this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
2123 points (94.3% liked)

tumblr

4799 readers
24 users here now

Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.

  4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

  5. No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.


Sister Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago (9 children)

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.

[–] Bruno_Myers@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago (5 children)

i've never met a ''''''centrist'''''' who disagrees with conservative talking points.

[–] Zehzin@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To quote the Black Panthers, scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

[–] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

As soon as someone self describes a a neither right nor left free thinker, I know exactly what they are

[–] Argonne@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We should encourage free and critical thinking instead of just repeating an echo chamber. If you can't tolerate that, you are as intolerant as your worst enemies.

[–] Bruno_Myers@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

not agreeing with someone who says 1+1=3 isn't repeating an echo chamber, it's living in reality

[–] Argonne@lemmy.world -5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Saying 1+1=3 is not critical thinking, it's being a dumbass. Just like all those "doing your own researching" antivaxers. However, doing your own research really is good. That's how you develop critical thinking skills. Without them, you are just a sheep. https://youtu.be/nD6hS8WV3ic?si=tTZZV2PzS5q6wpDn

There is a big difference between 1+1=3 and questioning bullshit from your politicians. If you can't see that then you are already a useful idiot

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] dmention7@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca -5 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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?"

[–] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I said no such thing, but good job constructing an argument to have with yourself. You win!

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

I wasn't talking specifically about your post, I was talking about the thread and things I was seeing as you appeared to be? But uhh... Allrighty!

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] SgtAStrawberry@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] 9thSun@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago

This person gets it.