You're conflating regional and global spectrums (again). A regional spectrum is a sub-spectrum within a region's position on the global spectrum. The US, as a whole, may be "right-wing" on the global spectrum, but within the US, "liberal" is left-wing. A position is only relative (and relevant) to the spectrum in which it's defined. Calling liberals "right-wing" is pointless and stupid.
How fucking boring would life be if you only hung out with and interacted with people that agreed with you on everything.
"Privilege is invisible to those who have it."
Yes, because I'm an adult.
Depends entirely on what the conflicting belief is.
Yes, I could and I am.
I have lines though, step over them and you're forever gone from my circle since it'd involve some pretty damned vile views and behaviour.
Information bubbles and echo chambers are not a positive thing.
My best friends are the ones I disagree with.
O Flora, of the moon, of the dream. O Little ones, O fleeting will of the ancients. Let the hunter be safe. Let them find comfort. And let this dream, their captor, Foretell a pleasant awakening
Why would I spent time on someone else who's beliefs and toughts are all exactly the same as mine?
That'd be a waste of time if there ever was one.
FOMO: "Fear Of Missing Out", also commonly known as people with a mental issue of managing time and activities, many expecting others to fit into their schedule so they don't miss out on things to come. If FOMO becomes a problem for you, do seek help, it can be a very unhealthy lifestyle..
I am friends with many people who don't share my beliefs at the levels you describe them (including to some extent my wife of 25 years). However, I think you are missing a HUGE portion of the question. WHY. WHY don't they support universal health care. WHY do they believe the death penalty shouldn't be abolished. A friend of mine next door is a conservative libertarian. I tend to the very far left on most issues. We discuss politics often, and what we've found is that our GOALS are basically the same. What we disagree on is either the best path to achieve the goals. As a note, I've found plenty of people who agree with my high-level support of a concept (such as abortion rights) but for poorly reasoned or flat out bad reasons. Those people, who by your definition here I agree with, are NOT people I would be friends with.
If you choose your friends based on political party talking points, you'll dismiss a lot of good people and accidentally glom on to some pretty nasty people. Reach deeper. Look for the moral pinning beneath the talking point. I find that's a far better way to determine the quality of a person and the likelihood of maintainable friendship.
- - - Updated - - -
Thanks for the actual physical laugh - always a good way to start the day
i mean, outside of reeeeaaally obvious no-gos (like being an actual nazi), i can talk to and befriend most people.
Depends what it is. Pretty much all of my friends are liberal.
The older I get I’m finding it harder to be nice to adults that believe in fairy tales.
I'd be insanely bored if all of my friendships were with people who had the same political/spiritual beliefs as me. In fact, I find people with no opinion on political or religious matters to be some of the most boring people alive.
- Christopher HitchensPopulists (and "national socialists") look at the supposedly secret deals that run the world "behind the scenes". Child's play. Except that childishness is sinister in adults.
I had significant disagreements with a number of people in my church, my family, social circle and at work. Doesn't stop me from being friends or socializing with any of them.
We seem to have gotten to a point where people, in my experience ages 15-30, seem to think that ideological homogeneity is the way to a peaceful society and that goal of a peaceful society should be our primary goal. I'd rather say that ideological diversity should be the goal to make sure that both minority and majority voices are heard.
That is also, in those minority voices, where you start dealing with the harder sides of issues like implementation in may public policy questions.
To your second question about when to stop talking to someone different than you, I would argue when they no longer respect you enough to hold a viewpoint different than theirs, or if they threaten physical harm or actually physically harm you for your beliefs.
If you can still talk to each other and agree to disagree then keep talking. They are human just like you are human. They may be right and you maybe wrong or they are wrong and you are right...or perish the thought there is enough grey in the policy at hand that there is no right or wrong and you need work with them to find a solution that you can both live with.
The Right isn't universally bad. The Left isn't universally good. The Left isn't universally bad. The Right isn't universally good. Legal doesn't equal moral. Moral doesn't equal legal. Illegal doesn't equal immoral. Immoral doesn't equal illegal.
Have a nice day.