672
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
672 points (93.5% liked)
Memes
51920 readers
1084 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Which is wrong. What "good points" do right-wingers legitimately have?
Saying "both sides have good points" places a mystical property on whatever is in the middle, as though the middle is inherently correct.
You're batting a bit too hard for someone that thinks correct answers come from finding the midpoint. If someone says 2+2=4, and someone else says 2+2=6, the answer is still 4, not 5.
You are comparing basic addition with extremely complex social economics. You can't just do A and guarantee B will happen. But if B actually happens it can be good for one group of people and bad for another one. Often the best solution is some kind of compromise. That said there surely can be some obviously bad ideas.
Which is why you can be correct. "Trickle Down Economics" was never even sound in theory, and proved itself wrong in practice even more, for example.
The Right are denying scientific consensus on anything that doesn’t make them money or own the libs.
Forget the “social economics” which is also bunk, because the majority of Americans want lower healthcare costs, gun control, freedom of choice, better economic equality, and better education.
These are all things the right (and written down in Project 2025 btw).
If Mr. Beast knew anything, he’d claim to work with the popular majority, but he’s been trained by social media that controversy equals popularity. Basically it’s an algorithmic version of “no such thing as bad press”. So he won’t do the best thing for the world, he’ll do whatever he thinks will be a net gain in popularity. Which is why he said what he said, so he doesn’t lose and right wing viewers of his clickbate.
Sorry should habe clarified, I know shit about US politics. I'm from Europe.
This is why US politics are wild….
And you’re saying only the left is right in both of your statements, obviously you aren’t impartial and have a bias, as pointed out in my previous comment
That is some fallacious strawmanning right there, you’re saying only one side can be right, that’s not someone who is willing to have a discussion, you’re obviously just throwing shit at anything you don’t agree with.
Which is the entire point of his joke running, it’s hilarious that you can’t see this, but not surprising since you think there’s only one party. This is American politics people.
This isn't unique to the US. The US did not invent the concept of a midpoint.
I never said I wasn't biased. Of course I am biased, I am biased because I have a coherent worldview and set of values that aligns to the left.
Generally, yes, there is a correct side.
Not sure where you got the idea that I think there's only one party, but keep cooking, it's funny lol
What other countries have a two party democracy? And what other countries smear the other parties to the degree of US politics?
I get you have an axe to grind, but I said I was an outsider, how am I supposed to know one side is right and one side is wrong? If one is right and one is wrong, that really only makes one party now doesn’t it? You seem to want to point out math to others, but have an issue understanding it yourself.
I get the sense that you don't follow politics super often... if you're an outsider, I understand that "you must be biased to say that only one side has any good points" seems like the obviously correct position, but trust me, it's not. Don't attack people who have spent time in politics and developed a more accurate viewpoint just because it's counterintuitive.
I don’t follow US politics* since I don’t live there……
But the issue is uniquely American, maybe you need to follow other countries politics more to see how flawed yours is?
I KNOW how flawed ours is. You do not seem to.
Hence maybe why I’m pointing out that there shouldn’t be any sort of party or candidate that should be referred to as “centrist”…?
In other countries and political systems, that would be someone who would stand in the middle and actually have both good points as their platform.
In the US it’s used as smear to refer to people who don’t align politically with you. Same with the terms “left” and “right”. Other democracies have parties in these sides, but A there’s more than one, and B, the term isn’t used to smear and slander people or parties.
Hence this being a uniquely American thing…. Other countries use terms like progressive and conservatives instead, much more friendly and correct terms.
You know we also use those terms, right?
No, I’ve never seen an article or comment about US politics use those terms. Which is odd for how often they get posted in other places.
And no, your country and politics specifically avoid those terms, since they want a two party system and that’s part of how it works.
It’s republican and democrats, not progressive and conservatives, that’s the “marketing”. Would love some articles from the US that use these terms though.
Really? You've never heard that? I'm sure if you searched around for some articles you'd hear people or even ideas described as "progressive" or "conservative" equally if not more often than by their parties.
Again, as someone who self-admittedly doesn't usually follow US politics, you should really stop telling me, a politically-involved US citizen, how you think our politics works. I don't presume to know more than you about your country's politics.
Ideas, but not the party themselves since they want to distance themselves…
Yes I don’t follow, but it’s shoved down everyone’s throats.
I’m telling you how your politics look to OUTSIDERS… this is how WE view the shithole that you claim is democracy. None of those terms are used how you’re claiming they are.
Sure YOU use the terms, but anything that escapes to other people doesn’t, because that’s how they want to be presented. As you say, they only use the term for “ideas”, that’s distancing dude… yeeesh.
Politics is literally entirely composed of ideas. The parties are named the way they are because that's what they've been named for like a billion years.
So, they ARE used how I'm claiming.
The onus is on you, you claimed the terms are used and I already asked and you decided to not oblige and tell me to Google it.
So you Google it, or provide the proof you claimed of first.
The terms the US wants and uses is democrats and republicans, since they don’t really follow ideologies at all.
In a healthy political system the right will have some left ideas and left will have some right. Maybe educate yourself on other politcal systems first if you want to discuss and call me out? Your democracy is a sham, others don’t operate that way, yet you want to claim they do…? What….?
I've made literally no claims about anyone else's democracy.
As a matter of principle I refuse to use Google for you, you're the one who originally made the claim that we don't use progressive or conservative as terms, and if you're going to insist on playing the Burden of Proof game then that's what you're going to get. Educate yourself on this topic or leave.
Nah, since that’s not what the original topic was about anyways, and you seem to be hell bent on being correct instead of having a discussion.
I've forgotten the original topic at this point tbh. If you have any further arguments to make then feel free, otherwise it seems we're at an impasse.
Do you find this an issue in many debates?
Again, when did I mention parties? You keep bringing them up when nobody else did.
You're confusing concepts like leftism and rightism with parties. Parties can have incoherent collections of ideas, they usually serve their donors alone.
I'm just fine, thank you.
You’ve mentioned left and right, are those not the party lines? You can’t claim you’re not mentioning parties when you’ve only done it using different terms in every comment. You can’t have someone who is “centrist” in democracies with more than 2 candidates, it’s a uniquely US issue, especially with the smear campaigns instead of actual politics.
I mean you described them that way, and you’re using them to describe the two different parties. Claiming otherwise is asinine. If they aren’t parties, and they aren’t sides, then what are they?
Without parties or sides, you can have left, right, or center. I’m sorry you got called out on this and are now flinging shit and making yourself look like biased bigot.
Now can you answer my questions or are you just going to deflect because you can’t answer simple questions without decrying people who don’t align politically with you…?
Nope, I am referring to positions, not parties, ie Socialism vs Capitalism, as an example.
I haven't brought up parties a single time.
You absolutely can. Centrist does not mean someone purely in between 2 and only 2 concepts.
What are you cooking here? Parties are not sides, parties are groups of people with a shared position. People don't get their values and views from party lines.
Not a single one of your questions has made sense, like when you keep referring to parties.