I just noticed that one of the news communities here discourage the use of least biased/centrist news sources and I saw some people who put that they hate centrists in their bios.
All is that is kind of weird to me and does not make sense, as I thought that all sides should encourage ideas from centrists and least biased sources.
Is there is something that I miss here?
Left-wingers identify nearly everyone who doesn’t agree with them or doesn’t share their delusions as “right-wing extremists”.
So on the right, you have people who don’t want an entire subset of the population to exist. On the left, you have those people who are fighting for the right to exist. Tell me where a centrist falls in this situation. How can you meet in the middle?
You could be fine with the people existing but differ in how to correct past or systemic injustices.
Or let’s say you think the prices of some things should be set by supply and demand, but you’re against gouging in emergencies and think some basic necessities (food, water, medicine) should have price controls.
There’s plenty of middle ground, and the people who say you’re with us or you’re for the Nazis may have forgotten what the Soviet victory meant for Eastern Europe.
Great, but as to the point about wanting huge swaths of the population to cease to exist? You know, the actual question the OP asked.
Who is the OP here? Because I can’t see from the post itself or this comment thread who is arguing that.
Here’s what I wrote in response:
Someone might be viewed as centrist if they were in favor of civil rights but have some reservations about affirmative action.
If your argument is simply that anyone who thinks gays have the right to exist is left and not a centrist, I think your definition is not aligning. People say Democrats in the US are center-right. Many Democrats support gay rights. So therefore they are left?
Do you understand the viewpoint that if you are against affirmative action, you are appeasing the right? Actions speak louder than words, and while affirmative action wasn’t perfect when rolled out, it was better than lip service while doing nothing.
Let’s take your statement for example: Someone wants to have equal and fair treatment. The left side makes an argument for how to make things more fair. The right side says no, you don’t deserve those rights. The centrist then says, I think you should have rights, but not right now, or not this way. When the centrists appease the right, they are seen as the right.
How about “You can have this, but the full thing you’re asking for is going too far? Let’s compromise and give you something the right wouldn’t let you have, but not exactly as much as you want.”
It isn’t rocket science, and the binary thinking here is absurd.
What are these left-wing “delusions” lmao
Here’s a delusion: Maduro is right to suppress free speech and association because he needs to keep the right from retaking power in Venezuela.
I don’t think this is at all something leftists in general think and I see a lot of them calling out what’s going on in Venezuela right now as large human rights violations. This is pretty much only something I see said by tankies (which is a small fraction of leftists).
Very good point. People online like to read one comment from someone and put them in a group then prescribe the values of that individual to the entire group.
Like they read a disingenuous comment from a far-right person claiming to be a centrist, and then they hate on all centrists? I could see that.
So any left-wing delusion I post can be dismissed as “not all leftists?”