I am shocked, I say. Shocked! Well, not that shocked.
I am shocked, I say. Shocked! Well, not that shocked.
188 comments
-
Funny how there's a bunch of people in the comments essentially just unironically repeating the meme: "Well this must be wrong because I believe this and I'm actually a centrist!!!"
That's the point, buddy. You're the butt of the joke. The idea that the far-left and far-right are equally bad or warrant the same amount of scrutiny and criticism is a right-wing belief.
To make the point more obvious instead of using "left" and "right" look at specific political beliefs that the far-left and far-right have:
- Equality across social and demographic groups vs. State-enforced racism, sexism and other kinds of bigotry
- Abolishment of bourgeois property and money vs. Complete privatization, oligarchy and corruption
- Globalization, peaceful relations and a right to live where you want vs. Complete isolationism and xenophobia
- Right to self-governance and no government with a monopoly on violence vs. State sanctioned violence against those considered undesirable or traitors
Hopefully I don't need to explain which one is obviously worse. To equate what the far-left and the far-right advocate for one must misrepresent the left, so both-sides-ism inherently has a right-wing slant.
-
I like to come into these comments because it gives me a fresh batch of new "centralists" to tag.
-
What does right wing mean to you?
-
What does right wing mean to YOU?
-
Anyone who thinks any different than they do.
-
-
They are both bad in their own ways just one is the lesser of two evils.
But to me both sides suck
-
-
Both sides exclude me for holding my particular set of opinions. I'm on my side, fuck you!
-
This is some crazy doublethink shit. It's clear just looking at the inconsistent interpretation from all the top-level comments that 'centrist' is a blanket term that both describes 'centrist' positions and also 'left/right radicals'. The only consistent is whether the subject is subjecting the in-group to criticism
The same user constantly harps on 'far-left' progressives complaining about democratic positions, and calls himself a centrist.
This is just standard 'out-group' gatekeeping. "If you're not with us, you're against us" shit.
-
"Bothsides types are indistinguishable both in form and in end-result, regardless of whether they claim to be centrists or leftists"
"This is crazy doublethink shit!"
The same user constantly harps on ‘far-left’ progressives complaining about democratic positions, and calls himself a centrist.
what
-
Bothsides types are indistinguishable
... Yea, see there it is. "Bothsides types are indistinguishable [in the way they criticize my party]"
-
Wait, are you talking about both sides as in the political parties, or both sides as in far left and ‘centrist’ secret nazi?
Still sick of this blaming apathetic voters for the clear failure of the Democratic Party. You had mentioned that harm mitigation trumps all moral consideration of choice. That’s short term thinking, one that has gotten us in this mess. If democrats want to play chicken putting ‘their’ progressive voting base against their neoconservative principles, that is a failure on them. Their actions after losing further prove their deficit. I warned you specifically during the election what the outcome would be because of how the democrats acted.
-
-
-
What if I'm a centrist insisting both sides are garbage?
-
You're literally who the meme is about.
-
Oh it goes both ways then, cool. I'm okay with that.
-
-
-
-
Sorry your favorite genocider lost, asshole.
Yeah, I'm sorry the less genocidal option lost. Sorry that you think that more genocide was preferable. You'll get to enjoy more genocide, it'll give you good feelies for your left-purism, I guess.
-
-
As long as you're amoral and self-serving, you can only be a "right winger", whatever that means. It's only when you dispel the myth of moral relativism and believe that, yeah, some things ARE wrong (and we should avoid and condemn them, of course), that you can start becoming a person worth existing and worth listening to. And if you're not very smart nor very brave you might be a "non radical" "leftist" but hey, your heart is probably in the right place so I'm not gonna hate (too much).
-
It's only when you dispel the myth of moral relativism and believe that, yeah, some things ARE wrong (and we should avoid and condemn them, of course)
You can be a moral relativist without equating someone else's view of morality to your own. Or rather, while still only valuing your own.
-
-
The problem is those "Centrists" are the mainstream Democratic party. There is no left-wing in national politics. The left has no one to vote for.
-
Yeah but you hate democracy if you say that!
-
-
I run into this on dating apps. “Centrist” and “apolitical” are both code for “conservative.”
-
"I believe women have the right. The right to be a trad wife."
-
-
Not necessarily. I also think that both sides extremes are absolutely awful.
The difference is that us "real" "both-siders" realize and agree that the fascist side is much more imminent and dangerous and therefore tend to ally with the left.
-
The difference is that us "real" "both-siders" realize and agree that the fascist side is much more imminent and dangerous and therefore tend to ally with the left.
Say more about this. Some news articles. Some journalists. Some academic papers. Something to validate your statement here.
-
While their claim isn't falsifiable, because someone who doesn't isn't a real both-sideser
-
-
-
"Both sides bad, bit aT leAsT tRuMp iS hOnEst aBoUt iT!"
The Honesty:
"You won't have to vote anymore"
"Dictator on day one"
-
Another one I noticed is they say shit like "well they're saying two opposite things, so you cannot know the truth". Mother fucker, if you dig a tiny bit the truth is out there, waiting for you, but they cannot accept one side is lying (it's theirs)
-
An older acronym for the same thing, BSABSVR
Both Sides Are Bad So Vote Republican.
-
I prefer BEATSABERVR
-
Both Sides Are Bad So Vote Republican.
God, growing up, I heard the equivalent of that so often from the less-lead-poisoned of my conservative community.
"Well, you don't really know what's true, and both sides lie. Really, both parties are just out for themselves. There's no difference between them."
"So you aren't voting?"
"Oh no, I'm definitely voting Republican."
-
Lemmy being black or white like always. You can be a leftist, vote for the left and still recognize the flaws in your own parties and the good ideologies in the other…
I swear, the left usually calls itself open-minded, but as soon as someone on the right comes around, instead of trying to convince them with arguments, they are being called straight up evil russian bots. So what do they do, they go back to truth social, where they are well treated, and keep voting conservative.
-
Lemmy being black or white like always. You can be a leftist, vote for the left and still recognize the flaws in your own parties and the good ideologies in the other…
That's very different from asserting that both sides are the same.
-
Someone: "both parties share this specific commonality"
PugJesus: "oh rly?? Both sides are LITERALLY the same??"Don't you dare suggest that my party has a common flaw with the other party and can be responsible for their own losses, you fascist.
-
Both sides are similar in behavior, not in ideology. Right winger’s are treated just as bad here as leftists are treated on truth social. Both sides are somehow convinced their idea is the absolute truth and the other side is the devil itself.
-
-
Mr Jenkins!?
-
Nothing in the meme that directly names political parties.
Are you someone who calls yourself a centrist but can't decide if kids should be shot in schools or Healthcare is a human right? Weird.
-
-
No, I don’t think kids should be shot, and healthcare should be a thing. But here anyway, the current healthcare system is broken, and some of the conservative ideas are trying to fix it, while the left is fine leaving it half working. While I’m still a leftist, I do recognize their point and am not calling them evil for it…
-
-
-
I have never met a "centrist" on social media who wasn't. Same with the horseshoe theory.
Let's take America: are you for democracy or against it? - "I can see both sides" - wtf? Fascist enabler, at best.
-
Proponents of horseshoe theory argue that the far-left and the far-right are closer to each other than either is to the political center. Seems like a theory a right-winger would create to save face.
-
I will say, some far leftists have ideas that seem more libertarian on a surface level, like dismantling the state, but it's for different reasons, and generally far-lefts aren't common. What Americans consider "far left" is just advocating for common decency
-
Thr horshoe no longer exists today in any meaningful way, but it did for a brief moment pre tea party. There used to be a group of people that believed in both universal health care and understood risk pools, and would not directly vote to restrict personal rights. Pretty small group now.
-
-
I prefer stethoscope theory.
-
They did a U-turn!
-
This stethoscope diagram just reeks of a rebranding attempt similar to how Libertarians were adamant that they were not just Republicans yet somehow still only voted Republican and would support Republicans in all things even if it explicitly went against libertarian doctrine.
Horseshoe theory is more accurate. Hard left is tankies. Tankies are hard left.
-
-
-
Nuance is inconvenient to radicals and fundamentalists.
-
The US has little nuance. Your dominant parties are Fascist and Far-Right Neoliberals with some token LGBT rights.
-
I’m not American, luckily.
-
He's a troll, don't bother.
-
-
-
Even if they're not a right-winger and don't claim to be a centrist, "both-sides"ing things is a waste of time, at best.
Like, when Jon Stewart came back to the Daily Show. I think it was his first show back, but it might have been his second... And his main talking point was about how both Biden and Trump were old. I know he's just a comedian on a comedy show, but it still felt like a betrayal. At the very best, it was a waste of a chance to say something that could have actually made a difference.
-
He pointed out that they are the oldest candidates ever to run, beating the previous record of…the same two old white guys 4 years prior. Seemed pretty germane to mention that we have a serious lack of younger and diverse representation
-
I agree 100% with everything you said. Just like you said, it was a good point and definitely worth a mention. My problem is that it was the main segment of his first show back. Just like I said, a waste of time when there were much more important things to talk about.
-
-
I mean, they are both old, I don't think that's a perspective that should be discounted. That's not a discussion on policy or who one should vote for as much as it is the understandable concern about whether either of them would still be alive for their entire second term.
-
I like Jon, but TDS has done more harm than good for the left.
- It just normalized the Republican CRIMINAL behaviour by making fun of it and laughing, like it was no big deal
- It made an entire generation complacent becuase people though watching TDS and jucking along was actually doing fuck all to actually fight Republicans or help Democrats.
- And finally, like you said they'd frequently have both sides segments that the right loved to echo on their propaganda networks
-
Tbf, you shouldn't take news from a comedian.
They are meant to entertain, not inform. If they side with one party too much, they lose viewers.
They need views from "both sides" which is the precise reason why they have to "both sides" everything.
-
Comedians and court jesters have always been some of the most honest and straight forward. They don't bite their tongue or fret over access. You shouldn't discount them. Entertainment is one of the best methods of informing. You will spend infinitely time more learning in an entertaining way. Then beating your head against a dry impenetrable text that you struggle to comprehend.
-
The comedian in question is Jon Stewart, though. Do you really think that Jon Stewart has to "both sides" everything so that he doesn't alienate his conservative audience? I doubt that you're saying that. I don't think he has ever done that.
It doesn't make sense to try to generalize how comedians act when we're talking about how one specific comedian acts, and it's already clear that he doesn't act like the generalization presented.
I have no doubt that Jon Stewart simply did the segment because he thought it was funny, and he didn't care about alienating people.
The reason I'm so sure is that he predictably alienated a lot of left leaning people with his "both sides are old" segment. I say "predictably" because there's simply no way that somebody didn't talk to him before air and say something like, "You know, this is going to irritate the people who like you the most."
-
-
-
Yes, well.....when you've been indoctrinated by the internet the majority of your adult life, you (totally unironically /s) view anyone that doesn't align exactly with your world view as a Totalitarian.
I would say it's a problem, but at least it keeps you all in a centralized bubble that allows you to believe "we are the majority!!", without actually impacting the real world.
-
Said on the internet, by an internet user. Curious.
I am very smart.
-
-
On the other hand, the kneejerk of labeling every even remotely centrist viewpoint as inherently dishonest is pretty annoying. My own views lean SocDem and I've found voicing any opinion which is neither solidly left-wing or solidly right-wing, especially if it does not align with very American-centric views of the political spectrum, often elicits unpleasant reactions. Nuance is hard, I guess.
-
As an anarchist. The seething hate I've received for pointing out. That the genocide in Palestine is truly an appropriate both sides thing. That it wasn't just Biden or just Harris. That it was our senators, our Congress people, and the executive branch.
That it was going to be a Republican or a Democrat that won the presidential election. And we all would definitely prefer it wasn't for the Republican. Or that if Fox News covers you without wildly editorializing or smearing you. You done fucked up. You could be forgiven for thinking I had just strangled their grandmother's from the reaction.
-
Could you give an example of a centrist viewpoint that you've voiced that would be labeled as inherently dishonest?
-
Being in favor of mixed economies, with stock markets, venture capital firms, but also universal healthcare and protection for unions. Being against American style basically unregulated firearm ownership (which seems quite popular on both the far left and far right, yet maybe not so much in the middle). And I feel free to criticize the actions of parties or politicians across the political spectrum, not just those on one side. I understand many people, especially the political left which I sympathize more with, are very angry these days. Justifiably. So am I. But being accused of being dishonest just for having a different point of view is annoying.
-
-
-
Oh my God, you found Emmanuel Macron!
-
lovely flat comparison that only accepts this precise present moment as the only context.
Never mind that the Democrats today are the George W. Bush neo-cons of twenty years ago. Or that the precedent laid down by the Bush admin - and subsequently renewed and strengthened by the Obama admin - are the same legal standards Trump and ICE are now claiming cover under.
-
The middleground between racism and not racism is 50% racism. That being said, they probably mean centrist in different topics. Blame two party system not the people.
-
I mean, I understand that this is like a very prevailing thing, but centrists exist. Especially in a modern political climate that is this polarized, being a centrist is unbelievably hard to explain to people. The left is convinced that they are very people first and very centrist and the right is convinced that they are very right and very populist.
I mean basically what I'm saying is that this actually emphasizes a problem and people just blindly agreeing with this is also a problem. I would venture to say that most people can't recognize an actual centrist as opposed to just immediately assuming them to be a right winger. This has happened for over 10 years in my daily life. Before Donald Trump even started running for president, in 2013, I had people accusing me of being either left-wing or right-wing, when in reality, I am very much a centrist. If I use any political buzzwords to identify myself whatsoever, I will then be put into a category that which does not properly define me. I despise the Democrats, I despise the Republicans, and I despise Donald J. Trump. I don't think anyone in the last 10 years in the entirety of this government has been worth even considering for my vote for president.
But who am I? I'm just one guy.
Please don't hate me for saying this. I just, I see this meme and I see the comments and I just think, wow, this must be a bunch of people who have experienced like, you know, those weird people who liked Trump but no longer like Trump. My point is that like people continue to say that there's no such thing as a centrist and I'm not saying that you people are saying that I'm saying that that is a prevailing idea and I'm sick and tired of it and this meme and your comments very much seem to perpetuate that.
Anyway, I'm done. I hate politics because it's terrible. There's nothing and no one to vote for. No cause to get behind that will ever truly fix it just by voting. Get active in your community, physically, and improve things on a city-wide level. And then if a ton of people do that, we'll actually see change. That is if these tariffs don't literally destroy our entire economy. #AmericaisrecessionproofsolongaswethreatentheFederalReserve
-
Disliking politics and all the current political parties doesn't fit the technical definition of a centrist.
It's not that centrism can't exist, it's that it's commonly used as a thin pretense to cover actual partisan leanings, usually right-wing (by the general global metric, not just the US one).
Additionally, abstinence isn't commonly a good approach by which to assert a legitimately central stance. A lot of the time a legitimately central stance doesn't exist in a practical sense.
As stated by a commenter above "The middleground between racism and not racism is 50% racism".
I personally think the concept of "centrism" isn''t viable, not because nuance and context can't exist but because the "center" often isn't a useful target.
-
In a nutshell, what this meme is about is all the people that we've run into who say, "both sides are bad," because they believe the Republicans lies about Democrats, and the Republican talking points on issues. Actual centrists, in Republican lingo, are "the far left."
-
-
I may be left leaning, but I am also afraid of giving voters more power over the economy. Everything we do in housing, which is something people do have a high degree of control, is screwed up. People also want a huge amount of social programs but low taxes.
-
-
Well if you want fascists to keep winning you have to right attitude.
We have well over 50 years of evidence that attempts at top down change always backfire. If you don't want weak willed beholden people being nominated for leadership roles. Focus on filling all the offices beneath them with people who aren't.
Even had Sanders made it into office. He would have struggled continuously to accomplish anything with all the people underneath him.
It is a literal yet unfortunate fact that we must hold our noses and vote for anyone who stands a chance at beating a Republican in a national presidential election. Until such time as the parties have been taken over by people who wouldn't nominate someone like that.
-
Here's the hitch:
It is a literal yet unfortunate fact that we must hold our noses and vote for anyone who stands a chance at beating a Republican in a national presidential election. Until such time as the parties have been taken over by people who wouldn't nominate someone like that.
This strategy guarantees that the parties will keep nominating someone like that. (After all, they keep winning.) There's no mechanism for replacing the party leadership in it, nor any realistic scenario by which it would happen.
-
This already happened in 2016, why am i the only one who remembers?!?!
Supporting one side of the Duopoly keeps us in the Duopoly forever.
Get over the democratic party, many already have
-
-
this is very convenient this just means im always correct because everything else is just a right winger as if that's argument.
-
Life would be better for everyone if right wingers would just shut the fuck up and keep their hands to themselves. But they just want to hurt everyone else, so their opinions are worth less than moose shit. When a right wing fuck is talking, there's only lies to hear.
Fuck them all.
-
188 comments