There are no centrists when one side is fascism.
The problem is you think anyone to the right of Stalin is a Nazi.
Edit: I'm glad my manic commenting this morning sparked such wonderful debate.
Right of...Stalin? Yes. Of course he does. Was this a joke?
I have a buddy who is right leaning in several areas. He's not a Nazi. Not fash.
Like, ok, he's not super comfortable about trans people which is disappointing but we talked about how outlawing treatment is fucked and he is agrees.
He is all for socialized healthcare. Less into socializing other stuff. And he is pro-2A like me, who is a lefty as in pro-labor, anti-bigotry, social democrat, ACAB, etc.
We talk about politics all the time. And we can see each other's point of view. Because we talk in person. And we respect each other.
Online with all the trolls and shit especially in this kind of brief social media format, political discourse usually shits the bed and rolls around in it too.
Anyway the folks I consider fascists are the ones who think in social hierarchy instead of equality and think certain identities are below them and want to "put those folks back in their place," by law or force. T
hey are the ones who favor authoritarianism over democracy and a return to some fake ideal before the civil rights era, before sexual revolution, feminism, women's suffrage, or in some cases emancipation. They're people who still praise Trump and DeSantis for the ways they hurt people not like them.
Some of us know what fascism actually means.
Nobody tell them about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
I remember when I thought the USSR was communist - simpler times... simpler me - then I picked up a dictionary.
I do listen to "both" sides! That's exactly why I'm a leftist!
I don't get why centrists think that you have to be "centrist" to listen to both sides, or why doing so makes you a centrist.
For America I'm what used to be a centrist, but now unfortunately I would be considered far left. I hate what we have become. Vote blue!
Green is better but not enough people even know about the Green party that it would be viable
It's not even just that people don't know about the green party, it's that we are stuck with a voting system that is inherently biased against 3rd parties being viable.
If we can switch to a better voting system like STAR or approval, it would be far better for the green party.
And the existing parties would have to compete for once, which would go a long way towards making them not dumpster fires.
The Greens are horrible on their own merits. Any third party in the US needs to start out saying the voting system must be changed. If they don't, that's a good sign they're a combination of a grift and useful idiots. The Greens rarely talk about it unless someone else brings it up first, and they quickly try to change the subject after mumbling a few things about it.
Another sign is that they don't try to build up support over time from local and state races. Greens occasionally run candidates for state congress, but for the most part, they show up for a Presidential run every 4 years and disappear.
Their historical anti-nuclear stance has exasperated climate change. They held back something that would have been very useful to mass deploy 20-30 years ago (although I do think the economics have changed, and it's no longer the right option for new rollouts). The German wing of the party is currently cheering on the dismantling of perfectly good nuclear reactors in exchange for much, much dirtier sources.
Nader's campaign in 2000 absolutely did torpedo Al Gore (and no, you don't have to convert every Nader voter in Florida to Gore for this to be true). He kept power out of the hands of one of the most genuine public servants to run in recent history, and gave power to a trainwreck of an administration that was 180 degrees away from their stated goals.
Greens need to get serious or fuck off.
The Democrats are nominating a genocide denier though. Similarly to pretty much every election for the last 50 years. (Not genocide specifically, but a candidate with major issues in their beliefs). Voting blue simply allows them to continue ignoring us. It also lends legitimacy to the winner. If the 2020 election had seen Biden win 15% to Trump's 10%, that'd be a much better case for Biden being an illegitimate president. When you do average things, you get average results. There is zero reason to think voting blue is ever going to fix any of our problems, because it hasn't so far.
I think it's a difference in how we define words. If we focus on our common ground, first, then we are more likely to listen to each other. To a person who identifies as centrist, a person who calls themselves liberal might appear to be on the fringe of society IF the so-called centrist (who may even actually be liberal) is within a community where they are surrounded by more conservative voices.
Being with my husband has taught me that how we individually define words matters a lot more than we think. He and I grew up in very different circumstances and will often argue different points and then get extremely frustrated at each other for not understanding what we mean. Sometimes I'm thinking "what is he saying, that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about" only to realize that the way he defines a word, phrase, or idea is completely different to my definition.
If you want someone to truly listen to you, you first have to be open to discovering what's important to them and how they are expressing it
Yeah, as it turns out, when you actually hear out both sides, it becomes very clear that one side is, for the most part, completely full of shit. And that the other side barely pays lip service to their supposed beliefs, even though they're somewhat correct.
If you start out right in the middle, and then every time you find out that you're wrong about something, change your mind on that topic, overtime you'll shift further and further left. Not to say being the most left is correct, but the vast majority of correct answers to topics lie to the left of Democrats, while most of the obviously false ones lie within the beliefs of establishment Dems and Republicans.
I don't like being categorized as a leftist because being a leftist now is just being radical and crazy and I certainly don't want to belong to this category. So leftists as we see them certainly don't listen to both sides, that's for sure (or those people aren't numerous enough to have a party we can look for, whatever the country you're talking about). So I would like to call myself a centrist, as it should mean that you listen to both sides, but centrist are apparently right wings who don't assume being right wings. That's why I generally don't answer anymore because all categories are fucked up and I don't seem to belong to any of them: none of them are able to have rational and nuanced opinions and solutions, whatever the subject.
What I think doesn't make me anything. I want an armed population AND domestic spending. Most importantly I want to have the means to draw a line between myself and everyone else and defend that border when someone comes along to twist my arm.
I think their point is that you can get more done with compromise than with strict adherence to your principles. Being right doesn't mean much of shit if nothing gets done about it.
Compromise only works if both sides are acting in good faith and acutally are trying to get shit done. If one side is actively trying to tear the whole democratic system down then it will just result in a slow decline if the other side compromises.
I have family members who refer to me as Cassandra because I regularly spout "inane nonsense" about the future which then inevitably becomes true.
I don't have a gift or a crystal ball. I have two eyes and (sadly) a working brain and the werewithal to study history and put one and one together.
We aren't geniuses by any stretch of imagination. It's just extremely sad and painful to see almost everyone else keep going with the (just) bearable lies vs the distinctively unbearable truth.
Cassandra... in Greek mythology was a Trojan priestess dedicated to the god Apollo and fated by him to utter true prophecies but never to be believed. In modern usage her name is employed as a rhetorical device to indicate a person whose accurate prophecies, generally of impending disaster, are not believed.
For those who were also wondering
I'd also suggest Mythos by Stephen Fry. Good book for someone who would like to read about Greek mythology.
No, no, she’s the last human in the universe. A bitchy trampoline.
I'm like this, but I'm just a pessimist. I naturally expect a terrible outcome from everything, and get disappointed every time I'm right.
My roomie got called in on an all-staff meeting on a weekend back in spring. They're truckers, so some work weekends, it's normal. All-staff meetings were not however. No one divulged any information, and so I was all "oh you're all getting laid off." My friend was all "that's impossible, they're actively hiring!"
Day came. Gathering started. Atmosphere was great. My friend sent me a text going all "we're all having a great time, drinking coffee and eating cinnamon buns, talking about work." Half an hour later "so we just all got laid off."
The company was struggling as a whole, so they decided to shut down operations in this region in an attempt to downsize and keep the company afloat long enough to remedy the situation. The management didn't know until right before the meeting, hence why no one knew what the meeting was for.
I'm in the same boat and have to admit that while I had very low expectations people call me nuts for, the past decade especially has had me go "this is even worse!" quite a few times.
Reality somehow one ups my worst expectations on a regular basis still.
I realise this isn't the most enlightened response but I entirely misread "Cassandra" as "Canada" and it made the entire reply SO much more entertaining.
"Surely we can find some common ground between the Final Solution and the status quo?" —centrists
- * Boasts about listening to both sides of the argument *
- * Doesn't even bother to read and understand the Xweet they are replying to *
Everyone who claims to be a centralist is like that. They're not a centralist they're just a ostrich sticking its head in the sand.
There's no sensible debate to be had about whether the climate crisis is happening. The Right don't have anything to offer the conversation because they deliberately refuse to debate sensibly on it.
I'm a leftist precisely because I started paying more attention and listening to both sides.
I was a centrist before I started doing that.
I was a leftist because my parents weren't and I was a rebel.
I eventually grew up and thought 'this is fucking awesome' and kept going.
If you are paying attention and you have a drop of empathy then you're almost guaranteed to be one.
I thought I was a centrist, because it was clear to me that both sides are terrible, and going to kill us all.
Turns out I was just a leftist all along
Literally arguing for a middle ground between correct and incorrect because they reflexively have to make themselves look like the reasonable center whenever the left/right dynamic comes up on the internet.
No thought into the response it's just Pavlovian centrist drooling.
Yeah, imagine that those guys praise themselves for agreeing only to half of a genocide instead of a full one, that's how their "middle ground" works.
As for listening to both the arguments, if done only for the middle ground instead of truth seeking and actual critical thinking, you get this kind of shit. I listen to both arguments and they still get me to the left side just because the right side ones cancel themselves out as lies, deception or just dumbthinking and emotional response.
The "others" think they are correct too. It's simple tribal politics.
I think the point is that if one side is correct and the other side is incorrect (regardless of which side that is) then someone with that point of view cannot possibly be centralist.
To be centralist you would have to conceive the both sides have a point. Centralists like to claim that they listen to both sides and then make an opinion on who to support, but they don't, they just stick around in the middle. They never actually commit to one side or the other, because if they did that they wouldn't be centralist anymore and they wouldn't be able to be on their high horse.
Sometime the 'others' are Russian trolls/bots infiltrating these posts on Lemmy and other sites where leftists hang. Oligarchs hate it when you talk about taxing their excessive lifestyles.
Past week, been seeing a lot of anti liberal stuff on lemmy. So, you've got people from the outside trying to destabilize the u.s. saying, both sides are the same, democrats are just as bad as Republicans. This creates a scenario that created Trump becoming president in the 1st place. It's done on purpose.
Now, I understand that democrats, liberals aren't perfect. But we have one side trying to set up detention camps, threatening to kill political rivals, consumed with hate. Other side trying at least to be better people.
I'm asking honestly, I would like to learn. Why is the both sides mindset becoming so prevalent?
Why is the both sides mindset becoming so prevalent?
Liberalism is used, cynically (imo), as a cudgel, to vote against real progressive politics. We can't have healthcare-for-all because we have to pick the side that isn't insane or else we get the insane group. And so on, and so on…
Look at how the Biden admin endorses genocide in Gaza. They completely ignore the masses of protesters calling for a ceasefire. How can they get away with this? "The other side is worse."
A truly responsive party would not stick its thumb in the eye of the people. It's not that both sides are equally awful. It's that both are awful and one uses the other to retain power.
Yes but the problem is despite all their blustering online, people only actually engage at the endgame stage of politics. All these "ideologically pure" leftists are doing jackshit to either ensure progressive leftist ideals win out over liberal ideals in the currently viable sorta left-presenting party or to support independent leftist political parties and groups in down-ballot, local elections, and community policy projects. No, instead these oh-so-great morally-superior "real leftists" instead want to bitch and moan about futility and then opt-out on big voting day while spouting virtues as if their behavior doesn't prevent real progressive change for the better, incremental though it may be.
And to very clear, I'm not taking the "fall in line or get out of the way" democrat bullshit stance here. If you really believe in the policy and values of a third party, please vote for them. I will never accuse an involved voter of throwing a vote away. I'm specifically talking about the large chunk of the left who are only left in theory, not practice, the ideological cosplayers who pretend anything less than absolute is not worth fighting for but who don't put in any effort to ensure that what they want even ever has a chance of ending up on the ballot in front of them.
It's easy to stand on virtue and say you won't support the lesser of two evils, but unless you're actively working on an alternative, the simple fact is that your abstained position enables the worst-case scenario which will have real-world impact. If we believe in leftist ideals, we should believe in reasonable harm reduction where possible. Same applies here.
To quote Vaush: "If the choice is between 99% Hitler and 100% Hitler, you choose 99% Hitler. Full stop."
No number of rights make a wrong and no number of wrongs make a right. That's not to suggest that there aren't generations of all of us that have made the best of what they could do. You have to hold to the ideal. It's incredibly popular to shit on everything because it's the internet.
The words worth fighting and dying for: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Let's be more honest. Both sides are horrible.
Yes, one side is "trying to set up detention camps, threatening to kill political rivals, consumed with hate". The other side isn't trying to better people. The vast majority (there are a handful of exceptions) of people in politics are trying to gain power and money for themselves and for their friends.
The biggest difference is that they haven't yet crossed the line into actively trying to destroy our democracy.
That's certainly enough reason to support that side over the other one. But it's not the "good side".
Bunch of career politician parasites the lot of them.
Their only interest is in getting re-elected. If it can't be fixed in four years, it won't get done because it's the next guy's problem.
Because people are tired of having to choose between shit and poison.
Staying in the middle is a bad idea, the truth is that both sides are bad but one of them is undeniably much worse, though I can’t really blame people shitting on Democrats. As long as they still vote against Republican, obviously.
gunna have to agree, having to eat shit may suck, but at least i'll live to tell the tale
Yeah this is pretty much where I am. I think Democrats could be better of course, but I don't mind how much anyone shits on them so long as they still vote against Republicans.
If we want things to get better, things have to, well, get better. We have to clean up a filthy house before we can live in a clean one. And we'll want to clean up the worst of the filth first, which means living with the lesser filth for a while.
Both sides ARE bad, but one side is blatantly evil. I was hoping that rise of the internet would make more people aware of it, but somehow it got worse. After 2004 election, I was convinced that the voters will start making a more informed decision, but 2016 proved me wrong.
Doesn't help the collective cognitive dissonance social media has accrued for all partisans. Anyone not terminally online will tend to be the actual definition of a centrist (not this loser strawman concept drafted up every fucking time a thread like this happens) where you contemplate the actual topic at hand and align yourself off your own morals and experiences rather than just blindly ally yourself to every goalpost set by a specific party or ideology.
90% of people in this thread are clearly affected. Stamped foot head in sand fluoride stare types teehee
One side who supports detention camps at home and the other side who supports detention camps abroad.
Fucking wonderful choices we have here.
Gee I wonder why people are tired of neolibralism
I have investigated my views and come to the conclusion I'm always right.
People who are either trying to help shift the window further right, or fucking morons who are fascist apologists
Both of those
there no need from outside to destabilize murica. You people are doing it by yourselves by keep voting for shit and shit lite®
This is a pro shit sentiment.
You mean the Democrats/Liberals who still have detention camps and support the genocide in Gaza?
To answer your question, what is meant by "both parties are the same" is that neither side has any interest in solving the root causes of virtually every issue within the country and abroad. Democrats and Republicans put the interests of the wealthiest and the preservation of capitalism ahead of all else. It's a bit unfair to say that everything the parties publicly fight over is a distraction from the conflict between the ultra rich and everyone else when fascism can and does create horrible outcomes for the less privileged. But it's certainly a convenience for Democrats to be able to say, "at least we're not Trump" while offering nothing else to those suffering under the constant shift to the right.
I truly believe it came about as a result of the loss of the fairness doctrine (thanks piece of shit Reagan) or at least that was part of it. And as a result, Fox News and other garbage like OANN provides absolutely no balanced viewpoints-it's just alt right garbage with outright lies.
CNN doesn't either in the sense it was purchased by a Trump supporter and now presents "both sides" by having Trump's dumb ass on there.
Billionaires know this; it's why arseholes like Elon Husk bought Twitter so they could control the both sides narrative and push anyone that could be "left" into a stupid centrist position.
The biggest ranters get the most attention. People who are calm and centered tend not to post.
People who are calm and centered tend not to post.
Or, when they do, are too unengaging for the average person to care to read. People want easily digestible and relatable turmoil, controversy, etc.
Democrat =/= liberal
Most of the democrats you see in politics are center right conservatives
Why, because they don't want to abolish capitalism?
What you might be missing is that an ethical global policy will "harm" rich nations initially, liberals are still invested in capitalist outcomes and both side ism is true in that sense, both side are in fact invested in preserving capitalism. In a weird way, trump destroying America has had good outcomes for the global poor and even poor within the U.S.
What are you talking about destabilising the US? 😆 This is a decentralized platform, not reserved for the US people, in case you have not realised yet. The country where I am from actually is very good generally at not dividing people in only 'left' and 'right'. Centrist parties have carried the country for the most part. We have a welfare society that most people in other countries seem to look up to. In my country, being liberal is considered right wing (nationalist conservatists considered most right wing). Don't forget that most people with an opinion have good reason to believe what they do. And everyone should be respected. Democracy wasn't invented so a bunch of US leftists could create an echo chamber and complain about people who listen to both sides. People who vote for a party you don't like are not automatically evil. One could argue your leftist parties in the US seem very eager to support the zionist regime in waging a war on civil citizens, aka. supporting the murder of political rivals, genocide, segregation, apartheid. As an outsider, the US political debate mostly looks very clownish, because both sides are just throwing stones whilst living in a glass empire. You need to check yourselves.
Theory: they know. They know we're in trouble, that we need to take action, that we can fix the problems. They know that they're wrong and that they're making things worse, but they don't care about being right or making the word better, they only care about winning. To change is to admit defeat and, therefore, lose, so the only way to win is to make sure that your opponents lose too.
I think it's even easier than that. Remember when you left your dirty dishes in the sink yesterday and thought that's a problem for the tomorrow guy (or girl)? That's them, on a global scale, all the time.
"Why should I care? I'll be dead before it happens."
As someone debating if I should wash the dishes before I go to bed right now, this hurt. I am going to the kitchen and do it, but for this evening at least I am not going to like you. (joking, thank you, tomorrow me will thank you too!)
I think you are partially right and partially wrong. They don't know for sure. They think it just doesn't matter. They think that we adapt and change and nothing can take us down because we are divine. That nothing can ruin humans, we are too smart. We are too strong.
I do think there is something to adaptability. I do think abusing it is a horrible strategy. However I don't know if they are being coy just to win. I think that they love conspiracies and buy into them because it feels good to be so special that someone is trying to trick us rather than the truth.
The truth is that we are all guessing based on the last generations guesses. Some guesses have gone long enough to become proof and acknowledging that is up to everyone. But some have decided that certain guesses aren't as good as others.
Honestly for a lot of people its even dumber then thinking humanity is special and divine. They know shits going to get bad, people just can't imagine things getting bad for them. Everyone thinks they are the main character of their own hero narrative and at worst shit hitting the fan means an adventure where they get to shoot people and get laid. It will be like a video game!
Also, we adapt by dying and having smarter kids. The secret behind the supposed indestructibility of humanity that makes people confident in being dumb is that is something happens, the dumb people die more often then the smart ones.
Of course a shitload of people of every ilk dies, it's just the survivors will be slightly overrepresented in smart people.
Looking through all the comments in this topic, it's sad to see that at this point we're arguing about defining labels, instead of solving problems.
Hmm almost like this post is specifically about labels. There are plenty of other places to discuss the problems.
Politics isn't about solving problems. It's about money and power. That's it.
I love an opportunity to bag on ‘centrism’. It is often used as a cover for political ignorance. After all, would a non-illiterate claim both sides are the same? It only takes a few minutes to find some of the million ways they are not the same.
I once talked with an enlightened "pacifistic" centrist.
At some point I used the low hanging fruit - colonialism! do you think both sides were right? I felt kind of silly for not using a more sophisticated argument but- he said "yes, they should've just talked and came to some compromise :)". It didn't matter to him that one side was clearly an aggressor, because since the native people tried defending themselves that was enough for him to think both sides were bad.
clearly that fruit was a bit too high still, so I went with the good old - what about Jews and hitler? he replied that still, they should've tried to come to some sort of compromise- at that point I was very done talking to that guy. How on earth did he see a possible middle ground between "i'd like to live please thanks" and "i want your whole ethnicity eradicated" is beyond me
the lesson is - start with arguments you find simple and straightforward, ones with obvious answers, because some people can and will trip over even the lowest hurdles, and it'll save you a lot of time lol
Some people claim "both sides are the same" because they're politically ignorant.
Other people claim "both sides are the same" because they're so far left that the distance between the right-wing party and the ultra-right-wing party is insignificant when it comes to the issues they care about. (Note: the ultra-right-wing party has been doing its damnedest to create distance by sprinting even further right, but at least until the recent fascism my argument was pretty valid.)
You can be on the fence about anything, but remember the devil owns the fence.
Now you listen here, bucko. The devil didn't do all that work for you to associate him with centrists.
Some things are the same and some things are different never ashamed to be blunt about it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGArqoF0TpQ One of my favorite skits for this issue
Hey leftists how about you stick your head in the sand and live in blissful ignorance like us centrists do. Meanwhile our asses are sticking up and we get ass raped by capitalism. But because we “listen” to “both” sides and make up our own mind we decided to actually enjoy it.
"Why don't you listen to both sides of the argument and make your own opinions and arguments based on that?"
Bitch, why do you think I'm a fucking leftist???
The enlightened centrist here comes across as a Republican too embarrassed to admit it -- it seems to be a core thought in conservatism that anyone who isn't conservative just hasn't formed an independent opinion, and if they did that, they'd be conservative.
Actually, I lean fairly hard left on most things but I often say I'm centre-left to leftists because the average person I meet online who identifies as a leftist is so sure they're right about everything that my response contrary by reflex.
Call me old fashioned, but a key component to being a responsible person is to maintain an open mind, even if that means considering shit for a quarter of a second before telling someone to go fuck themselves, rather than presupposing that they should go fuck themselves. That feels wrong.
I completely agree, and I usually describe myself the same way online because of how left some people are. Someone center left here is very left in reality on the American (and probably Western overall tbh) spectrum.
I think there's a saying that intelligence is the ability to consider a conflicting idea? It's almost always worthwhile to consider what someone's saying because there's no guarantee I'm actually right. The exception is things like "hey maybe the Nazis weren't so bad", and those are just absolutes where I can firmly say absolutely not. People just put too many things into that category sometimes.
That's not what he's saying though. That's all you and your prejudice making it up on the spot because you dislike people who are not into polarised politics. Being quite new to lemmy i must say there seems to be a whole lot of leftist echo chambers. Also what is the issue with the person possibly being female? You probably shouldn't be using a derogatory term like that...
Bitch is no longer really a gendered put down any longer any more than asshole is. Languages change. Back to centrism. Fundamentally the language is deceptive. Left and right implies they are equally valid choices like tacos or burgers. The problem is that what is being described as "left" or "right" is in fact fact based positions vs fantasy. Lets do one. Climate change.
Far right: Climate change isn't real the earth is only 6000 years old made as is. Nothing needs to be done.
Middle right: Climate change isn't real the Earth is just going to natural cycles nothing needs doing.
Moderate right: Climate change might be real but its just a natural process having nothing to do with people nothing needs doing.
Centrist: Climate change is real and people might be causing it but we shouldn't do anything that would effect my 401K
Moderate Left: Climate change is definitely caused by people lets not do anything that will effect my 401 but lets give a bunch of money to people with green in the title
Center Left: Lets give even more money to things with green in the title and TRY not to effect my 401k too much
Radical Left: We need to make substantial change to preserve the only home we have even if it tanks grandpas 401k
Herein the radical position is just plain actual unvarnished reality and retreats from same are just different levels of self delusion. The climate really is changing and humans have a huge part in it and we really do need to change how we are living.
I don't like polarized politics, it's just the reality. The mainstream right are fascists who reject science, reason, and ethics, so of course I feel the need to take a hard stance against it. You don't get to will an unpolarized world into existence when calls for genocide are a common phenomenon.
I spend an inordinate amount of time listening to the right, but what i find more important than listening to them is seeing the effects of their policies. A right winger can talk all they want about trying to create a better America using good Christian values, but if the policies and politicians they support are discriminatory or terrible for everyone, their words don't mean shit.
Anti-abortion advocates claim to oppose bodily autonomy for the sake of the potential children, but they consistently oppose policies that help those children once they're born. Anti-Trans advocates also claim to be protecting children, but their policies are terrible for trans and cis people alike. Republicans claim to care about the budget, but always balloon the national debt through tax cuts on the rich while Democrats sometimes even lower the debt. The right claim to be better for the economy, while their policies basically always worsen the lives of almost everyone through externalities and increased inequality.
I look at fucking reality when considering opposing views, and the right's arguments are rarely supported by reality. Right wingers aren't tolerated here because they're intolerant assholes who base their entire worldviews on lies.
One of the worst things we liberals did, including me is not fighting this Republican rot at the start with the ferocity it deserved.
I remember during the Bush years, while republicans were infesting every level of government and calling liberals demons and Unamerican and enemies... We chuckled at them and laughed along Jon Steward how silly these republicans were, while sitting at home complacent. All our leaders kept spouting bipartisanship as the ultimate goal... Meanwhile Republican talkshow hosts were calling Democrats America's #1 enemy...
We didn't sense the danger and the massive damage their propaganda was doing to the next generation and to every level of government.
Now we've arrived at Trump... And fighting back now is infinitely harder.
It reminds me of climate change.... We saw the problems early, yet did nothing and now that we have to do something it's so much more painful and some of it likely unfixable.
But South Park showed us that Al Gore was a weird nerd who was afraid of something that doesn’t exist! hahaha ManBearPig he’s super cereal!!!
Not everyone. Someone did try to assassinate Regan after all. Bush too (in Kuwait)
I mean, the guy that tried to assassinate Reagan was trying to impress Jodie Foster, so I don't think he was a woke leftist fighting against Republican fascism.
Both sidesism is so stupid.
"Oh let me hear the fascist nazi's side that's trying to kill trans people as a scapegoat! I am so enlightened and balanced to be hearing this side too!"
"So scientist are saying cigarettes are bad for my health? Well I should listen to what cigarette companies have to say as well so I can form an enlightened opinion."
... that's not a centrist view. That's a shitty straw man argument.
Anybody who thinks any serious social and political subject only has two sides has never seriously thought about human society and politics.
The entire idea of a centrist is built on top of a ridiculous falacy.
political subject only has two sides
A center isn't only between two sides...
Mathematically calculated centers for each and every subject on a multi-polar political world fall all over the place, are not consistent between one subject and other in a political sense and move a lot more over time as the miriad of opinion shift even if only slightly, so your mathematical "centrism" would pretty much be "one opinion today, another tomorrow and no political consistency".
Absolutelly, you can mathematically find a middle point for everything, it's just that averaging anything but the smallest count of political ideologies (two, maybe three) across all possible human and societal subjects is not going yield a small enough and stable enough area of opinions to add up to a political ideology.
Dude that's not LEFT. they made us believe that. It's just common sense
Reality has a "left wing" bias.
left is common sense
No.
I wish.
Left is very counter intuitive. That's why you get leftists writing walls of text and everyone else writing "duh, invisible hand of the markets".
When doi get banned here for speaking aloud?
I feel like 14 at 43
The key is to get everybody to hate you. That's why I'm a centrist. Everybody hates me from every side.
Excuse me, I am a centrist too. So I like you
Ohhh you'll hate me the most based on which center 8 prefer on what lol
aka the Cassandra curse
If someone says that they are “centrist” they are not telling you that they base all of their opinions on being in the middle of any two positions. That would be astoundingly stupid and is very much a straw-man take on the situation.
They are telling you that they agree with neither major party on everything, and find that both parties have views that they don’t agree with. It’s pretty easy to come to that conclusion because the US two-party system packs in an almost incoherent mishmash of beliefs into exactly two sides.
There is absolutely no contradiction in being for police reform, and against riots lasting for days. There is no contradiction in being for gun rights, while also wanting limits on them. There is no contradiction in wanting functional government services and universal healthcare, and thinking that free markets are effective. There is no contradiction in wanting a more balanced budget, and government services to be funded.
The idea that there are only two sides in politics is a strange delusion created by your two party system.
If you are left wing, and argue for left-wing policies in every case, that means you will also be argued with by somebody who believes political nuance and not just waving a party flag.
The right wing also shits on centrists because they think they are secretly left-wing since they argue with some of their stupider points as well.
These people are not "secretly right-wing" and just don’t have the balls to say it. That is a horrendous take no matter where you fall on the political spectrum the only serves to limit conversation.
i've never met a ''''''centrist'''''' who disagrees with conservative talking points.
Then you either have a very small bubble, or don't identify some because they happen to have agreed with you on some particular issues.
My boss is one who identifies as a "moderate" and gets offended when people call him right wing or Republican. Yet, on 9/10 issues he sides with the conservative stance. We've correctly deduced that he actually is a conservative and votes for conservative candidates in every election, but he doesn't like being confronted about his association with extremist viewpoints in a blue state so he claims he is just a centrist to take the heat off of himself.
The majority of people who identify as centrist/libertarian/“on the fence” are purely doing it because they know that saying they’re conservative gets them attacked.
In the US there really is no compromise anymore, nor can there be. If you willingly vote for a facist, racist, sexist party under any circumstances I’m personally not interested in your opinions at all, because you’ve deemed whatever minor policy more important than my, and many others, ability to live safely in this country.
This seems to be what the so-called centrists don't get. The issues may be important, but "I am ok with rapists, fascism, and manipulating/stealing elections" should be a dealbreaker.
Even if someone rejects everything else, there's no doubt that Republicans are the perpetuating force behind Gerrymandering, and that the goal of Gerrymandering is for a minority of voters in a state to have more power in the Federal government.
You just described a Leftist, in some ways. Disagreeing with both majority parties doesn't mean you have to stand between "evidence-based" and "far-right".
There is absolutely no contradiction in being for police reform, and against riots lasting for days
That's being in the middle of the two positions. It's not that there's a contradiction, but that you just ate up the rhetoric that BLM protesting was all "riots lasting for days". And "Police Reform" is a middle-of-the-road alternative to "follow the evidence, defund 90% of the police and have non-lethally-armed services do those things". This fits our description of centrist to a tee
There is no contradiction in being for gun rights, while also wanting limits on them
Sure. I'm a leftist who feels this way. The "real center" here, though, would be the Democratic party, who still want less gun control than most civilized nations. Your view perhaps resembles the "the Right is so bat-shit insane that conservatives are confused for moderates"?
There is no contradiction in wanting functional government services and universal healthcare, and thinking that free markets are effective
I mean... yeah there is. If free markets were effective, we should be gutting all government services and regulatory bodies. Nobody actually believes free markets are effective. There are those who embrace the buzz-word without realizing it, and then there are those who want the free markets because they are ineffective and that the profit margins available to them are massive.
There is no contradiction in wanting a more balanced budget, and government services to be funded
Again, this is the formal Democratic position. The formal Republican position is called "Starve the Beast", and it is for there to NEITHER be a balanced budget NOR be government services funded. I'm not making that up. On this view, you sound like a Democrat, but if you vote for Republicans on their economic stances despite matching Democrats, that makes you the middle of the two views again.
The idea that there are only two sides in politics is a strange delusion created by your two party system.
Obviously, but there are two sides to every issue. If we get back to the OP issue, it's that one side has been screaming "climate change is real and permanent damage is imminent" and the other side has been screaming "climate change is fake and God loves us". Centrists have been between the two saying "I know the meteor is headed for us, but my retirement is more important to me than the world still being around when my kids grow up". We've been dealing with 40+ years of that. But yeah, that IS between the two sides.
If you are left wing, and argue for left-wing policies in every case, that means you will also be argued with by somebody who believes political nuance and not just waving a party flag.
The funny thing is that for 9 policies out of 10, most lefties just argue for the educated position against the "gut instinct" or "I know science says this but it worked for me" position. Hell, just look at the topic of parents hitting kids and it covers all the nuances of the leftist problem. Is the Left always correct? No. But the Right and/or Center is a broken clock in this. I think the Left is wrong on Gun Control and the Democrats are right. That's about the only issue I can think of right now that the majority of the Left is wrong on. Not because I'm a leftist but because I'm educated in the issues.
The right wing also shits on centrists because they think they are secretly left-wing since they argue with some of their stupider points as well.
Not quite. They pretend centrists are the far left and shit on them, so that "moderate" really means "neocon but not seeking Handmaid's Tale".
These people are not “secretly right-wing” and just don’t have the balls to say it. That is a horrendous take no matter where you fall on the political spectrum the only serves to limit conversation.
Anyone who voted Trump in 2020 was either ignorant or Right-Wing, regardless of what they claimed to be. He is against fiscal conservativism, against modern medicine, and was caught red-handed working with Russia to steal the 2016 election. His presidency damaged the economy, but also focused that damage on states that net-provide resources for the country as a whole because they are Democrat. A person in New York paying an extra $10,000/yr in taxes with reduced overall QOL and COVID-dead family members "voting Trump anyway" is not a centrist.
I have never once voted for the right-wing party in my country (Canada). I also don't agree that any left-leaning party in my country is particularly great. If I were in the US, I would be presently voting for the Democrats, but only because they are the least bad of the two. I would also be stumping for third-party candidate viability as a solution to this.
you just ate up the rhetoric that BLM protesting was all “riots lasting for days”
It was vague on purpose. I'm not discussing a specific set of current events, merely commonly attached attitudes to events that have occurred throughout history. Police forces vs. protesters is a pretty common recurrence, no "rhetoric eating" required.
Nobody actually believes free markets are effective.
Well, if you'd like to actually discuss, they are to a limited extent. I also believe that the government should step in to break mon- du- and tri-opolies. If a bail out is required, the government should then own the business and all patents should be made public. Patent timeframes should also be restored to the original or shorter as all it's doing is stifling innovation. Some industries should be removed entirely from being for-profit. Now you go!
Centrists have been between the two
Maybe some. Centrists and independents are not a cohesive group with set ideals. Each individual has their own stance. It also doesn't mean that the views they hold are always between the two parties in power, but instead means that they fall between any two parties. As an example, I could be a Canadian Centrist between Green and NDP; I'm still a centrist. This makes ragging on the label kinda worthless because depending on the scale, most people are Centrists. I would be screaming at the top of my lungs about the fucking meteor in your example instead of wasting time on social politics. Yelling "Whataboutism" with things that important is fucking absurd when one means we're all going to die roasting in our own goddamn juices.
Trump
The dude sucks, no doubt. To me he represents the enshittification of modern politics, but... You can vote for Trump and still be centrist just like you can still have voted for Hillary and be a Centrist. It depends on what you value most and to what extent. There was a really good episode of Radiolab a few years back that discussed this. Basically, a legal US immigrant (with undocumented family members) voted Trump despite feeling that the man was disgusting and disagreeing with him on literally every single issue but one. The one issue they believed in so hard though, that it was enough to vote Trump (in that instance, their line was abortion). If you have a line that you will not cross, then that's all there is for some people. You can say they're wrong (and in that instance, I would agree with you), but they're neither stupid nor gullible.
This is another case of how more (and more varied) political candidates would help.
Bro, you're describing an independant.
Centrism is, by definition, staking your position as the middle between two (or more I suppose) defined positions. The reason it's such a ridiculed stance is that it's not based on any sort of principled viewpoints or analysis of the issues, and as one position shifts to extremism, the self-defined centrists follow happily along.
Just because you frame two positions as dichotomies does not mean that someone who agrees with parts of both is a centrist. It could mean they are false dichotomies (i.e. pro-riot vs pro-police) or they are positions where nuance is appropriate. Having a nuanced view is NOT being a centrist, unless the depth of your nuance is "Person A wants all of the things, and Person B wants none of the things, therefore the clear and correct answer is to have SOME of the things". Especially when the thing is something like systematic racism or corruption.
The fact that US politics is so polarized that we're constantly conditioned and primed to lump our positions into one of two (often incoherent) camps explains why centrism happens, but it's not a defense of centrism.
Wikipedia disagrees as does every other definition I found.
Centrism is a political outlook or position involving acceptance or support of a balance of social equality and a degree of social hierarchy while opposing political changes that would result in a significant shift of society strongly to the left or the right.
The far left and far right each have some funny ideas that aren't fair to the rest of the country in America (and in some cases the world). Thinking about how best to move forward while getting as many people on board as possible and affect real change doesn't mean "Hey other side, get fucked. Civil war time because I can't have everything I want in all scenarios!"
The "false dichotomies" that you're speaking about are simplifications to get the point across and are not false. You can feel that there needs to be a better system and that people in power shouldn't be able to ignore issues that they find uncomfortable so that riots are not needed, and also be opposed to destroying things belonging to people not in power. There is nothing false about that.
I don't agree with both parties (in the US) on most things ... it's kind of why I'm left. The Overton window is so fucking far right you have democrats running on a platform of "nothing will fundamentally change" while moving into the center right spaces that the GOP left behind when they finally started saying the quiet parts of loud
For real: these "neither right nor left 'free thinker' types" invariably skew the same way. 3 guesses a to which way that is
I'm not even in the US, I'm just mystified by these threads whenever they come up. It's always the highest level of straw-manning I've ever seen...
"You better attach the correct labels to yourself **and ** agree with my personal version of that label or FUCK YOU! YOU'RE BRAINWASHED! My carefully curated group of friends that think the same as me and social media where I've blocked everyone else says that I'm right! Here's a video of an expert on my side that says I'm right that neither of us will watch. Bet you feel dumb now, huh?"
There is absolutely no contradiction in being for police reform, and against riots lasting for days. There is no contradiction in being for gun rights, while also wanting limits on them. There is no contradiction in wanting functional government services and universal healthcare, and thinking that free markets are effective. There is no contradiction in wanting a more balanced budget, and government services to be funded.
That is a left position in the US.
The republicans are against police reform (except eliminating the FBI) and in favor of riots (as long as they are to overturn elections a Democrat won). They want no limits on gun ownership (except maybe black and LGBT people). They think the government is always worse than free markets and that child labor is part of a healthy free market. They want a balanced budget only when a Democrat is in office, otherwise they are fine with blowing trillions on tax cuts for the rich. The only government service they care about is ones to suppress and control non-white people.
Being against riots, and being for gun rights are not typically leftist ideals.
Edit: I mistook riots for protests. I stick by the gun rights stuff being right wing. I know what Marx said, I have a copy of the manifesto on my coffee table. Communism is about arming the workers against the proletariat, but not about guaranteed access to guns which is what gun rights means in the US. None of the major communist countries constitutions mention civilians rights to own guns, and the majority of them seek to limit civilians access to them. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, either.
I find it a bit funny that this is basically the same argument that bisexual people face, especially in the US. You are ether "secretly gay, and afraid to commit to it" or you are "actually straight, and want to experiment" You can't just like both sides, you have to pick one.
I'm sorry, but when someone's "enlightened centrism" is between queer people having rights and getting murdered in the street I don't really care about your other options. You are a facists enabler at that point.
Yeah, that's not what it would mean though and that's a massive straw man definition. You've made up something you don't like and applied to a group that you now also don't like.
It's like a Republican saying that they don't like Drag Queens molesting kids. They made something up, and applied it to a group they don't like. You just did that to someone else.
You can be a centrist or independent and agree with every single LGBTQ+ talking point on the books; the label is irrelevant to a stance on any specific issue.
In fact, the labels are often the problem.
You criticize others for being brainwashed by the 2 party system, but your own understanding of left and right seems to be based on that very 2 party system
Nope. I don't use terms like brainwash unless I'm speaking about the literal act, not just media consumption (or making fun of those who do use those terms like I did in another response).
I do think that labels and identity politics are one of the worst things to be socially pushed, however. Group membership, gatekeeping those groups, and surrounding yourself with an echo chamber are the results. And with that, welcome to current politics. If you're a "Liberal" and identify as such, then that generally means certain things a large majority of the time. If you call yourself a "Conservative," then that also has connotations. When was the last time you heard a self-identified Liberal / Conservative want something considered a wedge-issue that was opposite to their standard issue position? It's increasingly rare.
If you call yourself an independent or centrist, both sides will call you stupid and assume you're the opposite of what they are by default because they've been trained to immediately think the worst about anyone that's not 100% on-board with what they feel. I'm in Canada - we have more viable parties than the US (notably the NDP), but it still happens here.
If asked, I don't tell people I'm anything. I argue individual points because then I can't be dismissed by people who see only the label and then plug their ears and run away.
This person gets it.
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but it reminds me of Kassandra who was cursed by Apollo and destined to tell everyone true prophesies, but nobody would ever believe her.
She foresaw the fall of Troy and tried to warn everyone, but was ignored and forced to watch the city's downfall.
Both sides narrative it's ring wing propaganda, "both sides are the same, so why don't you vote for us, you won't feel guilty"
Only "centrist" fall for it, and saying falling for it, it's pretty generous, "centrist", "independent", they really want to fall for it, any excuse is good enough, so they can vote ring wing or openly fascist people.
Both sides people = conservative RW afraid of judgement.
Not really. You're gaslighting people who you dont agree with simply because they are perspectivised. Seems a bit unreasonable to be honest. One can be centrist without being conservative or right wing. And the part about being afraid of judgement is just far out my dude. Consider it.
If ignorance is bliss
Then knock the smile off my faceRage against the machine!
Here is the thing: always listening to both sides of the argument is a good policy, but remember that you are under no obligation to agree with both sides. Yes, on some issues both sides have valid points, but on other issues one side is completely bogus and once you realize it you should not pretend that it isn't.
I got into leftism BECAUSE I listened to both sides of the spectrum (i used to be a right winger) not in spite of it
Right?
No left, it's right there
tbf to centrists at least they aren't convinced they are right about everything. People with strong views get blinded by their ideology.
It's been easier to debate and change every centrist or independent I've ever known than anyone who applied left or right wing labels to themselves, that's for damn sure.
I'm extremely keen on politics but have been a paid up member of the third party in the UK. Kind of centrists who have liberal social views. Get so much stick from friends and family for getting involved in politics to come sit on the fence! They never win anything but function a bit like a policy think tank where they adopt progressive policies before anyone else does then one of the larger parties steal their ideas.
IMO most issues have nuance and need to be considered in isolation on their own merits.
Being left: Good.
Not so much absorbing Kremlin and CCP propaganda as fellating it, and thinking everyone who isn't calling for the active destruction of the west isn't left enough: Go fuck yourself.
Last time I checked, The Right is fellating Putin.
Time for you and your cat to have…. A training montage!
I could not figure out WTF you were on about but then I read the post about the cat depressed as the next one down.
Are centrists and independents lumped together? I call myself an independent because I'm tired of the bs of both sides. Both sides do have great things to offer, and dumbasses at the same time. But, for clarity, I don't take a middle ground stance on most things, I have varied opinions that bounce from side to side.
I think independent should just mean "not affiliated with a party."
Which it does. In most parts of the world. Also I've seen right party(Yabloko) nominate left candidate, and I've seen literal communist party nominate right candidate. Buuuut all those candidates are anti-Putin, so it doesn't count.
"Both sides have great things to offer" is a bad take when one side is openly courting Nazis.
You can't make generalizations about entire groups of people. That's very counterproductive. Yes, some people on that side are with the Nazis and they rightly deserve to eat shit. Not everyone who is conservative or right wing or whatever is an asshole shit head nazi sympathizer. Grow up.
I have varied opinions that bounce from side to side.
Ah yes, the "ping-pong" side... /jk
You have varied opinions because the "sides" are fake, they're made up from opinions on dozens of different axes pre-packaged for easy vote collection.
100%
Not necessarily. An independent just doesnt side with a party (not to be confused with the independant party). An independant can have some slight preference to a side but it doesnt necessarily guarantee said side would get a vote.
That's what I was thinking, but then I didn't really know how to categorize centrism. I feel like they're pretty similar, but have to have some sort of distinction. I suppose I must consult the Google.
On Lemmy, you will absolutely be seen as "the other side" by many extreme left folks when you broadcast this.
I'm also independent, though I lean a lot more left than right in the US system. This said, there a lot of far-left extremists here on Lemmy...
I'm over here gunning for something resembling democratic socialism, and 5/6 comments around me want to weaponize the prolitareat and burn society down so they can some-crazy-how rebuild the socialist utopia from Star Trek overnight.
"Both sides" are absolutely not the same... But they are both pretty delusional when you get into their most extreme examples. They both think they know exactly what's best for everyone (just like the original meme that started this thread clearly exhibits.)
I'm right there with you, honestly.
It's very possibel that there's just legitimate nuance to those policies and criticisms that you may have interpreted as prescriptive rather than descriptive.
Pluto is a planet vibes
Well as a centralist I think that both sides are correct, and Pluto is therefore a very small planet and not a planet.
I think I handled that very gracefully
You know, science is about opinions. And I disagree. /s
Ironically, Pluto is a valid case of being in between definitions, unlike the BS of political "right vs. left".
Substitute left for right, and you will find the same sort of commentary being made, except using different political talking points. The worst part about it is the hatred towards critical thinking shared by both sides. "Consider multiple arguments from their respective points of view, look at the evidence and rationales, and form my own judgements? No thanks, that's stupid, I'd rather believe all politics devolve into a line of people who are right versus people who are wrong while ignoring the exponential branches of information systems as they grow in complexity, totally isn't me devolving complex issues into tribalism."
Governments still work because there are still people within them capable of critical thinking, but I dread the day these morons begin to get elected and try to chest pump their ideology from all sides of the radicalized spectrum.
Incidentally, trying to call people who exist outside of the radicalized left-right schism centrists is just showing your ignorance and bias; when you don't devolve issues into simple left and right, there is no "center", nor does it mean everything is an indistinct shade of grey. It gets even more complex than that because of the tendency of radicals and external influence to try to portray everything into one of two sides, which does actually make political posturing be about the left and the right, but focusing on those takes is probably the biggest hint that you trying to base yourself on a flawed perspective without nuance.
It doesn't surprise me that most people choose to become a dot on a line because, quite frankly, most people (including me) are morons about the issues they try to approach as if they were experts, yet many still see themselves as infallible while doing so because of overextended projecting from some branch of a knowledge they are actually experts of. The left-right pantheon is basically the very hyper-rationalization of that projection. Trying to define that dot on the line is very much like the Romans who tried to establish a relationship between their deities and that of the locals in their path to conquest. I will admit, it certainly is very effective at manipulating the same sort of people who are easily tickled by their own ego.
Nah this is a both sides/centrist argument which is just bullshit.
Compare what the left advocates for compared to right over history and you'll see the left is demonstrably more on the ball. Right is just full of corrupt morons at this point in time looking to pad their wallets.
It's hard if not impossible to de-radicalize a zealot who's been convinced to throw critical thinking into the trash. I too can tell you how my god Jupiter is the best and how he's really all the good things you know of your god Amun-Ra, and that anyone saying otherwise is just an agent of Eris/Apothis, but I prefer to leave imaginary bullshit out of a conversation.
In 2020 as we contemplated our second week of lockdown I made the following predictions:
- Lockdowns will go on far, far longer than two weeks
- It will result in enormous economic disruption
- While will trigger WW3
Boy does that also suck. Good thing we don’t have any centrists though.
I don't understand your point. Neither of those points are left or right. And the third one didn't even happened.
it's neither the refugees nor the fear mongering around them which cause a rise of fascism. It's those type of leftist who call everyone "Nazi" they don't agree with. The leftists have became really uppity and claim that only leftist views are right and good. Every right wing view is evil and has to be canceled in the view of leftists. Moderate right wing people's concerns are not listened to and instead they are defamed. This is causing them to radicalize themselves.
You'd knew this if people would start listening to each other again. Instead we let ourselves get separated by the rich and post memes which let centrists look like idiots.
This reads like one of those right wingers pretending to be a leftie
your comment pretty much proofed my point. thanks I guess.
Moderate right wing people’s concerns are not listened to and instead they are defamed.
I mean, for example? Because in Europe, Biden would be a “moderate right wing” person. Which concerns do they have that are actually “moderate” and don’t align with the current Democratic party line?
alot of moderate right wing people are concerned about the behavior of immigrants. They tend to create parallel societies and refuse to integrate themselves. they also commit an increasing number of crimes. The German criminal statistics for example shows that immigrants commit more crimes than natives. Talking about this almost immediately grants you the "Nazi" status even though it's a fact and has nothing to do with the ideology of the Nazis.
the democrats and the Republicans are both corrupt and stupid. Trump and Biden are fossils which belong in a retirement home.
This is wrong. No one became a Nazi.because a leftist insulted them. Not once. They were already Nazis and they're crying crocodile tears. That's like saying Biden's gonna switch to being a communist because he was called one by republicans. See how silly that sounds?
guess you never heard of the power of repetition.
Morally superior leftists, of which there are so many, are the second grade bane of my existence. Right wing Christians are still worse.
Agreed. Far left are all freaks.
Indeed, but same goes for far right.
It's not a chart, it's a spectrum. Both sides go backwards until they meet.
That's not how a spectrum works.
shit I got the word wrong
TIL that Americans hate centrists, and that anyone that doesn't fully support the left must be fascists. What the fuck is going on in your country?
The only people I ever see saying we should listen to both sides, generally are talking about one side that is both progressive, compassionate, and has ideas based in science vs another side that thinks Hitler was the coolest person to ever live and that vaccines will literally give you brain damage.
They have a ridiculously shifted Overton Window. When the “middle ground” is between centre-right and far-right, it’s obviously going to get labeled as “fascist” by people on the left.
It may help to realize that compared to other countries.
America's typical left is more like the center, the right are literally attacking the goverment and trying to make it authoritarian (Jan 6 and Project 2025), and the centrists are telling us to atleast hear out the people who led a coup and expect us to forget about it.
That's why the centrists sound ridiculous to us, it's one thing to hold centrist views (which is actually the right compared to the first world) but telling us to listen to both sides when the other side has given up on democracy and are testing the waters for a forceful takeover, it's absurd.
Brainwashing, gaslighting, demoralization, retconning...etc.
A guy on X and Lemmy don't represent America.
Since when are the leftists right?
Takes deep breath Democratic vs Autocratic systems Dangers of Fascism(WW2) Slavery Woman (voting) rights Workers rights Racial Segregation Vietnam Abortion rights Invasion of Iraq Banking Crisis(Lack of Regulation) Pollution Ozone Layer Climate Change Infinite Growth, Resources, yada yada
Just a little excerpt
Basically every major crisis in the last 100+ years was well forseen by leftists pointing at it saying "guys this will definitely go wrong" and there were always people shouting "shut up you little sissy treehugger" at them
Basically every major crisis in the last 100+ years was well forseen by leftists pointing
Yes crisis and issues objectively created by their own leftist policies, presidents wtv. I'm aware that you guys are most likely Americans and I'm not. Politics in Europe works differently and here is the kicker: every leftist politician in the US would be considered extreme right if they tried to appeal to people in Europe in the way they do in the US. Sometimes you even hear people joking about the fact that our most "extreme right" politician is more leftist than the most leftist one in the US. It may also come as as shock to you that here there isn't much distinction between leftist parties and plain communist parties - they even usually win elections on coalitions and they also own the majority of the media around here.
Essentially what we have around here is extreme left, mostly communist, governing countries while running their show on the shadows of "Hitler (the right) was bad". The end result is an Europe that is constantly massacred with immigration from Islamic countries and economies hitting the rock bottom. Most of you can't even begin to imagine the damage already done and how bad things are now. The left/communists failed Europe and this is why today they say the "extreme right" (which is actually about as right as the US left) is on the raise here.
Some factions of leftists are wrong. Unfortunately, these are the factions that have historically gained political power
The communists stacking to downvote this comment ahaha
communism is when disagree with me
Leftism ≠ communism
"My point of view is the only correct point of view. If you disagree, its because you're stupid." Classic.
if someone disagrees with you on 1+1=2, they're fucking stupid. i don't know what to tell you. cope, i guess.
The fact you think this is equivalent to 1+1 tells me everything o need to know.
politics isn't 1+1.
they hated him, because he spoke the truth.
this type of thinking is the reason why murica has only 2 political parties and why it's falling apart.
It grinds my gears that murica is infecting the whole world with their bullshit.
For real the irony of a leftist saying “I’m not stupid”
For the record I'm not on your side either and you can suck my hemorrhoids.
