You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
4 points

Lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply

I think the words that more accurately make your point are “dishonest” or "cynical "

permalink
report
parent
reply

Can’t do the grade school level difficulty job of defining your terms huh

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

the_dunk_tank

!the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net

Create post

It’s the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances’ admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

Community stats

  • 2K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 444K

    Comments