So....Jubilee has had a few more debate. I aint gonna react to the doctor vs RFK supporter one. Quite frankly it's not that interesting from my perspective and not a good use of my time. I would like to address James Talerico debating undecided voters though.
So...overall....kinda cringe. The debaters were ignorant. And James was...well...too Christian for my tastes. i get it, dude's from texas, he has to push the "good old Jesus boy" thing, but UGH...I really don't like Christianity mixed with politics given my own belief system.
Anyway, let's get on with it.
Claim #1: Cuts to healthcare and food assistance hurt all of us
He's right, you know. They do. And of course the people he's arguing against are going on about fraud. And it's like...ugh. Really? That rarely happens. And honestly, cutting welfare programs to punish the undeserving does more than it helps. And of course, Christian boy over doing the protestant work ethic thing, debating on their terms. Going on about teaching people to fish and hands up, not handouts, but yeah. As a secular progressive, handouts are based and we should normalize that.
Here's the thing. I wanna solve problems. I wanna solve poverty. I wanna improve peoples' lives. My policies would benefit around 70-85% of people depending on the measure you use, and I stand by that. On the question of what of people "taking advantage" of the system, I don't see it that way. I believe that UBI and other services should be a RIGHT of citizenship, not a privilege. I believe that if we wanna talk personal responsibility and people misusing cash that they're given under my proposals, the thing is, if they waste it, that's on THEM. They're only hurting themselves, and no, they shouldn't get more. That's personal responsibility in my system. I aint interested in debating welfare fraud and undeserving people who are lazy and blah blah blah. This guy is and that's why I dislike democrats like this. I get it, it appeals to moderates and undecideds with ignorant takes, but yeah. Again, not super sympathetic.
And then there's a debate about how we shouldnt have the state do this but have charity take care of it. Again, this is something that irks me about christians. I look at it like Thomas Paine did. You know, one of the founders? The dude who wrote agrarian justice. He talked about how charity doesnt solve problems and if you wanna solve poverty, you do it by organizing society like a system of pulleys to remove the weight of the problem. Instead, Christians wanna keep the problem existing so they can then impose this moral burden on people to give. It's backwards. Like, again, I wanna solve problems. These guys don't have a solid exegesis of the facts that allow us to do so. So they leave us with a fragmented and broken system instead.
Really, this is why Christianity in politics irks me and why I'm so hostile to it. Everyone gets caught up on these BS shoulds and oughts and in reality we should be doing what Paine suggested, use society like a system of pulleys to solve problems. But people are unhappy with those solutions because of these stupid shoulds and oughts and we all gotta suffer because of them. Again, it just annoys me.
Claim #2: Immigrants make America stronger and richer
This is unequivocally true. Again, this is why we need a secular worldview that values things like facts and statistics. This is an objective reality the sociological data tells us. Welfare fraud is low, most immigrants arent harming the country, they're paying taxes, blah blah blah, and people just get so caught up on the immigration thing. Anyway, I dont have the energy to argue this one like I do point 1, but I believe I've made my points clear on this blog before.
Claim #3: Your vote matters in 2026
Here I see things both ways. On the one hand, to James Talerico's point, let me make my argument for voting in 2026. Texas is technically a swing state. It's not a very swingy one, it is likely R to "safe" R, but honestly, it's in that zone where if enough people came out for the democrats, they could swing it. It's mostly a theoretical exercise, but let's go back to a few of my previous predictions.
2024 (presidential): 1.2% chance
2024 (senate): 13.6% chance
2020 (presidential): 38.2% chance
2020 (senate): 3.0% chance
I mean, the chance is never great, and sometimes it's rather insignificant, but it can happen. I consider texas in play for good reason. And if voters turn out highly enough, yeah, it can flip.
On the other hand, will that make their lives better? A lot of these guys don't really feel like their vote matters because even if this guy could win, he's not gonna represent them. This guy is saying he's gonna try, but honestly? I kinda feel sympathetic to some of them. Like the atheist dude who didn't think that anyone actually represented their beliefs. yeah, I dont blame him for thinking that way. This dude gives me HRC vibes at time laying on the christianity so thick, and honestly, that's one of he reasons i disliked her and many other moderate dems too. Those guys just represent a milder version of the same worldview the right has. The right is fundamentalist christian and then these guys are just moderate christians who think the same thing just with more nuance. So I can understand feeling disenfranchised.
To Talerico's credit, he pointed out he doesnt always like the dems either and he places his convictions above the party, but let's think about what that means. He basically talked about already having a church and a sports team. So...again, more loyalty to religion. Not really inspiring me there. Because when someone like that does defect from the party odds are they'll run right, not left. So again, not really feeling this dude much.
And thats the thing. if you're disaffected, and feel disenfranchised by democrats, this guy doesnt give me much hope for the party. Question #1 tends to center around my own ideological vision for the country and this dude isn't that. He's just another moderate dem in my views who has those flawed views and it doesn't inspire confidence. I get it, it's texas, but still. I really wish we could throw religion into the trashbin of history and just abandon it. It just holds us back and stops me from reaching common ground with these guys on basic existential philosophical issues. Like, my values are not his values. And he might appeal to what the dems conventionally consider moderate, but that ain't me.
Claim #4: The biggest divide in our politics is not left vs right, it's top vs bottom
Eh...I do kinda agree with this. But again, let me put some nuance here. What is the top vs bottom? Corporate interests vs the interests of everyone else. THis one woman who spoke was talking about how she's like in the 97th percentile of income and how she was willing to pay more taxes, but are all people willing to do that? Will they do that to advocate for policies that I support like UBI? A lot of those guys bristle at that idea. And they'll go on about how they earned it and everyone else should work for theirs. Even though that's clearly not working. And those guys being democrats....actually makes the dems weaker. because that's why they become this insufferable moderate hugbox. They're like "we cant do that..." because they wanna appeal to those guys. A generation ago, many were republican. Hell, as recently as 2012, many were republican. But the centrist dems keep trying to bring these guys into the party and it weakens it.
But, at the same time, it's also values. And for me, I define left wing politics between the Christian worldview vs the secular one. I understand that's not a clear divide in reality. Pope Francis was pro UBI and left wing and Ayn Rand was an atheist. But, if we really wanna discuss the cultural issues of American politics, and the real existential, philosophical stuff undergirding these views, I really do believe Christianity seems to drive a lot of right leaning thinking in the modern era, while secularism drives the left. And we can see that statistically demonstrated just by checking out the build a voter stuff. You go from evangelical to atheist and BOOM you shift like 75% of the spectrum from that one variable. And then other brands of Christianity are in the middle between them. Kinda fitting all things considered. The right is driven by evangelical Christianity, the left by secularism, and the "moderates" are....moderates. Kinda in the middle. Almost like religion matters.
So idk is it left vs right? To some degree, yes. Where you stand on cultural issues does influence your ideology down the line, and a progressive christian is still gonna cede a lot of ideological ground to the right that I'm not comfortable giving up (see question 1). On the other hand, it is top vs bottom. because both republicans and democrats in America kinda both serve the wealthy interests. It's not one or the other, it's both. And if anything, one of my arguments is that religion really is the opium of the masses where it kinda placates people. It keeps them running around with this worldview full of flawed premises and all of these nonsense shoulds and oughts that people just won't think straight on the subject from my perspective and solve problems. When i left Christianity, it really did make a HUGE difference in my ideological perspective.And I feel like, if people approached these issues from a secular perspective where people could think straight, that we would see a left wing revolution that crushes modern conservatism.
On the flip side, maybe it might make the conservatism we get worse. Look at germany, and the split between the CDU in the western parts, and the AFD in the eastern. Whereas western germany's conservatives are religious, eastern germany's conservatives are turning into fascists. Of course, eastern germany also might be nostalgic for authoritarianism given it was communist for four decades. Either way Im willing to concede that point back to the Christians on that one. Maybe their influence makes their version of conservatism significantly more ethical and less homicidal, despite it making me role my eyes from all of its arbitrary beliefs and rules for how things should be that hold us back. Idk.
Undecided Voter Claim: No matter how much gun violence happens within the state of Texas, there will never be a gun ban or gun reform
I dont remember much about this one and it wasnt that long, but honestly, I won't say "never." Either way, yeah, I kinda agree. I don't see it happening any time in the foreseeable future. Texas is really "yeehaw" country and big on their second amendment. And honestly, I think pursuing the gun issue is a good way to lose. Even I'm pretty moderate on guns and am basically a second amendment lib. Still, you give people enough time, and enough party realignments happen in American politics, and anything can happen.
Conclusion
Honestly, not a bad debate, but I really don't care for James Talerico as a candidate due to him being so up front with his religion. Again, it's texas, I get it, but...UGH. It just reminded me why religion and politics don't mix. And before people ask of me what James said of himself, and how doesnt my spirituality influence my politics? of course it does, in a sense. But let me explain HOW.
My deconversion was apparently planned "from above" to bring me to my current ideas, which I then express to everyone else. My views are based around secular humanism. And even coming back to spirituality, the secular basis of my politics haven't changed. Like really, I'd still believe 99% of what I currently belief if I wasn't spiritual. Why? Because I developed my belief system as a literal atheist, and I still fight for that perspective even though I have spirituality.
So...I'm in a unique perspective to say that yes, I wish there was less religion in politics.
Either way, my spirituality just strengthens my belief that I'm advocating for what I see as the right thing. Because if this whole thing was planned, then I'm supposed to be like this, and I'm supposed to advocate for what I do. It just adds even further conviction that "this is what I'm here to do." and makes me double down even harder on my views. If that makes sense.
But even if I was still an atheist, my beliefs would be the same and you can probably tell that since I literally sound like a new atheist here still.
Either way, yeah, I still think the world would be better off if they leave Christianity...and for that matter, other organized religions. Because they just mess up your worldview with all of these weird arbitrary shoulds and oughts that stop us from seeing the issues with clarity, and advocating for solutions that would actually fix things. I really think we allow problems to exist for a lot longer than they should because people see those problems as part of god's design and think fixing them goes against said design. Meanwhile if we removed that veil from peoples' thinking, it would be like, oh, yeah, the way we're doing things is irrational, let's change this. ya know? That's all I'm saying here.
Like, why teach people to fish when we're advanced enough to create a machine to do all of the fishing for us? It's just maddening to me. Ya know what I'm saying?
No comments:
Post a Comment