What do you think of fact that the political center is different at different times and places? Are all of those respective centers correct, is it merely a matter of coincidence that our current center is the Truth, or is this golden mean thinking a load of horseshit?
I did attempt to explain in another post, but I'll also reply here.
I'm not saying the center is the ideal. I'm not saying people at the edges of the political compass are "extreme". Being in the center would be like trying to serve the same plate to two different patrons at a restaurant. I personally think you should pick a side and stand up for your ideals.
However, issues that arise should be resolved with critical thinking in mind. Bad faith arguments in an attempt to hold your position is extreme. Ignoring evidence supporting other conclusions is extreme.
I view extremes, in the context of political leanings, as being positions that do not allow for new or competing information. Holding on to a position at any cost, despite evidence of the contrary.
I can "define my terms" for you, but would that really change anything?
I just thought it was a bit funny to see so many replies to such a one-off and throwaway comment.
I do want to know though... is it that everyone thinks I'm a troll? I'm not familiar with this particular instance overall, but I'm not a stranger to general socialist content. I figured it would be understood that "extremes" would refer to political ideology that involves sticking with a party at any cost, without ever thinking critically about the ideology and their positions.
I can "define my terms" for you, but would that really change anything?
why are fascists so unwilling to just define their terms? do you know your terms are explicitly fascist, or have you just never examined the terms some youtubers or whatever handed to you?
"positions that do not allow for competing information" is just hand-waving, you didn't define shit and you know it
I won't answer any questions until you answer my simple one. I'm a communist, I'm not afraid to define what I believe in because it's not horrible, disgusting shit. Fascists have trouble with this because they know their beliefs are repugnant, irrational trash.
My point was just that someone who has a more right leaning opinion is not the same as the cretin in the OP.
So what? A conservative is not the same as a fascist? What real fucking difference does that separation make? Both are cretins with abhorrent views at the end of the day. Are you a conservative?
Having a lean on a particular opinion at an individual level doesn't mean shit. That's nuance for you.
The comment I replied to implied they felt bad for having any right leaning opinion at all simply because of other people with right leaning opinions being more extreme. I merely said it didn't make them the same. Maybe the person will reconsider their positions after seeing the true nature of the conservative party. Maybe they have been blind to it.
I don't really know. It was just a one-off comment.
Saying that someone with "right leaning opinions" and an outright ideologically committed fascist are "not the same" is a redundant comment due to both categorically being different positions in the sphere of right wing thought. Both positions are delusional, and the former should be at least slightly embarrassed for choosing to occupy the same ignorant, anti-human ideological tendency as the latter in any capacity, especially in the context of this post. There is absolutely no nuance, when a person actively recognizes that they "lean" rightwards ideologically on any issue, other than the nuance of their individual opinions inevitably changing as time progresses.
You aren't on anymore, and running any form of asinine one-off apologetics for right wing positions will rightfully get you flamed. Your kind isn't welcome here.
For the record, I was scrolling my Lemmy feed and saw the OP. Was reading the comments and simply replied to it. I'm not here to run apologetics for right wing positions.
As I said in other comments, doing everything possible to stifle progress and maintain the status quo is the extreme position I'm referring to in my original reply. That has nothing to do with left/right. There are plenty of people all over the spectrum that refuse to allow humanity to move forward (or push to reverse progress). Anyone that is against moving us forward is fucking wrong.
If even after I clarify this you still think I'm some fucking piece of shit stormfront facist, then I'm sorry. Either you have dealt with so many trolls it's now expected from every new person, or you've made up your mind and it doesn't matter what I say anymore.
I don't think you are a fascist. All I know from the information provided so far is that you are a very lost redditor (look at the logo closely) who speaks with authority on subject matter he understands little about due to a lack of political education. That is always something quite annoying.
Like the implication that there is a (mythical) reasonable right wing ideological position in a thread where we're mocking some internet fascist for being an anti-human scumbag, is a wrong statement, unwelcome on this site, and functionally apologetics for the tendency at large. However, I believe that it was not your personal intention to do so.
That was also some interesting stuff about the fervent defense of the status quo being separate from ideology but idk man at the end of the day your heart seems to be in the right place, I admire your open mindedness and genuine acknowledgement of a bigger picture for humanity, thats what matters. If you have the time, I would implore you to check out the works of modern alternative thinkers like Noam Chomsky, Mark Fisher, Micheal Parenti, and David Graeber, as reading their works is an exploration of novel perspectives about the current situation and the ways in which our progress as a species is stifled by bad actors.
But be careful about what people tell you online though, you should never go to gen.lib.rus.ec and search for books to download using their extensive database because its illegal to violate intellectual property rights. People even use that site to circumvent paying for outrageously expensive college textbooks, very bad.
I appreciate the response. However, I never intended for my comment to come off with any authority. I'm just a random fucking netizen. I thought it might be a good opportunity to show someone that is experiencing that break in delusion that there is light on the other side. Not that their right leaning opinion was reasonable (it's not). Of course, it's possible I misread the situation and context. I really didn't notice where I was in terms of community. I'm happy I fell into this though, I immediately subscribed when I explored a little more.
Addressing the status quo thing, I don't mean to say the status quo is separate from ideology. Only that progress as a whole cannot happen when people want to maintain the status quo so badly that they are willing to throw away any and all morality. This is something that both sides of the political spectrum do (in terms of the US political left/right) as evidenced by democrat and republican voting records. Missed opportunities to move forward alongside bills straight up intended to be cruel to marginalized communities.
Anyway, thank you for continuing to reply. I for sure will steer clear of the linked resource, as the thought of breaking copyright laws makes me shake in my boots. I would never download or access copies of obscenely overpriced reading materials.
By your deffinition of not allowing new competing information, libs fit that definition even more eo than the cretin in the op. And you know? I agree thats the escence of being a reactionary someone who oposes progress.
And by that logic any backward class that oposes progres are extremists and should be removed by force if necesary.
Yes. Regardless of political leaning, disregarding new or competing information on its face is bad. People should be more willing to accept that they can be wrong, or misinformed.
Progress is the goal, and we can't get there if we aren't willing to accept the errors we make and correct them.
define "extremes"
edit: awwww this one too I wanted to bat them around for a while
They aint banned yet
maybe they'll be back
Lol
What do you think of fact that the political center is different at different times and places? Are all of those respective centers correct, is it merely a matter of coincidence that our current center is the Truth, or is this golden mean thinking a load of horseshit?
I did attempt to explain in another post, but I'll also reply here.
I'm not saying the center is the ideal. I'm not saying people at the edges of the political compass are "extreme". Being in the center would be like trying to serve the same plate to two different patrons at a restaurant. I personally think you should pick a side and stand up for your ideals.
However, issues that arise should be resolved with critical thinking in mind. Bad faith arguments in an attempt to hold your position is extreme. Ignoring evidence supporting other conclusions is extreme.
That kinda shit, you know?
I think the words that more accurately make your point are "dishonest" or "cynical "
That's much better than the way I put it. Kinda feel like a fucking dumbass
good self crit, stick around and dunk on the libs that come after you
Can't do the grade school level difficulty job of defining your terms huh
I view extremes, in the context of political leanings, as being positions that do not allow for new or competing information. Holding on to a position at any cost, despite evidence of the contrary.
I can "define my terms" for you, but would that really change anything?
I just thought it was a bit funny to see so many replies to such a one-off and throwaway comment.
I do want to know though... is it that everyone thinks I'm a troll? I'm not familiar with this particular instance overall, but I'm not a stranger to general socialist content. I figured it would be understood that "extremes" would refer to political ideology that involves sticking with a party at any cost, without ever thinking critically about the ideology and their positions.
I hope this clears it up for you.
why are fascists so unwilling to just define their terms? do you know your terms are explicitly fascist, or have you just never examined the terms some youtubers or whatever handed to you?
What in the fuck are you on about lol
I defined the term, and asked if it mattered to you.
You never answered that question either.
"positions that do not allow for competing information" is just hand-waving, you didn't define shit and you know it
I won't answer any questions until you answer my simple one. I'm a communist, I'm not afraid to define what I believe in because it's not horrible, disgusting shit. Fascists have trouble with this because they know their beliefs are repugnant, irrational trash.
I totally understand what you're saying, and why you want me to define the terms. I really should have worded it differently.
My point was just that someone who has a more right leaning opinion is not the same as the cretin in the OP.
Again, after spending a lot of time re-reading my comment, I just feel like an idiot for not being specific.
So what? A conservative is not the same as a fascist? What real fucking difference does that separation make? Both are cretins with abhorrent views at the end of the day. Are you a conservative?
No, I'm not.
Having a lean on a particular opinion at an individual level doesn't mean shit. That's nuance for you.
The comment I replied to implied they felt bad for having any right leaning opinion at all simply because of other people with right leaning opinions being more extreme. I merely said it didn't make them the same. Maybe the person will reconsider their positions after seeing the true nature of the conservative party. Maybe they have been blind to it.
I don't really know. It was just a one-off comment.
Saying that someone with "right leaning opinions" and an outright ideologically committed fascist are "not the same" is a redundant comment due to both categorically being different positions in the sphere of right wing thought. Both positions are delusional, and the former should be at least slightly embarrassed for choosing to occupy the same ignorant, anti-human ideological tendency as the latter in any capacity, especially in the context of this post. There is absolutely no nuance, when a person actively recognizes that they "lean" rightwards ideologically on any issue, other than the nuance of their individual opinions inevitably changing as time progresses.
You aren't on
anymore, and running any form of asinine one-off apologetics for right wing positions will rightfully get you flamed. Your kind isn't welcome here.
Fair enough.
For the record, I was scrolling my Lemmy feed and saw the OP. Was reading the comments and simply replied to it. I'm not here to run apologetics for right wing positions.
As I said in other comments, doing everything possible to stifle progress and maintain the status quo is the extreme position I'm referring to in my original reply. That has nothing to do with left/right. There are plenty of people all over the spectrum that refuse to allow humanity to move forward (or push to reverse progress). Anyone that is against moving us forward is fucking wrong.
If even after I clarify this you still think I'm some fucking piece of shit stormfront facist, then I'm sorry. Either you have dealt with so many trolls it's now expected from every new person, or you've made up your mind and it doesn't matter what I say anymore.
I don't think you are a fascist. All I know from the information provided so far is that you are a very lost redditor (look at the logo closely) who speaks with authority on subject matter he understands little about due to a lack of political education. That is always something quite annoying.
Like the implication that there is a (mythical) reasonable right wing ideological position in a thread where we're mocking some internet fascist for being an anti-human scumbag, is a wrong statement, unwelcome on this site, and functionally apologetics for the tendency at large. However, I believe that it was not your personal intention to do so.
That was also some interesting stuff about the fervent defense of the status quo being separate from ideology but idk man at the end of the day your heart seems to be in the right place, I admire your open mindedness and genuine acknowledgement of a bigger picture for humanity, thats what matters. If you have the time, I would implore you to check out the works of modern alternative thinkers like Noam Chomsky, Mark Fisher, Micheal Parenti, and David Graeber, as reading their works is an exploration of novel perspectives about the current situation and the ways in which our progress as a species is stifled by bad actors.
But be careful about what people tell you online though, you should never go to gen.lib.rus.ec and search for books to download using their extensive database because its illegal to violate intellectual property rights. People even use that site to circumvent paying for outrageously expensive college textbooks, very bad.
I appreciate the response. However, I never intended for my comment to come off with any authority. I'm just a random fucking netizen. I thought it might be a good opportunity to show someone that is experiencing that break in delusion that there is light on the other side. Not that their right leaning opinion was reasonable (it's not). Of course, it's possible I misread the situation and context. I really didn't notice where I was in terms of community. I'm happy I fell into this though, I immediately subscribed when I explored a little more.
Addressing the status quo thing, I don't mean to say the status quo is separate from ideology. Only that progress as a whole cannot happen when people want to maintain the status quo so badly that they are willing to throw away any and all morality. This is something that both sides of the political spectrum do (in terms of the US political left/right) as evidenced by democrat and republican voting records. Missed opportunities to move forward alongside bills straight up intended to be cruel to marginalized communities.
Anyway, thank you for continuing to reply. I for sure will steer clear of the linked resource, as the thought of breaking copyright laws makes me shake in my boots. I would never download or access copies of obscenely overpriced reading materials.
By your deffinition of not allowing new competing information, libs fit that definition even more eo than the cretin in the op. And you know? I agree thats the escence of being a reactionary someone who oposes progress.
And by that logic any backward class that oposes progres are extremists and should be removed by force if necesary.
I agree.
Yes. Regardless of political leaning, disregarding new or competing information on its face is bad. People should be more willing to accept that they can be wrong, or misinformed.
Progress is the goal, and we can't get there if we aren't willing to accept the errors we make and correct them.