The chud losers know they won’t get any women if they put the truth on their profile. Who wants to go out with someone who doesn’t respect you as a human being? Who sees you as lesser, as an object? Who wants to take away your rights?
Their only option is to lie and hope they get someone without a spine or someone too nice to tell them to fuck off, then they take advantage them.
its also very obnoxious when conservatives talk, they will keep ranting nonstop without fail.
There are three options really
- The person is so far right they don’t see their views as political
- The person is filled with apathy and has enough privilege not to care about anything or anyone
- The person is the most uninformed unmotivated milquetoast liberal who doesn’t really care about anyone else but vaguely supports values like “being nice” and “respectability politics”
st uninformed unmotivated milquetoast liberal who doesn’t really ca
the last one also applies to conservatives, they also can be super uniformed, most of them are.
Or they recognise that identifying themselves as right wing could have a negative effect on their dating prospects, so try to disguise that fact.
Unless you mean reasons they might genuinely consider themselves non political, in which I agree with you.
even in the west coast i met someone at college that became more “conservative” when they moved here, which makes me think alot of transplant migrate to the west coast because thier “conservative” shithole must be too far right for them.
It means “I don’t want to hear your politics, I don’t want you to criticize my politics, I just want to keep acting like my support of shitty things isn’t my responsibility.”
Yeah… When I was on the dating apps I pretty much treated “centrist” as “conservative” for a filter
I would have a hard time describing my political affiliation. I would guess “leaning libertarian-socialist”, but I don’t fully subscribe to all so IDK in which category I fit in.
- I like the idea of workers owning the means of production, but don’t like production for use (that never works). Simply remove the C-suite leeches and distribute their paycheck and parts of the profit among workers that actually produced them.
- States and governments can stay and should mainly act as a developmental/economic guide. Taxes are okay, but they have to be spent in a way that benefits the public, not bailouts for banks or corporations. They should pay for social security, roads, healthcare, schools and universities, imports/exports, stuff like that.
- I’m not foolish enough to believe that humans can behave themselves, so there needs to be a way to hold perpetrators accountable in front of a court of peers. But as long as somebody doesn’t harm or endanger someone else (or the environment because that affects everyone), they should be able to do whatever they damn please, including owning things.
- There needs to be a wealth cap. Period.
- Exceptions need to be made for goods and property that are required by everyone, like food, water and housing. Buying houses and apartments as assets is morally deplorable because all you do is enrich yourself on other’s basic needs.
- Why are private equity firms legal again?
So what am I?
I agree with all of that. I think of myself as a pragmatist.
A rational and compassionate human being.
Well I’m a lot more conservative but usually call myself progressive. I don’t blame corps or ceos, nor do I think large scale workers owning the means of production can work. It’s all a failure to regulate the markets, and a failure of tax policy
It wouldn’t take many changes to
- restore a progressive tax ladder
- reduce income inequality
- add worker protections
- mandate healthcare one away or another
Capitalism can be a useful function if the market is regulated for the good of the people. Power dynamics can be ok if there are protections against abuses. Wealth inequality can be a good force to drive capitalism if the excesses are moderated. But things like education and healthcare should be a right afforded to all citizens
You need an Elon musk to make Tesla happen, but that would still be true if he were limited to say ten times the income of his lowest paid employee, rather than 1,000,000 times whatever he’s at now.
You need a responsible government to guide the market toward long terms good that capitalism can’t handle.
You need a strong enough government to protect employees and consumers from corporate exploitation, and to prevent corporate ownership
And somehow we need to restore the effectiveness’s of the balance of powers we believed in for the last two centuries
Yeah that’s just democratic socialism or as it was coined in post Ww2 Germany: “market socialism”
I’ve never met someone who says they’re not political who is actually not political. They just prefer to think about the things they care about as “above politics” or don’t want the heat for their opinions.
I’m not political, I just think you should work your whole life for rich people and get a small fraction of that in return.
🎯
I say not political because I haven’t studied our politics and I know basically nothing about it. Otherwise I’d get “What’s your opinion on what [name I never heard of] posted on their Facebook profile yesterday morning?”
Perhaps not so specific, but I don’t know the people and what’s going on.It’s a lot of history, specific events, constantly something new, and I have to study other things too.
Don’t sell yourself short. Politics, at its core, is just the description for group dynamics and decisions. Those impact all of us, and we all care about at least some subset of them. The dramatics and window dressing most media focuses on is just a small portion of the whole.
It’s totally understandable that you may not be super knowledgeable about certain topics that are getting a lot of attention, but your values are worth being represented as a meaningful political issue.
Mental exercise:
There is a serial arsonist going around
A house is on fire
You meet a stranger who says they don’t like to discuss whether the fire should be put out or not, nor whether the arsonist should be stopped.
If this person isn’t the arsonist, their actions (or lack there of) benefit only the arsonist. They are, at least, an arsonist supporter.
What if they are fed up with how many people support the arsonist in their area while personally feeling the arsonist should be publicly executed, avoiding discussion on the fire is their way to avoid getting overly angry with every single person they talk to who keeps insisting on talking about their support for the arsonist.
Or everyone keeps on talking about pro-anti arsonist, and they are one of the few that think dealing with the fire first might be a good idea instead.
If I’m angry at someone I just say swear words at them. I don’t hide it and I don’t try to avoid getting angry.
Complacence is compliance.
If everyone in your town was pro-dog rape, would you prefer to never speak up? Would you prefer to stay silent while your dog lives every day at risk?
Most people I talk to like this, in the analogy, used to be firefighters, but realized for every fire they put out, some literal idiot lights 3 more, and to them, they end up feeling like they’re the only one who cares. Pun intended, but they’re literally burnt out.
That is a sign natural selection has selected them for the male loneliness epidemic
So, nobody here actually used online dating? Here in the deep red South, “not political” means liberal and don’t talk your MAGA shit at me.
Not on any dating apps, but people I know who describe themselves as non-political are just so sick of it they can’t bear to talk about it anymore, which I totally get. Especially since any good discussion always ends up ruined by someone who’s very “political” but only gets their news from Facebook or something worse.
For the uninformed, what happens if you put liberal?
“Not political” in 2025+ America means they have the mental capacity of the average Idiocracy civilian.
Like, I’m sure they just rewatch people getting hit in the balls all day, every day.
This puzzles me especially when it’s a trans or enby person on a dating app… I’m like: girl wtf
That’s called lateral violence
“not political” means they are okay enough with the way things are that they don’t need to engage with it. It’s conservative. Not necessarily far right reactionary that wants to change things for the worse, but they don’t care about other people. (Or, rarely, don’t recognize or care about their own suffering)
It’s an idiot or monster’s stance.
“I don’t want to think about politics, but when I have to I lean heavily right.”
another favorite is i dont do look up anything on his policies, or i dont like politics in this or that show.
Trump rallies and conservatives in a nutshell
meh, i’m a registered independent who votes democrat. I’ll never join the dnc, but i won’t vote for republicans. I don’t particularly like talking politics with people either. I don’t relish circle jerking over hating politicians, I just get fucking angry.
its kinda double edged sword, the less people trying to engage it , the worst it gets and allows legitimacy to the offending side, aka conservatives. and the other hands you odnt want to start arguments and lose relationships.
I mainly dislike the increasing authoritarian push we are seeing from all sides in the UK. I don’t give a shit about your left or right politics if I am not even allowed to look at a fucking meme without verifying my ID. After that the next priority would probably be environmental, only then followed by anything to do with the economy.
Real talk, it’s what I used to put in my profile maybe 2 years ago.
I didn’t watch the news much, I had always stayed out of the discourse and I had refused to apply a 1-dimensional label to my beliefs.
Put plainly, I was privileged enough that politics rarely affected me directly, and I think until recently there were a lot of people like that.
One day in 2023, I took a political alignment test and found out I was a democratic socialist and it just so happened I was living in one (UK). Hence why I never felt the need to mess with things.
Of course, no country is perfect, and as I met more people, especially trans and disabled people, I discovered that there was a lot of terrible shit going on in my country and that’s where I finally got my awakening. I also started watching more political YouTube.
Since then, I’ve veered slightly further left I’m involved in advocacy and I’m proud to wear the “Left” label as someone who cares for others and believes we can all do better.
I still believe that left and right are a bit reductive, but I understand now that it’s more like the more of the things you believe in, the further on that axis you go. For example, the UK’s Green Party is bringing together some conservative environmentalists with leftist progressives in their interests to keep our green spaces and maintain traditional trades and crafts.
Anyway, the point is some “non-political” people are just sheltered. That said, you have to be extremely sheltered in the US to not experience the upheaval currently happening.
I took the test and I’m not particularly surprised at my result.
I’m strongly of the opinion that a lot of people simply do not have the bandwidth to be deeply involved in politics, even if it is in their best interests. We have so many people in the US drowning in debt, stress, unresolved mental health crises, and uncertainty about how they can afford the next big repair on their house/appliances/car/body that they do not have the luxury of spending time and energy advocating for the changes that would improve their lives.
I think of it like the airplane oxygen masks - you need to secure your own before you help others. It’s hard to expect people to organize and push for monumental change when they are a paycheck or two away from homelessness. I don’t see an easy way forward unless a lot of people are willing to sacrifice.
