becomingoverweight:Jokes aside, I wonder what fills people with such irrational hatred of others.
That's political parties for you. Very Us vs Them. Hell, I've seen plenty of people fight over politics only to realize, after establishing a common neutral vocabulary, that they more or less agree.
Modern folks can pride ourselves on our rationality all we want. Truth is, we're still just as vulnerable to propaganda, conditioning, and misinformation as we've ever been. People are busy. Often too busy to fact-check, or too reliant on biased sources. We trust friends, family, and our favorite websites. Certain buzzwords make our brains turn off and trigger purely emotional reactions - disgust, hate, fear as well as feelings of safety, unity, pride and so on. We say what we think is rational, but the person on the other end has entirely different associations for the words used, maybe ones that make our "rational" statement threatening. That's then the basis for their response.
Our allegiances are reactionary, often inherited, and make perfect sense to us given what we know (think we know, have been told) about the world and how it works. Political bigwigs and often governments want things that way. As far as situations go, it's easier to control. They release what information they want to release, and the common masses are left fighting over (at best) incomplete truths from utterly different footing.
This is why Washington was so adamantly against two+ partly systems. How can we have productive conversations and debates while everyone is busy feeling personally attacked? While we're socially conditioned to think of "the other side" as, well, another side? We distance, dismiss, diminish everyone who disagrees with the (literal) party line - they must be clueless, utterly lacking compassion, somehow less human than we are. We can't manage to extend the slightest amount of faith in our shared humanity.
This is why US politics are basically just...fscked. We're so focused on screwing each other over that we forget we're trying to collaboratively run a country. Sure, we may have radically different ideas on the best way to do so, but we're *supposed* to - supposed to test and question and vote and develop strategies and see what works. When was the last time our arguments were genuinely over the facts and merits of an idea and voting wasn't split down party lines? Yeah. Maybe it still happens occasionally - maybe locally where we all have to look our neighbors in the eye - but it was supposed to be the rule, not the exception. Instead we get all this kvetching and petty tit-for-tat in a political atmosphere where we can't assume anyone has our (or the country's) best interest at heart.
Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant. It just sort of materialized. Ontological hazard.