nothing in common with the average "heartland" chud except hatred and targets for hatred.
This is all that's required for chuds. That's the main thing chuds get out of engaging in US politics. Chuds want to harm their targets of hatred and own the libs. Libs are primarily motivated by assuaging guilt and feeling morally/intellectually superior.
No one can achieve anything material are better their circumstances through politics in the US. Chuds and Libs do however satisfy something that they need, or desire at least, through engaging with it. In thst sense both of them are voting in their self interest in so far as they can both understand it and as they can actually achieve in this system.
That's why its hard talking people out of Chudery or Libness. Because they do get something out of it - as bad for them as it is and as materially useless as it is they still want it and its a core part of peoples identities
Not only do they not have anything in common with them, people like Trump actively hate their base and think them pigs, and I have no doubt Musk probably thinks poor people should get the wall.
That's one of the funniest parts about watching Trump is when he's obviously showing his contempt and hatred for his base.
I have nothing to back this up but what I've seen myself from conservative people - but i think his base also hates themselves lol. I think that's why they are so driven to externalize that hatred. They need a target for hatred because they already have the hate. Being a chud gives them something to do with it that feels like a relief to them - to direct it out and not inside.
It makes sense to me because you would have to miserable to believe the things they do. To believe in such strict "norms" regarding gender, hierarchy, patriarchy. No one is, or has ever been the things they believe. No one can actually be the ideal of what chuds think a "man" is supposed to be to be worthy of existing and not be a target of hatred. That's what I've witnessed anecdotally and it makes sense to me.
I think chuds have an undeserved feeling of accomplishment because they are not the out-group. As long as they are not the "undeserving", it doesnt matter what their leaders personally think of them. It also doesn't matter that their heros live completely different lives than what their followers do, as long as the chuds get to feel apart of the superior group.
This also applies to libs.
I think it's more of an ideology, mixed with a bit of religiosity, and finished off with a healthy heaping serving of simple-ass bullshit that's easy to eat and easy to digest.
Redmaga and bluemaga are ideologically charged, politically concious radicals of their respective sides. Time wasted on them is time better spent on people that aren't convinced Trump is fighting communist aliens with space force, or that Russia somehow can shape material reality for propaganda purposes.
He's a cat scratch post, his entire existence is to get constantly scratched and have a bit more fluff torn off until nothing but the truth beneath is revealed to the world
I just tell people I will never respect anyone who has clearly never cooked a meal for themselves.
The issue is hierarchy. Chuds are okay with their leaders because they believe in the need for hierarchy. They view their enemies as being in the wrong place within the hierarchy and their policies should move people back to the correct spot. In the chud worldview, problems occur within society because some groups have moved away from their spot while pushing the chuds further down from where they should be.
This is why they're against things like universal healthcare. Resources are limited, thus shouldn't be wasted on people at the bottom. The people at the top are most deserving. If you give healthcare to the people at the bottom, it's taking away from the people above the bottom. And when the situation gets bad enough, they advocate for eradicating the lower rungs.
This is why it's so difficult to get through to non-communists. Even libs believe in this hierarchy, they just think everyone within their country should be at the top, but anyone else outside their borders should be placed below. Libs and chuds primary argument is over these classifications. Chuds think some of the people within their country aren't in the right place while libs think they are, but both agree brown and black foreigners belong at the bottom.
Socialists can not only see the hierarchy, they know how to get rid of it. Neither chuds nor libs recognize it because to them, that's just how the world works. The idea of abolishing the ladder becomes obscene.
I'd actually say it's less hierarchy and more settler class interests. It's why they hate non-white countries, while the rich people they worship are who they aspire to become. They have patriarchal (which includes transphobia and homophobia) beliefs because it benefits them.
Chuds pretty much know this and don't care, libs know but won't admit it till you press them and you know how it goes with scratching libs.
I'm referring to hierarchies from the perspective of chuds. Their class interests are what they can observe, while hierarchies are more abstract in a way that blinds them from making these observations.
The settler class and Imperial core are still hierarchies. They're in the spot in the hierarchy they think they belong in, which is the spot coinciding with their class interests. The reason they're so hard to convert is because they view hierarchies as not only natural, but desirable. And because they're "natural," they can't wrap their head around hierarchies being wrong.
So when the communist comes along and starts talking about destroying hierarchies, chud brains immediately turn off. The commie may as well be talking about destroying oxygen.
tl;dr-- Pluto's allegory of the cave, Morpheus gives Neo the women in red lesson.
