TheDemonBuer

Ok, but even if the person living in Seattle and the person living in Lafayette are (at this moment in time) not as different as a person living in Zurich is to a person living in Lisbon, they might be different enough in their conception of what America is, or should be, that is ridiculous to act like they are each a part of a singular American consensus. The folly is not on all of us, because there is no "us."

It's more complex than that. For one, there were many nations of people on the North American continent before European contact, each with distinct languages, cultures, traditions, etc. Then, people from many different nations immigrated to the United States, again, each bringing with them their own language, culture, traditions, etc. And then of course there were the African slaves, brought here against their will, once again, bringing with them their own cultures, etc, etc. Over time, each district culture, language, and tradition was eliminated and replaced by a singular, dominant cultural hegemony, that of English speaking protestants of almost exclusively northern European ancestry. That hegemonic order was maintained through force, repression, violence, and in some cases literal genocide.

That hegemony had been maintained for several generations, but it has been weakening over recent decades, as groups seek emancipation and autonomy. African Americans, indigenous Americans, Spanish speaking Americans who are recent immigrants or descendents of recent immigrants, all these groups (and more) are slowly eroding the dominant hegemony of English speaking people of European ancestry. As the hegemony erodes, distinct cultures will be able to emerge/reemerge, and/or many distinct groups of people will organically evolve along different paths, due to different geography and climate, economic conditions, history, etc.

It's true that the differences between us aren't nearly as significant as the differences between the various nations of Europe - YET - but that is because of the hegemony that has been in place, that had made the United States relatively culturally homogeneous. That will change. It already is changing. The hegemony is slowly (or maybe not so slowly) breaking down, and that will lead to ever increasing cultural and ethnic diversity. New, distinct nations of people will emerge, existing nations that had been violently repressed and forced to assimilate will reassert their autonomy, and this fiction about the United States being one nation of people will be exposed. It's already happening.

You're so close to getting it.

Americans have got to be the dumbest bunch out there.

Of the countries that score above a 0.9 on the human development index, the US is definitely among the stupidest, if not the stupidest. But, that's kind of misleading. The US shouldn't be compared to places like Switzerland or Norway, nations that have populations of less than 10 million. The US is more comparable to the EU as a whole. We should be seen as a union of nations rather than a single nation, and like the EU we have some states that are much more developed than others.

So, we're not one "bunch" of people, anymore than Europe is one "bunch" of people.

Studies suggest political divisions are increasingly seen as moral judgments, fostering a “mega-identity” where political views signify personal decency.

I think this is important information that doesn't get enough attention. The divisions that exist in the US today are often portrayed in the media as mostly superficial, as though we only disagree on the minor details of public policy choices, but generally agree on the core principles. I don't think that's true. I think there are significant ideological, philosophical, and moral disagreements among Americans. We have fundamentally different ideals, and we have differing visions of how America should be, and for how people should act and behave.

There are not only two different visions. I don't think it is a strict dichotomy. I think there are several different, visions for the US. Some left, some right; some that want to focus on religious, social, cultural, or ethnic issues, some that want to focus on economic or material issues. There are multiple different ideals competing for supremacy, since the US is a de facto two party system, the winners are which ever groups can form the largest coalition of voters.

53% of white women just voted for Trump.

Well, I'm not distinguishing between myself and the liberals based on skin color, but ideology. Liberalism is not an ideology that is exclusive to people with light skin. There are plenty of liberals who have darker skin. There are also many people who are left of liberals who have lighter skin, myself included.

They should be handled as a problem.

I don't understand. Handled how?

I do think a lot of liberals are spending far too much time trying to score cheap political points...That criticism actually extends to one of Ocasio-Cortez’s top allies in the Senate — Bernie Sanders — as well.

America is silly. Because of our first-past-the-post electoral system, we are a de facto two party state. As a result, Americans have come to believe that there are only two political or ideological possibilities: liberalism and conservativism. Therefore, everyone is either a liberal or a conservative, and everyone who isn't a conservative must necessarily be a liberal, and vice versa.

I am not a conservative, but I am also not a liberal. I don't agree with either ideology. Yes, generally, I might agree more with the liberals than the conservatives, but that doesn't make me a liberal. It doesn't even necessarily make me a liberal ally. Stop calling us liberals. We are not liberals, stop trying to make us part of your group. Stop with the, "hey, we're all liberals, guys," no, we're not.

Bernie Sanders is not a liberal. If he were a liberal, he would be a part of the liberal, Democrat party. He is not, he's an independent. He often joins with the liberals, because, again, the liberals are nearer to him than the only other party, the conservative Republicans, but he nonetheless remains an independent. Stop calling us liberals.

Unless emissions plummet

Define "plummet." If by plummet we mean global GHG emissions decrease by about half from current levels, by 2030, then I don't see that happening. Not unless all the governments of the world are somehow taken over by climate activists. Or, maybe if there's a global economic collapse. Whatever it is, something radical would have to change for that to become even remotely possible.

I'm not defending anything, I'm just saying that if you expect people to behave a certain way, and they don't behave that way, you can either continue to expect them to behave that way and be disappointed, or you can change your expectations.

Well, you need to adjust your expectations.

Did you really expect tens of millions of Americans to go and vote for Harris just to prove to people like you that they are not bigoted, or selfish, or whatever?