The argument is over who decides what the standards are. Case in point is the recent drama over enforcing border laws. Two factions are involved. One wants to enforce the law, the other wants to ignore the law. That's the battle. Hard and fast rules with deviations being a rare exception or fluid rules that suit moods and desires or that can be ignored all together based on whims.
Actually, that isn't true either. Most want to enforce the law, on "either side," but only a handful of deplorables want to enforce monstrous policy that they erroneously believe to be law, but it isn't. It's a lie to think that much of these policies are law. It's a verified lie.
You can't have a discussion about things when you start from a position that is demonstrably untrue. When you have to convince yourself that the "others" believe something that they actually don't believe, because you need that as a counter to your demonstrably unpopular position, then you aren't engaging honestly. You get angry when people are annoyed by your dishonest attempts to engage at their civil level, then call them mean and unfair. You pout and take your ball home. You can't accept that you are wrong, that you have swallowed a pack of lies because you want to believe them to be true, and so claim that you are being victimized.
You refuse to engage from the same set of facts that frame the issue. You make up your own, then act victimized when no one respects your fantasies like you do. This is the current republican platform. It doesn't matter that you don't want to believe it, because it is true regardless of what you believe. What matters is if you choose to strike above it, and further seek to engage the advanced world again. The toxicity of your party will remain until you willingly choose to escape it and be better.
Facebook
Twitter