zlacker

> Our society has become one in which people feel licensed to give their selfishness free rein.

This, this right here - and it's not just the US where this shows up (although it's definitely the most extreme). At the core, I think, it's all about "free speech": when you have a constitutional right to say whatever you want, without any limitations, you will first get a bunch of contrarians yelling all sorts of offensive stuff around "for the lulz"/"because they can", and eventually that sort of stuff gets normalized, and then societal cohesion (especially when the offensive stuff is directed towards minorities) and eventually society itself gets poisoned.

>>mschus+(OP)
This feels like the right time to remind people of the paradox of tolerance [0]. Here's the summary of the article:

"The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually ceased or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance."

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

>>mschus+(OP)
>it's not just the US where this shows up

where else do you meen?

>>_Micro+q
If you're going to post that, then let's also remind people that it's only a paradox if you treat tolerance itself as a moral imperative:

"Tolerance is not a moral absolute; it is a peace treaty. Tolerance is a social norm because it allows different people to live side-by-side without being at each other’s throats [..] the model of a peace treaty differs from the model of a moral precept in one simple way: the protection of a peace treaty only extends to those willing to abide by its terms."

- https://medium.com/extra-extra/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-prec...

>>finnjo+q1
It's grown in Australia slightly in recent years.

>>prawn+52
No offense but Australia, UK very much tend to have the same mentality as the US, from an exterior point of view.

>>finnjo+q1
It's become wildly prevalent the past few years in Canada, to the point where co-workers whom I've thought were decent people for the past ~10 years are actually inhuman pieces of shit, they've just never felt 'free' to air their grievances in public. But you don't only see this ignorance in the way people talk, it's extended to everything, from the way they drive, to the way they navigate a store, it's almost like nobody exists in their world except themselves, you're simply an obstacle in their day-to-day,

IME, COVID was a real turning point that pushed a *lot* of people into a more selfish mindset, and the "trucker" convoy/occupation of Ottawa really seemed to shed any remaining social decency that still existed in many of these people. Now that cost of living is spiraling way out of control (housing is a prime example, my $100k income virtually assures I will never be a homeowner), it's really galvanizing that selfishness in many while fosting in many more.

>>Fracta+H3
I'm not sure free speech is really causative. It might be a catalyst, but people have to be self absorbed and hold those beliefs before voicing them. They might just feel emboldened to voice them since others are too.

Is it that you can't afford a house anywhere, or that you can't afford one in the area you currently are? If relocating (remote work) is an option, my understanding is there are more affordable areas of Canada that have lower average home prices that someone making $100k could potentially afford one on the cheaper end.

>>finnjo+q1
Across Europe. Just see the shocking rise of authoritarianism and even outright fascism in some places.

>>tremon+U1
People don't want a peace treaty. They want a moral precept, a rule by which they can distinguish good behavior from bad.

At first blush, "tolerance" seems like a decent precept. You don't bug me, I don't bug you. But it takes only a moment's thought to realize that it doesn't work.

And that effectively makes it pointless. The peace treaty is routinely broken, and might as well not exist. The precept works perfectly well for the situations where it's not needed -- most of the time tolerance is also in your own immediate best interests. But as soon as you try to extend it to cover anything else, it fails.

Too bad. Back to the moral drawing board. Meantime, we can describe ourselves as "tolerant", if it makes us happy, and pretend it's the reason we're doing what we do. But it won't help us make any hard choices.

>>bestou+A2
Not surprising, given the influence of people like Murdoch and his media which is just the same crap that's being fed to Americans.