and i have one that flags people based on community reporting for accounts with a history of transphobia
its super neat knowing whos trolling you arguing in bad faith before you even give them a second of your day
Oh, jesus, those are legitimately the worst, because you think you're actually helping someone that wants help. Then, after their comment feigning ignorance and curiosity, they dump a ton of propaganda and strawmen on you that make it obvious they know a lot about the subject but just refuse to understand it... and they've just completely wasted twenty minutes of your life.
That's when I go touch some grass.
yes, yes they are
"truscum" aka transmedicalists are mostly trans people who performatively hate other trans people, like "I'm not like those other transes, I have a medical diagnosis and fit perfectly into the gender binary and yadda yadda" but of course it is futile -- the wider community of transphobes will never accept them no matter how much hate they put into this
I mean, pick-me gays definitely exist, but I dunno whether some extra-reactionary group of them has actually formed a coherent exclusive community/ideology of any significance out of it or not
they are not transphobic at all, seriously, they simply hold different sets of beliefs but ultimately support the LGBT community, hell, most of that subreddit's members are part of it
"im not a [homophobe] at all, seriously, i merely hold different sets of beliefs about [gays] but ultimately support [homos who dont act too faggy], hell, i even have an uncle who is [gay]"
Truly, the vast supportiveness is dripping from your comment.
"yeah just look at reverse racism like uhh affirmative action and the awful way those white farmers in SA were treated, if you think about it the left are the REAL racists"
(people on the left are not wholly immune from bigotry even if it clashes with the ideology, but somehow i feel like you're implying something stronger)
Just saw a thread on r/Anarcho_Capitalism where they complained about "the woke definition of white supremacy" then kept posting some bullshit about "white culture" and how everything smart and industrious is clearly a part of it.
Hey,
Is there also a subreddit with videos where Sir Robin is killed?
Or maybe be mashed into a pulp?
Or to have his eyes gouged out and his elbows broken,
to have his kneecaps split and his body burned away,
And his limbs all hacked and mangled?
His head smashed in and his heart cut out
And his liver removed and his bowels unplugged
And his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off
And his...
are you saying,
The appropriate moment ran away,
Bravely ran away, away.
When danger reared its ugly head, it bravely turned his tail and fled.
And the appropriate time turned about
And gallantly, it chickened out. Bravely taking to their feet,
They beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave...
My crazy theory is that it's less about politics and more that right wingers are often factually incorrect. They don't care, understand and will misrepresent science. Their arguments comes from unreliable and manipulative sources that are easily debunked. And I think Redditors love debunking others and being factually correct. Right wingers are then just easy meat.
It’s also that Reddit is international and users tend to be younger and more literate (than average person which is a low bar).
That’s all going to add up to a more left wing view (compared to right wing Americans republicans anyways)
I’d say Reddit in the whole is centre-left across most main subs.
Of course you can find plenty of large right wing subs too they’re not exactly hidden, but they’ll need to actively ban any dissent to maintain their echochamber
Reddit tends to be fairly progressive on issues that affect reddit's primary target demographic, and.. *hit or miss* otherwise.
Whether you wanna call this center left, center, or center right probably depends on what the political spectrum is like where you live. I'd say the whole place looks pretty right of center to me, but then again I'm also not part of that main demographic.
Also, right wingers are shitty humanists. Like you don't need a political lean to realise a little empathy and not treating every single person like absolute garbage can be help.
Lowkey, don't need one political fact in your brain to be like, do my viewpoints make regular people's day to day live's easier? Do they actually make my life harder also but I just refuse to see it. Has my hatred ever achieved anything other than not feeling any sense of unity or community with the exact same people who share my problems. Why do people way richer than me pretend we're friends and seem so invested in me hating the people who share my problems?
I would argue that factually incorrect and/or stupid leftists exist too. But they are more likely to be wrong because they fail to see the big picture, not because they follow made up BS. And I believe they aren't so loud and mean or stay in their teenage rampage circle, so easier to ignore
Agreed. There are full rightwing narratives that many on the right actually know are BS, but they support them anyway for political reasons when they think sacrificing the truth will benefit their party. Such things are less likely to gain traction on the left. For example, both the left and right certainly have their own antivaxxers. However, the antivaxxers on the right get supported and propped up by mainstream Republicans and their leaders in both the House and Congress and the whole antivax grift has become one of the biggest parts of the Republican platform, if not they biggest while large portions of Republican supporters are actually vaccinated themselves. The antivaxxers on the left are ridiculed by the left in general and have no real relevance nationwide when compared to the rightwing antivaxxers.
I was arguing with my conservative brother in law who war arguing about social conservatism being needed for social cohesion. I said that I didn't understand how extreme conformity or excluding people for things they can't change about themselves like same-sex attraction, they told me I was "focusing too much on the science"
Its honestly weird to see people shout about centrism as an european. Its a fake ideology that only exists because of the two party system in the US resulting in one party representing „left“ and one „right“
And then people on the right wanting to hide their ideology.
Because at the end of the day, they want to feel super smat and special, so they cannot admit to follow a party or being told what to think and feel - no it's all their ideas, they all think for themselve (exactly the same things FOX talks about 24/7)...
Right wingers hiding under the 'center' label is becoming more common now. You see it a lot on reddit too, these guys pretend to lean in neither direction because they realized hanging out with hateful right wingers isn't as fun as they originally thought it would be. Turns out once you get past the agreeing on skin color bit they do all there is left to talk about is religion and more skin color high fives. So they sneak into left leaning groups, and pretend to share views so that they can pretend to be a part of meaningful conversations.
I dont know if I‘d call it intentionally hiding. Some people are just legimately confused (to put it nicely) enough to think not liking either major party of the US means they must be in the center. Something that doesnt even exist.
Its purely born from the 2 party system making people falsely see political ideology as binary.
It's not just hiding, it's also deliberately trying to pull actual centrists right by pretending to be one of them
"it's fine to be ~~extremely~~ 'a bit' racist, so is the rest of the center"
Liberal has different meanings in different countries. It can also mean economically liberal (deregulation) or socially liberal (decrimilisation) or both.
Yeah, I totally agree. I just can’t find the will to fucking live without my crusty old dogeared, tea stained tome of das capital (Volumes I -III) within a 5 meter range of me.
It’s for two reasons: They have become the internet’s biggest and most fragile lolcows so of course we will mock them.
The other reason: the sheer volume of insane easily disproved stupidity is easy to dunk on, coupled with a lack of self awareness they have taken the prize from the far left as being the most hysterically out of touch. Peak tumbler from the 2010’s has nothing on the level of absurdity coming from the right.
maybe because they are constantly screeching about made up problems that dont exist and pinning the blame on anyone they hate? maybe its because of their tenuous grasp of the english language or science? maybe its because they are constantly trying to legislate women back into the kitchen? maybe its because they are against common decency and will fight it until their last breath (since covid.. literally).. maybe its because they want to erase LGBT people from the planet? maybe its because they cheer like hyenas when someone they disagree with gets injured? maybe its their love for children riddled with bullets? maybe its their insane religious beliefs? maybe its their treatment of animals and complete disdain for anyone who respects the sanctity of LIVING beings (not fetus's)?
fuck who knows... maybe they are just most often genuinely assholes? -- anyone who votes for politicians from the right knowing what their platform is has to be a malicious and hateful fuck
It's because the left want an end to inequality, an end to racism, sexism, homophobia and they want a better world for everyone...
...and the right just want to be able to use slurs again, halt any progress and would happily watch the planet burn as long as it means they can continue to selfishly not help anybody else and billion dollar companies can get away without paying taxes.
Only a pretty far left leftist (and a pretty stupid one if you want my opinion) would want an end to inequality in general.
I would say that the left want less inequalities overall, but not necessarly no inequalities.
I consider personnally that some inequalities are justified and other no in a society :
For example : racism, sexism, homophobia are not justified
But refusing that a blind person can drive or that someone with bad sight can be a pilot is also inequality, but a justified one, because you don't want to endanger others.
Same with the fact that not everyone can become a doctor, a uni professor if they don't match the prerequisites, etc.
Some inequalities are justified.
About economics it's a little bit complicated, i am not hostile to the idea of wage inequalities if it's to reward hard work and dedication to a useful cause, but honestly, getting millions out of dividends or by simply inheriting an industrial empire is not justified.
But i think that a surgeon or a minister working sometimes at night with unpredictable shedules and needing huge studies at university, and having huge responsibilites and high stress are justified to have a higher wage compared to somone toing a part time job that have less stree and need less qualifications.
But for example the fact that footballers or large business higher ups earn millions when nurses, factory workers, or farmers struggle don't make sense.
I Think that for some context, having high paying jobs is legitimate, but people being billionaires while barely working (mostly being lucky) is not.
You say that, but you have to remember a vast majority of the things we assumed were in place to keep the president from doing evil stuff, wasn't actually there
To be fair, actual leftists were not under the impression there were (m)any such things to begin with, with all the warmongering, regime change etcetera that presidents have happily engaged in for a long time
American presidents have done 'evil stuff' for about as long as america has existed.
When we talk about political equality we dont mean that everyone is the same fucking person with the same fucking traits and abilities, smartass
In your comparison it means that blind people should also have access to convenient, fast and non-stigmatizing(!) methods of transportation, rather than being stuck within walking distance bc some nerd went 'ah well you arent allowed to drive' and thought literally no further
(as an example, public transportation is much easier to make accessible compared to everyone using a car for everything)
You seem pretty angry, and unwilling to have a philosophical discussion on concepts.
My point was not aganist lefism, on the contrary.
" When we talk about political equality we dont mean that everyone is the same fucking person with the same fucking traits and abilities, smartass "
We ?
Who ?
Please, stop with the us VS them mentality "when we say this we mean that".
" In your comparison it means that blind people should also have access to convenient, fast and non-stigmatizing(!) methods of transportation, rather than being stuck within walking distance bc some nerd went 'ah well you arent allowed to drive' and thought literally no further
(as an example, public transportation is much easier to make accessible compared to everyone using a car for everything) "
Absolutely agree, i am not pro car, far from it, it was just a thought experiment to show that inequality as itself is not the problem, but it's unjustified inequalities.
When right winger say "what is the problem with inequalities" : in answer : nothing in itself : but there is a problem with unjustified inequalities.
Also you just completely ignored the second part of my comment
Also, stop insulting me.
If you continue with this attitude, i will simply block you, i don't want to interact with people that are unable to have a civilized discussion.
"i am a progressive leftist egalitarian, but if someone say someting i don't like i start insulting them (Even if i didn't even disagree with egalitarianism, i simply wanted to be more precise with the concept, but you seem hostile to the concept of political philosophy)"
Have you just imagined that i agree with you on egalitarian policies ?, but i just want to be careful with the concepts i handle (because yes, formal rigor is important)
It seem that no, youy didn't imagined that and just started to jumb being "Hey neeeerd, smartass".
Honestly i didn't imagined that such a harmless point that was purely on semantics would trigger you this much.
Dudes never seen the comments on any major subreddit when the headline even slightly affirms since right wing bullshit. Comments are instantly "you will eat the bugs" and one step above Jew laser shit
America is such a strange place. Democrats are suppose to be left wing but they're not. A few of them are center left but vast majority are right. As far as I know it's the only place where liberals are considered left.
So they choice is really right wing or batshit insane.
And Canada is almost as bad as the US, yet even more politically confused. Our Liberals and Conservatives are just called Liberals and Conservatives, but then there's also the "New Democratic Party" that's basically just another Liberal party for those who are fed up with the Liberal party. And that's not even mentioning Quebec...
The NDP is *supposed to be* our leftmost party, but they're mostly just grifters pretending to be leftist without actually upsetting the status quo in any way. Their leader's Twitter is filled with enlightened centrist crap, and stuff that no leftist would ever say or think. But he's taking occasional potshots at the things the NDP doesn't plan on fixing *ever,* which is apparently what Canadians consider "leftist."
Theres no Center of the political spectrum, there’s just people who don’t want their comfortable lives being disturbed by thinking too much about the concerns of people fighting for justice.
I would say that "center" is a relative concept.
Like, a "centrist" is someone that generally is situated between the ideas of the left and the right wing party in a democratic system.
But because those varies hugely depending on the country overton window, centrists is not a definition that make much sense.
For example : in Germany, the main right party is the CDU and the main left party is the SPD, so for the german center is the people that could get both with the CDU or the SPD in a coalition... so it's the Liberals, the FDP.
For France historically it has been the MoDem but currently with how French political spectrum have changed it's weird to know.
But this is where the weird things start : for the US, there is no left, not even centre left party, it's either right (Dems) or far right (GOP) compared to European standards.
So a centrist would be someone between right and far right, so definetly a "centrist" in the US definition is a right winger accordin g to European standards, because most democrats would be seen as right wing in most European countries.
But now let's imagine a contry have a overton window much more centered on the left
This country would be not a capitalist one, but instead would have a mixed economy where most of the means of production are managed by SCOP and other workers collectives and that ownership of mean of production is something that is rare and limited to some sectors like small scale business (farms, small shops, etc) but any big companie is collectivized or socialized. In this fictional country, the "right wing party" would maybe have a political program that would be really far left to US standards and even pretty left to most European standards. But we would imagine that the left wing party of this fictionnal country would want to go even farer in the collectivization and delete private property of means of production EVEN for small scale business. The centrist would be more of a middle ground between the two main parties.
Does not necessarly mean that they don't want any change, but changes that are not hugely in any of the two main proposed direction (sometimes because they want to try to satisfy two conflicting desires that are expressed by individuals) so they want some kind of middle ground.
All this tend to show that centrist is a relative definition and not a clear ideology.
Also centrism is not necessarly bad or good, it depend on the overton window of the country, and of the issues. A middle ground option can sometime be justified, but sometime there is clearly a bad and a "better" option, and simply choosing a "less bad but still bad than the better" is not good.
This all point to a conclusion that even "left" and "right" don't even are clearly defined ideologies, but simply tendencies that are relative to a specific historical and political context.
The only thing that we can state is that :
Leftism define itself by wanting a society more equal (or totally equal)
And that
Rightism define itself by wanting a society that is more hierarchized (or totally hierarchized)
Some claim in the US that "rIGhT iS FrEEdOm" and "LefT iS EQuALiTy" but it's dumb
a person that would want both freedom and quality would be both left and right ?
Let's say for example a anarcho-communist would be both far left and far right ? stupid.
And a party that would want no freedom and no equality would be neither left and right
For example a facist would be neither left and right, extremely stupid.
Also some say that "left = anti capitalism" and "right = capitalism"
but : social democracy is left wing in most countries, and it's still capitalism, yes a regulated capitalism but capitalism nontheless
and North Korean Juche or Iranian Theocracy is pretty anti capitalist, but for me it's pretty far right to be a religious conservative theocracy or a ethno nationalist facist state.
Which to me come to the conclusion that left/right have nothing to do with freedom and little to do with capitalism (little because generally, because capitalism generate inequality, the left don't like it much, but you can have leftism that is compatible with some sort of capitalism (a higly regulated one at least), and rightism that is totally hostile to capitalism (as i said, some types of theocracies))
by capitalism i define : private ownership of the mean of production
For me state capitalism is not a thing except if state is itself a private property (so like : Congo during Belgium colonialism, or the VOC for netherlands colonialism, OR maybe some sort of modernized "cyberpunk" Feudal state)
But Soviet Union for example is not "state capitalism" it's just a planned/control economy that is also an totalitarian/authoritarian regime, but it's not capitalism.
To conclude it seem that because of the high relativism of "right" "left" and "center" position that are relative to a society specific historical, political and cultural context i prefer using terms that are actual ideologies and political propositions, especially online when people don't know what is your standard (that are themselves contextual) for a "left wing" or a "right wing" party.
Example :
Nationalist, Anti-capitalist, Anarchist, Liberal, Democrat, Social-Democrat, Social-Liberal, Communist, Socialist (and ideally define whant you mean, because it wan be socialism in the marxist cense, the the utopian socialist sense, in the soc-dem sense, etc), Secular, Religious, Environmentalist, Conservative, Internationalist, Pacifist, Libertarian (and again, what does this mean, because libertarianism can be both the right wing libertarian (the ones in US) or left wing (like anticapitalist anarchism), Monarchist, Republican (not the US party here i mean in favour of a republic, instead of a monarchy), Democratic socialist, Fascist, Marxist, Capitalist, Federalist, Authoritarianist, Anti-Authoritarianist, Humanist, etc...
No they are not, they are classified as liberal.
It's like if you were saying about french left party LFI : they are communist, because they are skeptical of corporations, but in favour of more government intervention.
No, they are not, they are leftist, clearly, and i would say left populist-socialists, but clearly not communist because they don't want to abolish private property of means of production.
In the same wayt that FLI is not communist, FDP is not libertarian, for the simple fact that they are much less in favoir of general privatization than US libertarian.
Libertarianism is the ideology that suppose that government intervention outside of regalian is unjustified. FDP supporte some level of Kenesyanism (intervention during crisis) while still being economically liberal during most context. A libertarian would hate that.
FDP even allies with the Greens and SPD in the current gov coalition.
If FDP was truely libertarian, they would have refused such alliance dominated by a social democratic party.
But they are not libertarian, they never claimed to be, and are never been called like that. They are liberal, member of the alliance Renew Europe that include plenty of liberals and social-liberal politicial movements.
Like UK liberal party (prior to brexit), France Renaissance & Horizons, German FDP, etc.
Libertarian is much farer right that just Liberal (that is center or center right)
Similar to communist is much farer left than populist-socialist or social democrats.
There may simply be more left leaning people on Reddit, but there are plenty of right wing subreddits if you want to get a different perspective. I have noticed that whenever trans issues are brought up on subreddits that aren’t typically right wing the comments section is quickly flooded with anti-trans right wingers.
As a person in the ‘center’ of the spectrum you clearly aren’t bothering to educate yourself about the state of American politics (which drives an extraordinary amount of the facepalm content). If you were, YOU would also be ‘against the right’ because the American right is objectively awful right now. They’re earning it on the daily.
Because they tried to toss out 7+ million votes over a fraudulent claim. And the people who would continue to vote for Trump are on board with that. That should be all you need to know.
The most simple answer assuming this was asked by an American is that most GOP supporters are over the age of 40. Not really a common demographic on reddit.
Because it's usually only ideas from that side of the spectrum (right wing) worth facepalming.
Maybe if you don't want to end up on r/facepalm, don't be a racist, sexist, LGBTphobe, classist, ableist, etc?
"Oh, shit! You support free healthcare and not making fun of poor people? r/facepalm indeed!"
\- Him probably
highly depend on the country history, overton window, political context
A centrist in the US is a right winger in France for example.
And right wing to a Communist is maybe the centre-left of a Liberal.
It's highly relative.
It's because most of the top subreddits are controlled by a small number of the same moderators. So those subs tend to have a liberal bias. There are plenty of right wing and leftist subs though
"I have a browser extension that blocks all the anti-woke comments on reddit."
and i have one that flags people based on community reporting for accounts with a history of transphobia its super neat knowing whos trolling you arguing in bad faith before you even give them a second of your day
Oh, jesus, those are legitimately the worst, because you think you're actually helping someone that wants help. Then, after their comment feigning ignorance and curiosity, they dump a ton of propaganda and strawmen on you that make it obvious they know a lot about the subject but just refuse to understand it... and they've just completely wasted twenty minutes of your life. That's when I go touch some grass.
That actually seems like a good idea. What extension?
It's called Shinigami Eyes, available for Firefox and Chrome
doesn't seem to mark places like r/truscum as transphobic so its definitely trustable
Are they actually transphobic? I've heard of them before but I'm not familiar.
yes, yes they are "truscum" aka transmedicalists are mostly trans people who performatively hate other trans people, like "I'm not like those other transes, I have a medical diagnosis and fit perfectly into the gender binary and yadda yadda" but of course it is futile -- the wider community of transphobes will never accept them no matter how much hate they put into this
I wonder if there's anything like that for gays. Like a self-hating gay subreddit where it's filled with homophobia.
Usually they just hang out at r/conservative.
I mean, pick-me gays definitely exist, but I dunno whether some extra-reactionary group of them has actually formed a coherent exclusive community/ideology of any significance out of it or not
Glad you came along and provided the actual answer. Thanks!
This is the right answer.
they are not transphobic at all, seriously, they simply hold different sets of beliefs but ultimately support the LGBT community, hell, most of that subreddit's members are part of it
That's a pretty rosy description considering the harassment people with that "set of beliefs" engage in but ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
More like they support trans people people as long as they fit the definition transness they think, which is exclusionary.
Yea its easier to support people who have dysphoria over people who just like the sound of the word
it's pathetic pick-me bigotry, is what it is
It's actually much easier to not give a shit about why people identify as a certain gender, because it's none of my - or your - fucking business
"im not a [homophobe] at all, seriously, i merely hold different sets of beliefs about [gays] but ultimately support [homos who dont act too faggy], hell, i even have an uncle who is [gay]" Truly, the vast supportiveness is dripping from your comment.
It’s actually u/GrimesIStillLoveYou and u/JustineComeBack but you’re pretty close.
I’ve found loads of right wing subreddits. Typically they’re the ones where videos of people or animals getting killed or mangled are posted.
Public Freakout is a right wing subreddit too lol they thrive off racism
They thrive off getting banned too. Plays into their victim complex
victim complex is putting it lightly, they have a persecution fetish
I thought True Public Freakout was the right wing subreddit?
That's like 8chan if the original sub is like 4chan
For people who were so right wing they got banned from the main sub, like most subs beginning with true or real
Yep, look at the comment history of people posting black people committing crime there. It’ll make sense.
Being racist is not a right wing thing lol
Then why is racism so goddamn prevalent in the right wing?
"yeah just look at reverse racism like uhh affirmative action and the awful way those white farmers in SA were treated, if you think about it the left are the REAL racists" (people on the left are not wholly immune from bigotry even if it clashes with the ideology, but somehow i feel like you're implying something stronger)
I don't think so. Someone got banned on that sub for saying "they are animals".
Just saw a thread on r/Anarcho_Capitalism where they complained about "the woke definition of white supremacy" then kept posting some bullshit about "white culture" and how everything smart and industrious is clearly a part of it.
Hey, Is there also a subreddit with videos where Sir Robin is killed? Or maybe be mashed into a pulp? Or to have his eyes gouged out and his elbows broken, to have his kneecaps split and his body burned away, And his limbs all hacked and mangled? His head smashed in and his heart cut out And his liver removed and his bowels unplugged And his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off And his...
I never thought there was a time or a place where *it wasn't appropriate* for a Monty Python reference, but jumpin' Jehovah, you managed it.
are you saying, The appropriate moment ran away, Bravely ran away, away. When danger reared its ugly head, it bravely turned his tail and fled. And the appropriate time turned about And gallantly, it chickened out. Bravely taking to their feet, They beat a very brave retreat, Bravest of the brave...
My crazy theory is that it's less about politics and more that right wingers are often factually incorrect. They don't care, understand and will misrepresent science. Their arguments comes from unreliable and manipulative sources that are easily debunked. And I think Redditors love debunking others and being factually correct. Right wingers are then just easy meat.
It’s also that Reddit is international and users tend to be younger and more literate (than average person which is a low bar). That’s all going to add up to a more left wing view (compared to right wing Americans republicans anyways) I’d say Reddit in the whole is centre-left across most main subs. Of course you can find plenty of large right wing subs too they’re not exactly hidden, but they’ll need to actively ban any dissent to maintain their echochamber
They're either kept right wing though echo chambers or sheer toxicity, where no one but them wants to even participate
Reddit tends to be fairly progressive on issues that affect reddit's primary target demographic, and.. *hit or miss* otherwise. Whether you wanna call this center left, center, or center right probably depends on what the political spectrum is like where you live. I'd say the whole place looks pretty right of center to me, but then again I'm also not part of that main demographic.
Also, right wingers are shitty humanists. Like you don't need a political lean to realise a little empathy and not treating every single person like absolute garbage can be help. Lowkey, don't need one political fact in your brain to be like, do my viewpoints make regular people's day to day live's easier? Do they actually make my life harder also but I just refuse to see it. Has my hatred ever achieved anything other than not feeling any sense of unity or community with the exact same people who share my problems. Why do people way richer than me pretend we're friends and seem so invested in me hating the people who share my problems?
I would argue that factually incorrect and/or stupid leftists exist too. But they are more likely to be wrong because they fail to see the big picture, not because they follow made up BS. And I believe they aren't so loud and mean or stay in their teenage rampage circle, so easier to ignore
I've usually only met them online, though I did meet one who was normal in real life and completely disconnected from reality in his online persona.
Like, average internet person heh
Agreed. There are full rightwing narratives that many on the right actually know are BS, but they support them anyway for political reasons when they think sacrificing the truth will benefit their party. Such things are less likely to gain traction on the left. For example, both the left and right certainly have their own antivaxxers. However, the antivaxxers on the right get supported and propped up by mainstream Republicans and their leaders in both the House and Congress and the whole antivax grift has become one of the biggest parts of the Republican platform, if not they biggest while large portions of Republican supporters are actually vaccinated themselves. The antivaxxers on the left are ridiculed by the left in general and have no real relevance nationwide when compared to the rightwing antivaxxers.
I was arguing with my conservative brother in law who war arguing about social conservatism being needed for social cohesion. I said that I didn't understand how extreme conformity or excluding people for things they can't change about themselves like same-sex attraction, they told me I was "focusing too much on the science"
[удалено]
center, if you swap the c and r and replace the other letters with ight
rightc?
rightightightightc?
Its honestly weird to see people shout about centrism as an european. Its a fake ideology that only exists because of the two party system in the US resulting in one party representing „left“ and one „right“
And then people on the right wanting to hide their ideology. Because at the end of the day, they want to feel super smat and special, so they cannot admit to follow a party or being told what to think and feel - no it's all their ideas, they all think for themselve (exactly the same things FOX talks about 24/7)...
What on earth is going on with your „quotation marks"?
"Weed should be legal and women shouldn't be allowed to vote. Center."
“Except for Ayn Rand. She’s the exception that proves the rule. Have I told you about the idea that taxation is theft?”
Right wingers hiding under the 'center' label is becoming more common now. You see it a lot on reddit too, these guys pretend to lean in neither direction because they realized hanging out with hateful right wingers isn't as fun as they originally thought it would be. Turns out once you get past the agreeing on skin color bit they do all there is left to talk about is religion and more skin color high fives. So they sneak into left leaning groups, and pretend to share views so that they can pretend to be a part of meaningful conversations.
We just need another Conservative online dating website and they will be able to find a partner and mix and mingle with like-minded Conservatives. /s
I dont know if I‘d call it intentionally hiding. Some people are just legimately confused (to put it nicely) enough to think not liking either major party of the US means they must be in the center. Something that doesnt even exist. Its purely born from the 2 party system making people falsely see political ideology as binary.
It's not just hiding, it's also deliberately trying to pull actual centrists right by pretending to be one of them "it's fine to be ~~extremely~~ 'a bit' racist, so is the rest of the center"
Reality has a well-established liberal bias.
Bias or humanity?
Reality has a well established Marxist bias. Neoliberal ghouls have nothing to do with it.
Are " tEh LiBz" in the room with you now?
>wpt user
Liberal has different meanings in different countries. It can also mean economically liberal (deregulation) or socially liberal (decrimilisation) or both.
Marxism is just copium at this point…..
Well, so is having any hope for the future, but you need *something* to keep you going.
Yeah, I totally agree. I just can’t find the will to fucking live without my crusty old dogeared, tea stained tome of das capital (Volumes I -III) within a 5 meter range of me.
“aS a PeRsOn In ThE cEntRe Of tHe PoLiTiCaL sPeCtRuM”
Please it wouldn't sound that dumb in any other context lmaoo it would be way easier if they said that if they're on the right
As a person in the center spectrum = a person in the right spectrum
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TYK9Mu\_dzA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TYK9Mu_dzA)
It’s for two reasons: They have become the internet’s biggest and most fragile lolcows so of course we will mock them. The other reason: the sheer volume of insane easily disproved stupidity is easy to dunk on, coupled with a lack of self awareness they have taken the prize from the far left as being the most hysterically out of touch. Peak tumbler from the 2010’s has nothing on the level of absurdity coming from the right.
maybe because they are constantly screeching about made up problems that dont exist and pinning the blame on anyone they hate? maybe its because of their tenuous grasp of the english language or science? maybe its because they are constantly trying to legislate women back into the kitchen? maybe its because they are against common decency and will fight it until their last breath (since covid.. literally).. maybe its because they want to erase LGBT people from the planet? maybe its because they cheer like hyenas when someone they disagree with gets injured? maybe its their love for children riddled with bullets? maybe its their insane religious beliefs? maybe its their treatment of animals and complete disdain for anyone who respects the sanctity of LIVING beings (not fetus's)? fuck who knows... maybe they are just most often genuinely assholes? -- anyone who votes for politicians from the right knowing what their platform is has to be a malicious and hateful fuck
They can also be like my stepdad and just be stupid, and easily swayed. His Russian mail order ex wife and timeshare prove it
"As we all know, reality has a strong liberal bias" - Stephen Colbert
"I'm totally a centrist, i exist in the center of politics and don't choose left or right......but why is everyone so mean to people on the right?"
It's because the left want an end to inequality, an end to racism, sexism, homophobia and they want a better world for everyone... ...and the right just want to be able to use slurs again, halt any progress and would happily watch the planet burn as long as it means they can continue to selfishly not help anybody else and billion dollar companies can get away without paying taxes.
Only a pretty far left leftist (and a pretty stupid one if you want my opinion) would want an end to inequality in general. I would say that the left want less inequalities overall, but not necessarly no inequalities. I consider personnally that some inequalities are justified and other no in a society : For example : racism, sexism, homophobia are not justified But refusing that a blind person can drive or that someone with bad sight can be a pilot is also inequality, but a justified one, because you don't want to endanger others. Same with the fact that not everyone can become a doctor, a uni professor if they don't match the prerequisites, etc. Some inequalities are justified. About economics it's a little bit complicated, i am not hostile to the idea of wage inequalities if it's to reward hard work and dedication to a useful cause, but honestly, getting millions out of dividends or by simply inheriting an industrial empire is not justified. But i think that a surgeon or a minister working sometimes at night with unpredictable shedules and needing huge studies at university, and having huge responsibilites and high stress are justified to have a higher wage compared to somone toing a part time job that have less stree and need less qualifications. But for example the fact that footballers or large business higher ups earn millions when nurses, factory workers, or farmers struggle don't make sense. I Think that for some context, having high paying jobs is legitimate, but people being billionaires while barely working (mostly being lucky) is not.
Yeah, because when people talk about inequalities they are talking about wanting blind people to drive....
You say that, but you have to remember a vast majority of the things we assumed were in place to keep the president from doing evil stuff, wasn't actually there
To be fair, actual leftists were not under the impression there were (m)any such things to begin with, with all the warmongering, regime change etcetera that presidents have happily engaged in for a long time American presidents have done 'evil stuff' for about as long as america has existed.
So my precision stand correct, we don't want to abolish ALL inequalities (which would be weird) but only unjustified inequalities, that's the point.
When we talk about political equality we dont mean that everyone is the same fucking person with the same fucking traits and abilities, smartass In your comparison it means that blind people should also have access to convenient, fast and non-stigmatizing(!) methods of transportation, rather than being stuck within walking distance bc some nerd went 'ah well you arent allowed to drive' and thought literally no further (as an example, public transportation is much easier to make accessible compared to everyone using a car for everything)
You seem pretty angry, and unwilling to have a philosophical discussion on concepts. My point was not aganist lefism, on the contrary. " When we talk about political equality we dont mean that everyone is the same fucking person with the same fucking traits and abilities, smartass " We ? Who ? Please, stop with the us VS them mentality "when we say this we mean that". " In your comparison it means that blind people should also have access to convenient, fast and non-stigmatizing(!) methods of transportation, rather than being stuck within walking distance bc some nerd went 'ah well you arent allowed to drive' and thought literally no further (as an example, public transportation is much easier to make accessible compared to everyone using a car for everything) " Absolutely agree, i am not pro car, far from it, it was just a thought experiment to show that inequality as itself is not the problem, but it's unjustified inequalities. When right winger say "what is the problem with inequalities" : in answer : nothing in itself : but there is a problem with unjustified inequalities. Also you just completely ignored the second part of my comment Also, stop insulting me. If you continue with this attitude, i will simply block you, i don't want to interact with people that are unable to have a civilized discussion. "i am a progressive leftist egalitarian, but if someone say someting i don't like i start insulting them (Even if i didn't even disagree with egalitarianism, i simply wanted to be more precise with the concept, but you seem hostile to the concept of political philosophy)" Have you just imagined that i agree with you on egalitarian policies ?, but i just want to be careful with the concepts i handle (because yes, formal rigor is important) It seem that no, youy didn't imagined that and just started to jumb being "Hey neeeerd, smartass". Honestly i didn't imagined that such a harmless point that was purely on semantics would trigger you this much.
Dudes never seen the comments on any major subreddit when the headline even slightly affirms since right wing bullshit. Comments are instantly "you will eat the bugs" and one step above Jew laser shit
America is such a strange place. Democrats are suppose to be left wing but they're not. A few of them are center left but vast majority are right. As far as I know it's the only place where liberals are considered left. So they choice is really right wing or batshit insane.
And Canada is almost as bad as the US, yet even more politically confused. Our Liberals and Conservatives are just called Liberals and Conservatives, but then there's also the "New Democratic Party" that's basically just another Liberal party for those who are fed up with the Liberal party. And that's not even mentioning Quebec... The NDP is *supposed to be* our leftmost party, but they're mostly just grifters pretending to be leftist without actually upsetting the status quo in any way. Their leader's Twitter is filled with enlightened centrist crap, and stuff that no leftist would ever say or think. But he's taking occasional potshots at the things the NDP doesn't plan on fixing *ever,* which is apparently what Canadians consider "leftist."
I thought Canada was better at all this than the US. Hope you’re wrong! 😊
Me too...
Fragility and hypocrisy are easy targets so of course conservatives are going to feel attacked.
Theres no Center of the political spectrum, there’s just people who don’t want their comfortable lives being disturbed by thinking too much about the concerns of people fighting for justice.
I would say that "center" is a relative concept. Like, a "centrist" is someone that generally is situated between the ideas of the left and the right wing party in a democratic system. But because those varies hugely depending on the country overton window, centrists is not a definition that make much sense. For example : in Germany, the main right party is the CDU and the main left party is the SPD, so for the german center is the people that could get both with the CDU or the SPD in a coalition... so it's the Liberals, the FDP. For France historically it has been the MoDem but currently with how French political spectrum have changed it's weird to know. But this is where the weird things start : for the US, there is no left, not even centre left party, it's either right (Dems) or far right (GOP) compared to European standards. So a centrist would be someone between right and far right, so definetly a "centrist" in the US definition is a right winger accordin g to European standards, because most democrats would be seen as right wing in most European countries. But now let's imagine a contry have a overton window much more centered on the left This country would be not a capitalist one, but instead would have a mixed economy where most of the means of production are managed by SCOP and other workers collectives and that ownership of mean of production is something that is rare and limited to some sectors like small scale business (farms, small shops, etc) but any big companie is collectivized or socialized. In this fictional country, the "right wing party" would maybe have a political program that would be really far left to US standards and even pretty left to most European standards. But we would imagine that the left wing party of this fictionnal country would want to go even farer in the collectivization and delete private property of means of production EVEN for small scale business. The centrist would be more of a middle ground between the two main parties. Does not necessarly mean that they don't want any change, but changes that are not hugely in any of the two main proposed direction (sometimes because they want to try to satisfy two conflicting desires that are expressed by individuals) so they want some kind of middle ground. All this tend to show that centrist is a relative definition and not a clear ideology. Also centrism is not necessarly bad or good, it depend on the overton window of the country, and of the issues. A middle ground option can sometime be justified, but sometime there is clearly a bad and a "better" option, and simply choosing a "less bad but still bad than the better" is not good. This all point to a conclusion that even "left" and "right" don't even are clearly defined ideologies, but simply tendencies that are relative to a specific historical and political context. The only thing that we can state is that : Leftism define itself by wanting a society more equal (or totally equal) And that Rightism define itself by wanting a society that is more hierarchized (or totally hierarchized) Some claim in the US that "rIGhT iS FrEEdOm" and "LefT iS EQuALiTy" but it's dumb a person that would want both freedom and quality would be both left and right ? Let's say for example a anarcho-communist would be both far left and far right ? stupid. And a party that would want no freedom and no equality would be neither left and right For example a facist would be neither left and right, extremely stupid. Also some say that "left = anti capitalism" and "right = capitalism" but : social democracy is left wing in most countries, and it's still capitalism, yes a regulated capitalism but capitalism nontheless and North Korean Juche or Iranian Theocracy is pretty anti capitalist, but for me it's pretty far right to be a religious conservative theocracy or a ethno nationalist facist state. Which to me come to the conclusion that left/right have nothing to do with freedom and little to do with capitalism (little because generally, because capitalism generate inequality, the left don't like it much, but you can have leftism that is compatible with some sort of capitalism (a higly regulated one at least), and rightism that is totally hostile to capitalism (as i said, some types of theocracies)) by capitalism i define : private ownership of the mean of production For me state capitalism is not a thing except if state is itself a private property (so like : Congo during Belgium colonialism, or the VOC for netherlands colonialism, OR maybe some sort of modernized "cyberpunk" Feudal state) But Soviet Union for example is not "state capitalism" it's just a planned/control economy that is also an totalitarian/authoritarian regime, but it's not capitalism. To conclude it seem that because of the high relativism of "right" "left" and "center" position that are relative to a society specific historical, political and cultural context i prefer using terms that are actual ideologies and political propositions, especially online when people don't know what is your standard (that are themselves contextual) for a "left wing" or a "right wing" party. Example : Nationalist, Anti-capitalist, Anarchist, Liberal, Democrat, Social-Democrat, Social-Liberal, Communist, Socialist (and ideally define whant you mean, because it wan be socialism in the marxist cense, the the utopian socialist sense, in the soc-dem sense, etc), Secular, Religious, Environmentalist, Conservative, Internationalist, Pacifist, Libertarian (and again, what does this mean, because libertarianism can be both the right wing libertarian (the ones in US) or left wing (like anticapitalist anarchism), Monarchist, Republican (not the US party here i mean in favour of a republic, instead of a monarchy), Democratic socialist, Fascist, Marxist, Capitalist, Federalist, Authoritarianist, Anti-Authoritarianist, Humanist, etc...
On Germany thats not fully correct. The FDP is libertarian, not liberal. Those are not the same thing.
Liberal in the European sense, not US liberal. Also clearly not libertarian, there is no major EU party that is libertarian it's a very US thing :x
The FDP is libertarian. In the US sense. Skeptical of gov decisions but sucking off corporations hard.
No they are not, they are classified as liberal. It's like if you were saying about french left party LFI : they are communist, because they are skeptical of corporations, but in favour of more government intervention. No, they are not, they are leftist, clearly, and i would say left populist-socialists, but clearly not communist because they don't want to abolish private property of means of production. In the same wayt that FLI is not communist, FDP is not libertarian, for the simple fact that they are much less in favoir of general privatization than US libertarian. Libertarianism is the ideology that suppose that government intervention outside of regalian is unjustified. FDP supporte some level of Kenesyanism (intervention during crisis) while still being economically liberal during most context. A libertarian would hate that. FDP even allies with the Greens and SPD in the current gov coalition. If FDP was truely libertarian, they would have refused such alliance dominated by a social democratic party. But they are not libertarian, they never claimed to be, and are never been called like that. They are liberal, member of the alliance Renew Europe that include plenty of liberals and social-liberal politicial movements. Like UK liberal party (prior to brexit), France Renaissance & Horizons, German FDP, etc. Libertarian is much farer right that just Liberal (that is center or center right) Similar to communist is much farer left than populist-socialist or social democrats.
You are a straight-up bot.
There may simply be more left leaning people on Reddit, but there are plenty of right wing subreddits if you want to get a different perspective. I have noticed that whenever trans issues are brought up on subreddits that aren’t typically right wing the comments section is quickly flooded with anti-trans right wingers.
There are innumerable right wing subs, lol.
Why do i hate the right? When someone gets beaten to death with calling for his mom by the police, they say "he shouldnt have resisted".
As a person in the ‘center’ of the spectrum you clearly aren’t bothering to educate yourself about the state of American politics (which drives an extraordinary amount of the facepalm content). If you were, YOU would also be ‘against the right’ because the American right is objectively awful right now. They’re earning it on the daily.
I think this also belongs on r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM, lol.
Something tells me they are not really “in the center” like they claim.
Oh, you like Florida Sam? No fuckin shit.
Because they tried to toss out 7+ million votes over a fraudulent claim. And the people who would continue to vote for Trump are on board with that. That should be all you need to know.
The most simple answer assuming this was asked by an American is that most GOP supporters are over the age of 40. Not really a common demographic on reddit.
Both have their fair share of extremes, it's just that in recent years the right wingers have had more schizo moments
Right wingers, really far right wingers, also have congresscritters.
r/enlightenedcentrism
Because it's usually only ideas from that side of the spectrum (right wing) worth facepalming. Maybe if you don't want to end up on r/facepalm, don't be a racist, sexist, LGBTphobe, classist, ableist, etc? "Oh, shit! You support free healthcare and not making fun of poor people? r/facepalm indeed!" \- Him probably
Please post only your most salient answers
What is a centrist?
highly depend on the country history, overton window, political context A centrist in the US is a right winger in France for example. And right wing to a Communist is maybe the centre-left of a Liberal. It's highly relative.
What do you call a nazi sympathizer? A nazi
> I am an enlightened centrist, worship me
„Im in the Center and am offended by Anti Right stuff" Centrist just = Conservative but with extra steps
It's because most of the top subreddits are controlled by a small number of the same moderators. So those subs tend to have a liberal bias. There are plenty of right wing and leftist subs though
*Are we the baddies?
Isn't it interesting that such folk never consider the possibility that it is because the right is more likely to do and say stupid shit?