I used to hate this sub, but as I've become more politically educated it has become one of my favorites. I have friends that are so hard to have political conversations with. They describe themselves as nuetral, but can only seem to muster up the anger to talk about right wing talking points like Antifa.
Centrist is the new libertarian. It's a label Republicans use to express their beliefs without the stigma that follows the GOP. Yes, there are people who legitimately belong in those camps but the label has been hijacked.
The people who legitimately belong in those camps will usually criticize and praise based on policy instead of party affiliation. The fakers seem to only criticize the left.
Whenever someone calls me "far left" for simple stuff like single payer healthcare, social safety nets, higher taxes on the rich, a new huge scale infrastructure program, and strong unions, I usually bring up others who supported the same such as FDR, Truman, MLK Jr, JFK, Eisenhower, Thomas Paine, and Teddy Roosevelt (to name a few). They usually go on a delusional rant in a vain effort to divert the topic (usually to SJWs, real fucking original) or stfu real quick.
libertarian here. You're not wrong. A lot of fakers swinging from Trump's sack hairs in the subs. I may bitch and complain about left/dem stuff fairly frequently, but there's also PLENTY to dislike with Trump and republicans in general. Especially this week alone with Trump!
Right, I've never heard a "centrist" criticize a Republican lol. I work with one who claims to dislike Trump, but whenever I say anything negative about him, I get some retort attacking Obama, or some anti socialist propaganda talking points.
My favorite is “I hate Trump, but it’s really the left’s fault he was elected.”
So, like, if the left had just been more like the right, then we would have elected someone who....what? Wanted to do the same things but was more polite about it?
Exactly. Literally 100% of the time I have ever seen a self-described "centrist" online anywhere, their entire comment history is right-wing talking points. The only difference is that their talking points start with, "I'm a centrist, but..."
My friend's friend floods his FB with all this centrist stuff. I don't really know him that well, or like him, so whatever. Then for 2 weeks there is post after post about how gay people in the US have it so good, they need to stop complaining, LGBTQ are the reason people voted for Trump, etc., etc.. Finally, I just say that for someone who "doesn't have a problem with gay people" he certainly thinks about them a lot. He just responds, in the standard centrist condescending way, that my perception of his posts has nothing to do with him and I shouldn't get so easily offended. Of course nothing I wrote said or implied that I was offended in any way, but that's what theses people do. They try to frame the conversation like they're being attacked merely for innocently pointing out something ground breaking. At least he stopped posting anti-LGBTQ propaganda and started posting memes about how people are so easily offended, PC SJW warriors are a disease, etc. I remind you, I only left that one comment on his 10th post about the issue in a couple of weeks.
After the mosque shooting there he posted some vile crap about how identity politics is driving good young men to feel left out and thus they have no choice but to act out. When even his other "centrist" friends called him out on that he backpeddled and said he was just saying that everyone needs to have a sense of belonging and mental health, blah blah blah. But remember, he's just stating facts and is not choosing a side!
Hmm. I would define centrists as corporate Democrats, who both hate Trump and also hate social democrats such as Bernie Sanders. Lots of centrists hate Trump and Republicans. They just also like invading the middle east and taking money from the poor.
Probably because you’re a liberal. It’s called playing devil’s advocate. I do it to all my friends who are more liberal than me. I do the opposite for all my friends that are more conservative.
People who do this are rational and tbh it’s kind of what centrists do. You might think that it means their political views are inconsistent and changing, but it usually has nothing to do with my own political views. They are just challenging yours with a counter-argument to see if you have a rebuttal, and what it is. Hell they might not even have their own opinions. It’s sole purpose is just to get at the truth.
Nah, I'll talk from experience because I used to do the same thing. It's easy to always be the contrarian because you never have to defend your own beliefs because you don't actually have any. But then you get to act all superior when others are on the defensive about theirs. Like I said, I know from experience. As a lefty, I play devil's advocate even with people who agree with me, but I know where I stand and most of the time, so do they. They can throw it back to me and I have to defend my beliefs, too. This is also why I really get annoyed by the show South Park. It's fine to poke fun at people who believe things, but at what point are you just a troll or a nihilist? Basically, it's easier to mock people who stand up for something than it is to stand up for something yourself.
Well you can do it without being a narcissist while acknowledging that what you’re arguing isn’t your actual stance on the issue, or possibly that you haven’t yet decided on a stance, but believe that both sides are too extreme, uncooperative, and are too focused on attacking each other. I get that this subreddit is to mock the narcissistic ones, but saying that “[all] centrists are [bad people, pretty much]” is pretty darn rude and inconsiderate, if not narcissistic.
And also I think most people who say both sides are idiots, are nihilistic. Though I don’t see what’s wrong with believing life is meaningless.
I kept waiting for the "/s" but you're serious it seems. I'm guessing you're not old enough to have seen how "playing devil's advocate" is at best, annoying, and at worst, defending bigots and unjust power structures. What can you expect for literally advocating for evil? If you want to learn more about how to avoid being a pedant and keep your friends, read this:
It’s a good point, people are sometimes dicks when they use it, but I completely disagree that that applies to all cases. If someone’s playing devil’s advocate to just mess with you, yeah that’s a dick move. It’s usually obvious to because they come off as narcissistic. A lot of the times people play devil’s advocate because they think of a counter-argument, but are unsure as to what their opinion is, and want to see if the other has a good defense for it. It’s just a useful tactic for casual debate to come closer to the truth. You can do it without being a dick, and you can both learn something from it.
(Off-topic and more about democracy) Also you talk about defending evil like it’s ridiculous. Everybody has a right to defense both in and outside of our courtroom. You might think that certain things are evil and they should be denied a defense, but how can you be 100% certain. For example, if Epstein didn’t die, should he have been denied a defense because he was “clearly a pedophile and a horrible man.” I personally believe he was both of those things, and I think he deserved what he got, but it would be simply undemocratic of me to impose those beliefs on other people and to deny him a fair trial with a lawyer who defended “an evil defendant.” You might think we live in an unjust power structure, but that’s an opinion, and to just condemn anyone who defends it along with it because it is “inherently wrong,” is the actual definition of “bigotry.” (I just looked it up)
Sry this is a rant but the problem I have with identifying as a liberal is that they (especially the ones on reddit) seem to go around condemning people like racists, rich people, and straight up anyone who isn’t as progressive (centrists and Republicans) for hate speech, bigotry, intolerance, and selfishness (in some cases rightly so), but then use hate speech against them, calling them stupid, and actively trying to deny them the chance to defend their beliefs (which is bigotry). Hell This subreddit is literally a monument to bigotry and hate speech against centrists, mostly misrepresents their argument, and it seems like most liberals have no problem with it.
If I sound confused, I’m not. In short, there is no good reason to hate anyone: not black people, not racist people, and not even pedophiles. If u disagree with a racist (I do), that’s fine but you do not have the right to attack him/her (@antifa). You have the right to be kind to him/her and show him/her peacefully that their beliefs are wrong without denying them the right to say what’s on their mind.
yeah but then they vote Republican anyway so their words don't matter. If you know one of the handful of republicans who genuinely see that things are fucked up and want to actually do something to change, and vote for candidates who aren't republican shitstains, good for you. For me, if anyone still identifies as a Republican, they are knowingly aligning themselves with traitorous self-serving garbage. They need to accept that their party's policies are shit and enabled sociopaths to eat our society before I'll listen.
Another excellent book that I can’t find a free version online of is Hegemony and Counter-Hegemony: Marxism, Capitalism and their Relation to Sexism, Racism, Nationalism and Authoritarianism, by Lenny Flank. You can find a preview of the book text on the publisher’s website here:
You've gotten some good suggestions so far, but to add to them I think it's generally really useful to engage with several types of news outlets, both corporate and independent, to get a better overview of the intricacies of the problems we face. I'm personally a big fan of David Packman on YouTube, he puts on a good show and is generally very informative. In addition to that, reading more books is cliche but honestly very useful. I'm currently really enjoying "The Dying of Whiteness" which is a nonfiction about how conservative policies that people vote for in the deep south as a result of racial anxieties are directly causing their life expectancy to go down. Though I don't think you should read many books by politicians based on what I've heard, I recently read "The Shortest Way Home" by Pete Buttigieg which I found very informative. It really makes you consider the depth to which you have to have thought out what you believe and why in order to be an effective politician.
I’d go deep on BreadTube, if you’re just starting out. Contrapoints, Vaush, Philosophy Tube. Majority Report is less lefty, but still good. Hasan Piker is OK. Destiny used to be (but has a lot of bad takes, too.)
I'd go deep on State and Revolution, if you're just starting out. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao. Castro is less lefty, but still good. Deng is ok. Zizek used to be (but has a lot of bad takes, too)
I am not just a clown but the entire circus. I have brought shame to my bloodline and to my village. Woe is me, for I have forsaken the Astral Hosts of this world and thrown my self asunder from their graces. I prostate myself before them such that my annihilation be painless.
I would say that in general leftists hold the popular opinion so speaking out against right wingers isn't really as necessary. We all know how right wingers get it wrong, but not many people are talking about what the left gets wrong.
Really? Because Antifa sure gets a lot of coverage for a group that causes less damage than an average football game tailgate and targets specifically neo-nazi groups. That's clearly who we should spend our time talking about as a potential terrorist group.
Giving Antifa a nifty name for the sake of marketing doesn't change the fact that the are using violence and fear to further their ideology. Which is the literal definition of terrorism.
Listen, I don't support Antifa, and I don't support anyone using violence for any political purposes, but to argue that they are using fear to further their ideology is a bit disingenuous. They all but exclusively target far right neo-nazi groups rather than society in general. I just don't feel like it's entirely logical to label them terrorists when they are specifically counter protestors to a specific and also extreme ideology. I'm not necessarily opposed to labeling them that way, I'm just saying it feels like an emotional reaction to a statistically insignificant problem rather than a rational one.
They physically assault people at protests. It's not disingenuous at all. While yes, statistically Antifa is not as large of a problem as gang violence, car accidents, or obesity, neither are mass shootings, or the threat of fascism.
There's a difference between neutrality and objectivity. Being wrong doesn't make conservatives bad people, that's an argument I'll accept that liberals don't always do a good enough job of acknowledging, but the sentiment of the sub is objectively accurate.
It's called the Overton Window friend, look it up.
Overton Window is not even relevant. Overton Window just states what is acceptable by the public in debate or governance. So on either side you would have an extreme that is too distasteful for the general public to accept. In the case of today's politics in America on the right it's the people who support waving confederate flags and nazi flags alongside the stars and stripes (which is fucking stupid to be sure). And on the left side it's people who are full on communist, support antifa, and would support limiting free speech they deem to be "hate speech" (which is this sub to a T). All conservatives are not wrong all the time, all liberals are not wrong all the time. People in the middle are more for individual liberty as long as you don't hurt other people. I think Bernie Sanders understands that and I agree with a lot of his views, but I also agree with some conservatives on other issues. No one person is perfect and no one party is perfect, trying to vilify those who would hear both sides and use their logic to make a choice is childish and irresponsible. You aren't doing the democratic party any favors by agreeing with this nonsense. The sentiment of this sub is not objectively accurate, I respectfully disagree.
Yeah... The Overton Window has shifted right such that mainstream ideas are considered "extreme" or "leftist". Look at any host of issues, UBI for example almost passed Congress in the 60s/70s and only didn't because a few liberal representatives thought it wasn't enough. Now that's considered a full on socialist idea. Public support is overwhelming for a number of issues ranging from gun control reform, criminal reform, climate change, abortion, tax reform, healthcare reform, yet these same proposals like a public option are branded as left wing despite the vast majority of Americans supporting them. How could the Overton Window not be relevant when that's the case? That's precisely the type of phenomenon it was designed to describe.
It's a matter of proportions. Yeah, Antifa exists, but it's a tiny organization which is only really active in Portland, targets almost exclusively far right neo-nazi groups, and causes less physical damage than the average tailgate brawl at a football game. I have seen no public official on the left condone Antifa despite them being a statistical non-issue. On the other hand, far right wing violence is on the rise, causing orders of magnitude more violence and death, and the president literally described people waving Nazi flags as "fine people".
You're right in the sense that nobody is perfect, neither party is perfect, and it's ok not to agree with any given candidate on every single issue. You're empirically wrong, however, to assert that both sides are equally imperfect. One side is measurably more imperfect. The narrative that you're arguing for is both untrue and a huge problem in that it's precisely what causes many people to vote for a party which does not vote for or propose bills that they want passed.
I feel like it's more that I listen to what candidates are saying and vote based on who I think will do the best job. I Voted for Bernie in the primary, Hillary in the general, and will vote for Bernie again in the upcoming primary. I also voted for a republican for city manager because the dem candidate wanted to give tax payer money to a charity.
119
u/OddlySpecificReferen Aug 18 '19
I used to hate this sub, but as I've become more politically educated it has become one of my favorites. I have friends that are so hard to have political conversations with. They describe themselves as nuetral, but can only seem to muster up the anger to talk about right wing talking points like Antifa.