Edit: What do you judge them for?
Police uniform.
MAGA hats, swastika tattoos
MAGA gear or by association those stupid shirts, hats, and stickers that say “F your feelings” or “we the people have had enough” etc. most people I work and live around that’s there basic fashion and culture.
Blue line American Flag sticker/apparel, especially if it’s set inside the Punisher logo.
Cops most of all, tells me they’re not only an asshole but an asshole who doesn’t even know what Frank Castle is all about despite rocking the logo
For real. I’m willing to bet most don’t even know it’s from the Punisher, they just like it because it’s a skull, or because they saw the word “Punisher” on the sales tag and thought that was cool.
Being Religious.
Cybertrucks
Ugh, yes. Seriously, Elon aside, what kinda GIGA-DOUCHE does a person have to be, to see that thing and think “Wow! I must have one!”
Lifted trucks are sus, especially if they have balls hanging on the back.
MAGA hat
A MAGA hat. I judge them for MAGA.
Really really long fake nails. Less judgement and more confusion I suppose. How do you do normal everyday activities?? I’m baffled
I’m amazed nobody has mentioned a confederate flag (or confederate anything) yet. My first assumption would be that they’re racist and proud of it.
At this point that falls in line with MAGA gear to me, which lots of people have mentioned
Good point. At the risk of making it sound cool, I’ll say that confederate flags are the OG MAGA gear.
You’d be surprised at the number of Democrats in the South with them.
It’s particularly jarring when people have them in Canada.
I really love how there’s one conservative going through the comments and ascribing a solitary downvote to any mention of conservative values, like trucks, crosses, Cybertrucks (cause it’s super specific) and the like.
Hey asshole. How does it feel to be part of a community that hates your fucking guts?
I feel you— but also what does this declaration of hate garner us? Is it anything beyond the base tribalistic fervor: “we are strong fear us”. It makes sense if we were in person— but I fear this is how we create silos.
If there are conservatives here, and we continually assault them directly then perhaps they’ll leave— and while personally I may feel that would make the discourse more favorable, they do not disappear; they leave and find a more homogeneous pasture. We shouldn’t isolate ourselves lest we contribute to make debate a toxic no man’s land.
The paradox of tolerance relies on a lot of assumptions that don’t really work in reality. We don’t tend to see more open societies have more intolerance, quite the opposite. Part of the problem is that “the intolerant” is not a single group, but many groups that hate each other. And those who are intolerant towards the intolerant are themselves part of the intolerant.
For a less-political example, let’s imagine hypothetically that Lemmy is very pro-linux. However, some people who absolutely hate linux show up and start posting anti-linux memes. These people get insulted, downvoted, and eventually banned by others on Lemmy, because they’re showing intolerance towards linux.
But then what happens to those anti-linux people? They go off and created their own forums, and talk about how intolerant lemmy is to people who don’t use linux. So whenever a linux user shows up on those forums, they’re inevitably banned. The result of intolerance of the intolerant is that they remain intolerant, and now the tolerant have become hard to distinguish from them, and there’s no way for pro-linux forces to be part of the conversation anti-linux people are having - allowing them to create their own culty filter bubble.
Now imagine an alternative - instead of banning the anti-linux people, pro-linux lemmy users decide to engage with them and correct misconceptions about linux. After all, linux, like many other topics, can get kind of complicated, and linux users need to remember that not everyone has the same background knowledge that they do about the topic. Sure, some linux haters would be persistent, but maybe others would be like “hey, these linux folks are actually kind of cool and helpful, I want to be more like them.” That may sound idealistic, but I think that’s a lot closer to what we see in reality - intolerance thrives in closed off spaces, and dies in open ones.
I appreciate the detailed comment and example scenario, but I don’t agree with the reasoning or the conclusion.
For a less-political example, let’s imagine hypothetically that Lemmy is very pro-linux.
Lol. Yes, hypothetically.
I don’t think this non-political example works as an analogy, because: 1. there isn’t a moral component to it (or not as much of a moral imperative), 2. the percentage of the populace that hates Linux doesn’t have much of an impact on the functioning of society, and 3. the target of the hate here isn’t a person or class of people that, you know, has the right to exist.
The reason I’m drawing that line is because the whole idea behind being intolerant of intolerance is because doing the opposite allows the intolerance to spread unchecked and fuck up society, having a very real negative impact on the targeted people. (And not, like, an OS.)
Part of the problem is that “the intolerant” is not a single group, but many groups that hate each other.
This is the difference between the political and non-political examples. In the Nazi vs. anti-Nazi example, one of those groups is absolutely morally right and therefore we should do everything we can to stamp out the intolerance. In the Linux vs. anti-Linux example, ehh, it is closer to a matter of opinion—or at least a lower-impact moral question.
It’s about cost-benefit, right? Like, what’s the cost to society if Nazi propaganda goes unchecked? Lives lost, people deported, families broken, etc. Seems pretty important then to pay the “cost” of not tolerating Nazis. But what’s the cost to society of anti-Linux propaganda goes unchecked? Costlier computers? More inefficient companies due to vendor lock-in and security issues? Maybe more state surveillance? It’s not good, but it’s nowhere near the same level as with the Nazi thing.
The result of intolerance of the intolerant is that they remain intolerant, and now the tolerant have become hard to distinguish from them, and there’s no way for pro-linux forces to be part of the conversation anti-linux people are having - allowing them to create their own culty filter bubble.
The culty bubble is going to exist regardless. The question is whether we let it infect everything else it touches.
That may sound idealistic, but I think that’s a lot closer to what we see in reality - intolerance thrives in closed off spaces, and dies in open ones.
It only dies in open ones if you shoot it down at every opportunity. But if you engage with it and allow the intolerant to do their “I’m just asking questions” sealioning, then it just metastasizes.
You’re missing the point entirely, it’s not a paradox, nor is it so philosophical, it’s a very basic social contract. If you offer tolerance then you receive tolerance, if you offer intolerance then you are owed nothing but intolerance. It’s simply reciprocity.
I generally want good things for all people. However, modern conservatives in my neck of the woods have grown increasingly vile over the course of my lifetime. I like the idea that they might feel isolated because the ideas they champion are backward and negative. And because they seemingly delight in causing harm to others, especially groups who have less power.
Do not try to humanize those who are clearly evil and evil for the sake of evil because they are psychopaths who delight in the suffering of others.
Do not humanize these fucking animals. They are not “conservatives”; they are fucking NAZIS.
Crosses.
99% chance it’s performative.
There’s some verses in the Bible that tell you to be wary of those that come dressed clean and godly, that pray in public, and make a spectacle of their worship.
I forget exactly the words but it is basically that yeah, they’re filthy and ungodly inside.I am convinced most people aren’t religious, or at least agnostic. If they truly were they’d not be living like they are and wouldn’t give a shit about anything but their holy book. I call it being alibi-religious.
I used to wear a cross every day, and i believed… until i realized everyone else around me were all hypocrites for one reason or another and no one actually practiced what they preached.
One of those big trucks but they are immaculate, clean, scuff free. So not used for they are meant for: working.
Now they are just taking up space and being dangerous to the public just to try and help prop up someone’s ego.
I call those brodozers, and I hate those drivers. I’ve damned near gotten hit by them so many times cuz they can’t see shit over their hood
I love that my dinky hatchback has more get up and go then they do, they get so fucking offended when you zoom off from a light next to them.
Yeah I see them parked at my office and always think - someone drove that enormous truck here, then went up the elevator to their office job. What the fuck?
I apologize for the misandry but also we have a saying down here - the bigger the truck, the smaller the cock. If you don’t need a work truck for your work, you ought not get a work truck, it’s stupid expensive and gas guzzling. I judge you.
“Parking lot princesses”
Had a lot of those come through when I worked at Lowe’s. Many were indeed working trucks, but they were towing monster loads, not throwing shit in the back.
We have a few of those here in the Netherlands and it’s so ridiculous it’s almost sad. These big American trucks really aren’t fit for Dutch roads. They’re too large for the roads, they don’t fit in any parking lot, and they look ridiculous next to any normal car. I could sort of understand that a farmer would have them, but even then it can’t be that useful because it must be a hassle any time the truck needs to pass through a city or village.
Yeah I should have said: I’m from the Netherlands as well. And my gripes are only valid here I think. The roads here are NOT made for these monster sized units. Parking one of them means you are half way parked on the curb, meaning pedestrians and wheel chairs can no longer pass.
I’ve seen cases where these “parked units” block the flow of traffic and even trams!! #useless
City trucks
Do you judge people driving clean, scuff free vans as well or only truck drivers?
I use my truck for work but other than having a roof rack you probably wouldn’t be able to tell it’s a work truck from the outside. When it gets dirty, I wash it, and when it gets dents or scratches I fix them. I don’t want it to look like a beater.
A 4x4 truck with its big wheels and high ground clearance are features that allow the truck to move off-road. These features have the unfortunate side effect of making them dangerous to other road users, and very uneconomical / environmentally unfriendly. They also take up a lot of space.
Work vans and most cars are capable of driving on a building site or track.
Hood height, engine size, and the physical exterior dimensions of many vans are similar to those of pickup trucks. When used for work, it often just comes down to personal preference. One key difference is towing capacity - most vans are limited to around 750 kg, whereas trucks typically offer much more. Mine can tow up to 3000 kg.
Edit: Also, rear visibility in a van is much worse due to the enclosed cargo area. With a truck, you pretty much have 360-degree visibility.
most vans are limited to around 750 kg, whereas trucks typically offer much more. Mine can tow up to 3000 kg.
Yeah that’s bullshit. Vans that can do the max of 3500kg are common as fuck. You probably looked at the wrong spec. 750kg is the max for a trailer without brakes, regardless of type of car. There are usually two numbers on the spec sheet, one for max towing weight for unbraked trailers and one for braked trailers.
True, my bad. Many of the most commonly used vans here can tow 2500kg as long as the trailer has brakes. Anything more than that is rare though. Even many of the other mid-size pickups can’t tow 3000kg.
It may depend on local laws. Here the total weight of the combination (car + trailer) with a B+E driving license is 7000Kg, and 3500Kg for a car. That means you can have a van with 3500Kg capacity plus a 3500Kg trailer. So naturally there are vans that are built to match the max spec.
Ford makes (or at least made) and E-350 van. It can tow anything your truck can. And seat 11 people. And keep your equipment secured and safe from the elements. And it has a backup camera.
What’s your point? That thing is bigger than my pickup.
The point is that both of your points are factually incorrect.
Which points exactly?
Here’s a great video by Fort Nine that explains how and why the shape and size of these trucks are a threat to everyone outside the vehicle.
This applies to vans just as well though. This Ford Transit is little over a meter longer than a Toyota Hilux so these pictures are roughly to scale.
But the front/hood is much shorter in length. Also, people driving that type of van are much more likely to be doing so in a professional capacity and are significantly less likely to be asshole drivers fucking around with their phone while driving. People are bad drivers at baseline quite frequently, but if someone is on the job in a van used for commercial purposes, they’re more likely to at least be paying attention and not speeding everywhere.
Edit: I marked up your image to illustrate the point made much more eloquently in the video. Because of the length of the hood, the truck has a much longer distance of road obstructed from view in front of it, and this is with a standard truck that doesn’t have one of the very popular lift kits (and assuming that the driver is relatively tall.)
If there’s a 70 cm tall child standing in front of the vehicle, then in either case the child either would or wouldn’t be visible - there’s effectively no difference. It doesn’t really matter whether you can see 2 or 3 meters more of the road surface from one vehicle or the other. In both cases, the hood height is the same, and that’s what determines the safety in the event of a pedestrian collision.
Also, with a van, the rear visibility is greatly reduced compared to a pickup. You could say that can be compensated for with cameras - but that same argument applies to the front visibility as well.
Let’s also keep in mind where this discussion started from: a commenter was taking issue with clean, scuff-free pickups as if a work truck couldn’t look like that.
Yeah Sorry, I should have said I’m not American. I’m Dutch. I’ve been to the USA and these things “fit” better in a car-centric society. At least there is room.
But even there I still question it’s usefulness, you cannot see right in front of you. You’d miss wheelchairs, children, etc. And van’s can usually carry more the the flatbed of a truck.
I’m not American either - I’m from Finland. I’ve been to the Netherlands, and I can’t quite imagine owning a truck there either.
However, your criticism was about clean, scuff-free trucks broadly. If you had said that you judge people for owning a truck when they have no practical need for one, I wouldn’t have any issue with that. But that’s not what you said.
I don’t own one of those gigantic American trucks, but a mid-size one - think Toyota Hilux, Ford Ranger, Mitsubishi L200, Nissan Navara, or Isuzu D-Max. The external dimensions and hood height on those are comparable to similarly sized work vans. So when someone needs a vehicle capable of hauling cargo, it’s basically a choice between a truck and a van - and there’s not much difference between the two in terms of pedestrian safety.
I’d even argue a truck might be safer, because you generally have better all-around visibility. Vans tend to have very limited rear visibility due to the enclosed cargo area. You could argue that a van is more convenient for hauling certain types of cargo, but that’s a separate discussion about practicality - not safety.
Well I agree. My first reaction was a bit tongue-in-cheek. On purpose to conjure a very specific image; A person owning a huge monster truck without the intention of using it for it’s intended purpose but for propping up one’s ego.
A Toyoto Hilux is not something I would consider. More along the lines of: https://www.hotcars.com/the-sickest-lifted-trucks-weve-seen-in-2020/
Or these:
p.s. Vans have camera’s these days, allowing you to even see the ground underneath your fender. So even better then you could ever get with just your mirror’s.
Cybertruck owners. That is all.
