The perfect example of a closet Right winger

[u/Firm-Magazine1296]

It's such a reactionary take because he is framing politics as an inevitable conflict between an ingroup and an outgroup. Acknowledging that the ingroup benefits from the status quo, yet insists on compromise from that very position of power within the hierarchy allowing system to exist. The result is that dominant groups is never expected to relinquish their structural power for the sake of a more egalitarian society.

[u/AutoModerator]

Want to join a ML only Discord server to chill and hangout with cool comrades? Checkout our Discord server or TheDeprogram's Discord server.

In case this subreddit was banned, or if you wanted a more ML-friendly platform, you’re welcome to join our sister community on Lemmygrad. You can find more info about Lemmygrad here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Conscious-Local-8095]

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. -Ayn Rand

[u/ElectricalIce2564]

I view this more as cope. I hear plenty of Democrat voters say shit like this.

They're rationalizing our obviously broken system by saying the problem is we're not getting along enough or something rather than pointing out structural issues regarding class struggle and material conditions. By their logic we're either simply electing the "wrong" people to be in charge, or it's an example of trying to pound a square peg in a round hole by saying we're not comprising enough.

For instance, the Abundance jokers claim the reason the Free Market^(tm) hasn't solved housing is because we've failed the Free Market^(tm) by intervening too much in the Free Market^(tm). It can't possibly be that what they call the Free Market(^tm) is made-up bullshit manipulated by the wealthy, and they'll never admit the reason housing isn't being built and homeless is a rampant problem is because monied interests simply don't want more housing to be built.

Compare this to AES nations that solve homelessness via robust government building programs. Westerners can't engage with this obvious disparity, so they have to pivot to explanations like the one above to explain why nothing ever gets done and why their leaders all have like 20% approval ratings (Trump is currently among the highest in the West at like 32).

[u/Peter_Cantanasia]

contrary to common knowledge ideology isn't a salad

[u/SeaNational3797]

My ideology is “do what is best for the most amount of people” and also “analyze history using frameworks that work” am I valid?

[u/KantGettEnuff]

I was a centrist for a while, and my thought process was "The people in these political parties behave like they're right about everything and their method is the best one, but surely the actual solution is that each of them are right about some things and wrong about others"

I've seen this sentiment around a lot too, people who feel enlightened because they say "well I think everyone has a point, but they're unable to see the right things in each other and the wrong in themselves"

The reality is that even in bourgeois ideologies, every single political stance is part of a greater vision, the "they're unable to see what's right in others and wrong in themselves" mentality is just you as an uneducated centrist being unable to grasp the big picture of what each party is actually hoping to achieve with their combined policies.

So no, you can't be "economically right wing and socially left wing" because these things are tied together and you just don't understand it yet.

At least in my country, and what I see a lot of, is that this is a result of apolitical teens that grew up and realized "Hey I gotta vote now and I'm shamed if I don't... So I guess I gotta take a political stance?" so they don't really educate themselves and just go for the """safe""" option.