.

They refuse to work with each other, Republicans doom any proposal made by a Democrat and Democrats do the same for any proposal made by a Republican. The merits of the proposal isn't even considered, just who proposed it.

This tribalization, intolerance, bigotry as you put it may be one reason for the rise in the independent ranks. From 30% in 2006 to 44% of the electorate today. Could be those who aren't bigots or intolerant of a different political ideology or philosophy are deserting both political parties who have become so. Those who now remain in both parties are the hard core leftist and rightist. This would explain the more or less straight party line votes that have taken place over the last 20 or so years. Where prior to that a straight party line vote was rarely heard of.

Perhaps independents who are tired of the polarization and ultra high partisanship that bigotry brings have produced three wave elections in 12 years. 2006, 2010 and 2018. Interesting idea of yours.

Perotista said:

Definitely. I would have never thought to use the word bigot, but it fits. We do have many on the left that are intolerant of those political views on the right and vice versa. I suppose we always have had that to a certain extent. But today the intolerant views of others who have a different political ideology or belong to a different political party have hit a high to include most of our political elected leaders of both parties.

They refuse to work with each other, Republicans doom any proposal made by a Democrat and Democrats do the same for any proposal made by a Republican. The merits of the proposal isn't even considered, just who proposed it.

This tribalization, intolerance, bigotry as you put it may be one reason for the rise in the independent ranks. From 30% in 2006 to 44% of the electorate today. Could be those who aren't bigots or intolerant of a different political ideology or philosophy are deserting both political parties who have become so. Those who now remain in both parties are the hard core leftist and rightist. This would explain the more or less straight party line votes that have taken place over the last 20 or so years. Where prior to that a straight party line vote was rarely heard of.

Perhaps independents who are tired of the polarization and ultra high partisanship that bigotry brings have produced three wave elections in 12 years. 2006, 2010 and 2018. Interesting idea of yours.

Click to expand...

I think the conflict goes beyond political parties.

It’s “Liberals” vrs “conservatives”

Of course, so I selected "Yes."

I don't want to hear about "Best system of government" from Communists, Anarchist, or Fascists (and their subset of Nazis); nor do I want any of those ideologies to succeed.

That does not mean I can't tolerate individuals who adhere to such ideologies in other aspects of life. For example, I won't "Punch a Nazi" although I won't listen to one and might try to counter their speech. But I will still support their access to all normal business, and otherwise peaceful share in the social aspects of community while they are NOT trying to push their "ideals" on me or mine.

Captain Adverse said:

Of course, so I selected "Yes."

I don't want to hear about "Best system of government" from Communists, Anarchist, or Fascists (and their subset of Nazis); nor do I want any of those ideologies to succeed.

That does not mean I can't tolerate individuals who adhere to such ideologies in other aspects of life. For example, I won't "Punch a Nazi" although I won't listen to one and might try to counter their speech. But I will still support their access to all normal business, and otherwise peaceful share in the social aspects of community while they are NOT trying to push their "ideals" on me or mine.

Click to expand...

Rejecting an ideology or a political party based on effect, results, agenda, philosophy, or whatever, however, is not bigotry. Discrimination based on bigotry or prejudice is a bad thing. Discrimination based on principle, analysis, critical thinking, etc. can be a very good thing.

We do not reject Nazism out of bigotry but out of knowledge of and rejection of what it has been, what it has wrought, what it is.

To reject a political party on vague or unproven belief of this or that unacceptable characterization is bigotry and/or prejudice.

To reject a political party because of its agenda, what it has wrought, what the results have been, etc. is a good thing.

SDET said:

Absolutely. Exactly what you describe is institutionalized in China, Cuba and North Korea.

Click to expand...

And was in Augustos Chile...

Jetboogieman said:

And was in Augustos Chile...

Click to expand...

Chile was already a Castro colony. Pinochet had to take drastic measures to pull things out of the fire. Chile would have become what Venezuela is today.

AlbqOwl said:

Rejecting an ideology or a political party based on effect, results, agenda, philosophy, or whatever, however, is not bigotry. Discrimination based on bigotry or prejudice is a bad thing. Discrimination based on principle, analysis, critical thinking, etc. can be a very good thing.

We do not reject Nazism out of bigotry but out of knowledge of and rejection of what it has been, what it has wrought, what it is.

To reject a political party on vague or unproven belief of this or that unacceptable characterization is bigotry and/or prejudice.

To reject a political party because of its agenda, what it has wrought, what the results have been, etc. is a good thing.

Click to expand...

I never meant to insinuate that my "bigotry" isn't based on all those points you presented. I agree that to my mind I am being very reasonable.

But I am pretty sure the Nazi's, Commies, and Anarchists don't agree; since despite all those points, they still believe they are being persecuted and you are I are wrong.

Captain Adverse said:

I never meant to insinuate that my "bigotry" isn't based on all those points you presented. I agree that to my mind I am be very reasonable.

But I am pretty sure the Nazi's, Commies, and Anarchists don't agree, since despite all those points, they still believe you are I are wrong.

Click to expand...

Yes. They all say we are wrong. And if we are intellectually honest, we will admit that we see Nazis, Commies, and Anarchists as bigots because if they weren't, they wouldn't be Nazis, Commies, and Anarchists.

Unitedwestand13 said:

I think the conflict goes beyond political parties.

It’s “Liberals” vrs “conservatives”

Click to expand...

Yes, but it is parties now. I would say over the years the Democratic Party has become more and more liberal while the Republican Party has become more and more conservative. I can remember when both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. The Republicans had the Northeast, the liberal Rockefeller Republican northeast. The Democrats had the solid conservative south. The Republicans shed their liberals and the Democrats their conservatives.

Today Romney probably is an example of a liberal Republican while Biden a conservative Democrat. You may be able to come up with better examples. I'm sure both parties having shed their unwanted wings are in the process of shedding their moderates. 2010 did a good job of getting rid of the more moderate blue dogs of the democratic party. Perhaps the more left and right extremist show up in Washington than in either political party in general. That could be a result of the hard core Ideologues are more apt to get out and vote in the primaries.

I don't think Trump, McConnell, Schumer, Pelosi and most of the rest represent main stream or middle America. they all represent the hard left or hard right. I'm sure they represent their base, but not those in the center, center right or center left, middle America as I call them. This is why I think independents gave Democratic House candidates an 18 point margin 57-39 in 2006 and voted in Obama in 2008. They thought Bush and his Republicans no longer represented them. Then independents gave the GOP house candidates a 19 point margin, 56-37 in 2010 and voted for Trump in 2016. Obama and the democrats didn't represent them either. Now you have 2018 where independents went Democratic in the house races 54-42 and have soured on Trump. Trump and the Republicans only representing their base, not middle America.

I would wager if the Democrats win the White House in 2020 that in 2022 independents will switch back to the Republicans as the democrats will represent their base forgetting all about middle America stating they have a mandate to do this and to do that. I also wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the independents ranks rise above 50% of the electorate as both major parties shrink below 30% in the next ten years.

Synonyms for bigot
extremist
fanatic
maniac
racist
zealot
chauvinist
diehard
doctrinaire
dogmatist
enthusiast
fiend
monomaniac
partisan
persecutor
puritan
sectarian
segregationist
sexist
stickler
opinionated person

SDET said:

Chile was already a Castro colony. Pinochet had to take drastic measures to pull things out of the fire. Chile would have become what Venezuela is today.

Click to expand...

As long as its innocent men, women and children being disappeared by pedophile Nazi cult because they are suspected of being from the wrong political persuasion, then it's A-OK with SDET.

Unitedwestand13 said:

According to the merriam-Webster dictionary, a bigot is defined as:



And bigotry is defined as



Bigot | Definition of Bigot by Merriam-Webster

Recently I have been pondering a question that came to my mind while trying to understand what is driving political tribalism in the United States. The question I had was this: can one be bigoted towards a political ideology or people who identify with that political ideology?


Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Yes, the far right-wing are bigots.

many years ago the leadership of the NRA agreed to several gun restrictions. They went along with banning mail order guns after John Kennedy was shot with a rifle apparently purchased by mail. They went along with several other restrictions, because the anti-gun politicians kept saying that they wanted only this one more restriction. The membership finally rebelled and said, with their votes for hard line board members, no more compromises with gun grabbers.

Today politics in general is like this. Both sides want what they want, and aren't much open to compromises. Both sides elect hard liners. So we have winner take all. Both sides irrevocably locked into their respective ideologies. Which of course means they are bigoted against any opposing opinions. Conservatives view themselves as the last bulwark against the excesses and authoritarian nature of the left. Liberals view conservatives as a obstinate stumbling block on the path to what they envision as a better, more utopian future.

One of the reasons this hard line bigoted attitude has grown and is so widespread today is that government, usually by the power to regulate, is intimately involved in every aspect of life, both public and private. There is very little that goes on which is beyond the purview of government. So politics matters, and it matters a lot.

Fact is, we need both sides, to balance out the excesses of each.

Unitedwestand13 said:

According to the merriam-Webster dictionary, a bigot is defined as:



And bigotry is defined as



Bigot | Definition of Bigot by Merriam-Webster

Recently I have been pondering a question that came to my mind while trying to understand what is driving political tribalism in the United States. The question I had was this: can one be bigoted towards a political ideology or people who identify with that political ideology?


Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Most certainly, Unitedwestand13. While most people tend to use the term with regard to prejudice against people of different racial, religious or ethnic backgrounds, the traditional definition certainly encompasses zealous intolerance of those whose sociopolitical views differ from one's own.

But in my opinion, I do not believe a person is a bigot for disliking or publicly decrying any given political viewpoint. You are only a bigot if you take an active step in limiting or encouraging the limitation of people's ability to participate in society. This can be done through acts of formal bigotry, such as segregation or limiting the rights of certain people from voting as was common in the Jim Crow South. Or it can be informal bigotry, which can include acts of intimidation, threats of harassment, violence, mass boycotting of businesses that are owned by people of holding a particular political view, all the way up to murder.

Essentially, the bigot is one who envisions society as a place that they do not have to share with their ideological lessers.

AlbqOwl said:

Rejecting an ideology or a political party based on effect, results, agenda, philosophy, or whatever, however, is not bigotry. Discrimination based on bigotry or prejudice is a bad thing. Discrimination based on principle, analysis, critical thinking, etc. can be a very good thing.

We do not reject Nazism out of bigotry but out of knowledge of and rejection of what it has been, what it has wrought, what it is.

To reject a political party on vague or unproven belief of this or that unacceptable characterization is bigotry and/or prejudice.

To reject a political party because of its agenda, what it has wrought, what the results have been, etc. is a good thing.

Click to expand...

Have you not you heard? If one is opposed to recidivist robbers that have announced their intent to rob you and others, You are in the wrong in democrat oppositeland.

I'm going to disagree with the premise, actually. I think it is important to distinguish bigotry from intolerance. Bigotry, I think, is based upon immutable characteristics, and political viewpoints are certainly not that. Ethnicity, race, and to some extent religious community, are "immutable" characteristics. I think religious "tests" often stand in for other prejudices.

The danger, though, in any form of intolerance, is when it becomes institutionalized. Apartheid, Jim Crow, institutionalized religious intolerance are all examples of when a prejudice or intolerance became policy. Our founders were extremely leery of it, and created the Bill of Rights to prevent it (yet many of them held extremely bigoted views themselves).

If you follow our domestic politics through time, you will see one side is usually defined by what they do not like about the other side. When these issues become part of the platform and are part of the identity of the individuals, then you have a situation where bigotry based upon tribalism can emerge. It happens in religion everywhere in the world. In America over the last 50 years, it is seen in the modern conservative movement starting with Ronnie. Remember that he campaigned against government, against liberals and against minorities. While he was a benign advocate that hardly grasped what his messages would evolve into, he did become the patron saint for those who turned conservatism into a money machine for themselves and their buddies. You can trace this all the way back to a fat slob on a local radio station in Sacramento in the late 80s.

akyron said:

Have you not you heard? If one is opposed to recidivist robbers that have announced their intent to rob you and others, You are in the wrong in democrat oppositeland.

Click to expand...

That is exactly why I reject the Democrat/liberal/progressive/socialist agenda. It too often robs people of their dignity, self respect, choices, options, liberties, and opportunities while forcing them to go against their best instincts, beliefs, and convictions. Not because I am Republican which I essentially am not. But because of a track record I have observed for decades now.

By definition, "bigotry" is not inherently wrong. Are you "bigoted" against the KKK? Bigoted against marchers chanting "What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want them? Now?" Bigotry just means strong, fundamental prejudice against ___________________. Of itself, that can be the ethically correct opinion.

Perotista said:

Yes, but it is parties now. I would say over the years the Democratic Party has become more and more liberal while the Republican Party has become more and more conservative. I can remember when both parties had their conservative and liberal wings. The Republicans had the Northeast, the liberal Rockefeller Republican northeast. The Democrats had the solid conservative south. The Republicans shed their liberals and the Democrats their conservatives.

Today Romney probably is an example of a liberal Republican while Biden a conservative Democrat. You may be able to come up with better examples. I'm sure both parties having shed their unwanted wings are in the process of shedding their moderates. 2010 did a good job of getting rid of the more moderate blue dogs of the democratic party. Perhaps the more left and right extremist show up in Washington than in either political party in general. That could be a result of the hard core Ideologues are more apt to get out and vote in the primaries.

I don't think Trump, McConnell, Schumer, Pelosi and most of the rest represent main stream or middle America. they all represent the hard left or hard right. I'm sure they represent their base, but not those in the center, center right or center left, middle America as I call them. This is why I think independents gave Democratic House candidates an 18 point margin 57-39 in 2006 and voted in Obama in 2008. They thought Bush and his Republicans no longer represented them. Then independents gave the GOP house candidates a 19 point margin, 56-37 in 2010 and voted for Trump in 2016. Obama and the democrats didn't represent them either. Now you have 2018 where independents went Democratic in the house races 54-42 and have soured on Trump. Trump and the Republicans only representing their base, not middle America.

I would wager if the Democrats win the White House in 2020 that in 2022 independents will switch back to the Republicans as the democrats will represent their base forgetting all about middle America stating they have a mandate to do this and to do that. I also wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the independents ranks rise above 50% of the electorate as both major parties shrink below 30% in the next ten years.

Click to expand...

That would largely be determined by how you define "Liberal". I would hardly say the Democratic party is becoming more and more Liberal. If anything they are becoming less so.

Yes. In the end it's no different than a religion - itself a set of ideologies and values. If we say, "I disagree with your politics or your religion", it's normal debate. If we say, "I hate you because of what you believe", then it's a problem. This is more relevant to the tribalism of America's left/right political divide but has happened in other places and led to wars.