Current Events > You know who is worse than right/left-wingers? Centrists who try to toe the line

(+) Yeah! (+)

Attempting to please both sides in a debate is intellectually lazy and unhelpful. Just because complicated issues are not black and white does not mean the "correct" stance is to be willy-nilly about your position.

In other words, pick a side you coward.

Both sides-ing right wing bullshit is bad, but it isn't worse than right wing bullshit.

Geiki_Ganger posted...

Attempting to please both sides in a debate is intellectually lazy and unhelpful. Just because complicated issues are not black and white does not mean the "correct" stance is to be willy-nilly about your position.

In other words, pick a side you coward.

Problem with the "pick a side" attitude is that you're then expected to 100% support that side to the death.

And, for me at least, I just can't do that. Because once you label yourself as "Left" then you're expected to support every viewpoint seen as "left". And some extreme left thinking is a little too extreme for some. Shit like "you need to get your newborn's consent before you can change their diaper or give them a bath, or else you are violating their sexual privacy".

So it's easier to just say "tell me the topic, and I'll tell you my stance on it" as opposed to saying "I'm a leftists" and have to jump into that pool with no life raft on.

getting mad about "centrists" is usually just a deflection from people who cant accept that real life isnt usually black & white

IB a hot take like "centrists would argue for half a genocide as a compromose"

g980 posted...

getting mad about "centrists" is usually just a deflection from people who cant accept that real life isnt usually black & white

It's also tends to come from people that aren't as "Left" as they think they are.

Geiki_Ganger posted...

In other words, pick a side you coward.

But if I want to play that harry potter game suddenly im alt right

I dont know a single person who always takes a neutral opinion. every centrist Ive met supports some stuff the left does, supports some stuff the right does, and chooses their position independently of which side it comes from.

I dont think people described in OP exist in any sort of large number.

Have never met a centrist who actually sits on the fence. They're always just right wing but too cowardly to admit it.

refmon posted...

But if I want to play that harry potter game suddenly im alt right

Exactly.

I consider myself "left of center", but I also enjoy Mel Brooks movies, and Mel Brooks once casted "alt right" comedian Dave Chapelle in his Robin Hood spoof.

Therefore, I am labeled as alt-right.

bigblu89 posted...

Shit like "you need to get your newborn's consent before you can change their diaper or give them a bath, or else you are violating their sexual privacy".

Citation for this being a thing needed

bigblu89 posted...

Problem with the "pick a side" attitude is that you're then expected to 100% support that side to the death.

And, for me at least, I just can't do that. Because once you label yourself as "Left" then you're expected to support every viewpoint seen as "left". And some extreme left thinking is a little too extreme for some. Shit like "you need to get your newborn's consent before you can change their diaper or give them a bath, or else you are violating their sexual privacy".

So it's easier to just say "tell me the topic, and I'll tell you my stance on it" as opposed to saying "I'm a leftists" and have to jump into that pool with no life raft on.

I have never seen this in practice. The left criticize their own and don't fall in line with leftist positions all the time.

Ironically, you're exhibiting another "centrist" stance of aiming your attacks towards the left while ignoring the right.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Citation for this being a thing needed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQvBtH1DurU

A_Good_Boy posted...

I have never seen this in practice. The left criticize their own and don't fall in line with leftist positions all the time.

Ironically, you're exhibiting another "centrist" stance of aiming your attacks towards the left while ignoring the right.

It was just an example.

It's the same as being "Fiscally conservative, but Socially liberal". People that hate the poor, but are ok with the LGBTQ+ community.

It was just easier to use the left as an example, because it's the "side" I personally get more pushback from.

Example. I'm for stricter gun laws that punish irresponsible owners, but I'm not "ban all guns". But I'll get pushback from the "ban all guns" stance for not being 100% in favor of universal public ban on guns.

or maybe that's actually a side? Fuck off with your "pick a side" bs. Politics its as any other thing that you dont need to label. What if for some people neither of 2 constructed extremes is what the agree on.

bigblu89 posted...

It was just an example.

It's the same as being "Fiscally conservative, but Socially liberal". People that hate the poor, but are ok with the LGBTQ+ community.

what if one is, just as an example, libreal in LGBT issues, but conservative in immigration issues?

ROBANN_88 posted...

what if one is, just as an example, liberal in LGBT issues, but conservative in immigration issues?

I feel that same. Such as the stance that you feel that anyone that want to come to the US should have ever opportunity to do so, but they should do it legally, but it also shouldn't take 10 years and several thousands of dollars to become a US Citizen.

I have very little respect for anyone that immediately jumps onto a side in an argument without educating themself on that matter. Being neutral until reviewing the facts isnt being a fence sitter, its being intelligent.

I've noticed more often than not, the "I don't really get into politics too much" people usually end up getting into far right-wing stances down the line. They always seem to close themselves off from various sociological issues or current events, and then get too reactionary when some issue like that comes up. Gamergate is a good example.

bigblu89 posted...

I feel that same. Such as the stance that you feel that anyone that want to come to the US should have ever opportunity to do so, but they should do it legally, but it also shouldn't take 10 years and several thousands of dollars to become a US Citizen.

That would make you hard leftist/centrist. Overwhelmingly all people here are illegal due to expired work visas so the act of making it easier to get a US citizenship would inherently remove most illegal residents. It is only conservative who focus on the mythical unicorn of a person hopping the border.

Just as bad Republicans imo and those centrists dont really toe the line they question every little Democrats do but give the other side a free pass

Hayame_Zero posted...

I've noticed more often than not, the "I don't really get into politics too much" people usually end up getting into far right-wing stances down the line. They always seem to close themselves off from various sociological issues or current events, and then get too reactionary when some issue like that comes up. Gamergate is a good example.

It's a result of many things. Lack of education is one side of it, but there's also the obvious fact that most people who aren't involved in politics are generally fine with the way things are, and feel supported by the social system they live in, and when people who aren't fine with it speak out, or if the system is merely scrutinized or criticized, they feel directly threatened, and respond with empty cynicism and irony, in an attempt of dismissal and denial. Fascism always starts from there - it's just a matter of a hop, a skip and a jump.

That, or people who say they aren't actually interested in politics are lying. GamerGate, as you said, is a perfect example of both of these things.

ellis123 posted...

That would make you hard leftist/centrist. Overwhelmingly all people here are illegal due to expired work visas so the act of making it easier to get a US citizenship would inherently remove most illegal residents. It is only conservative who focus on the mythical unicorn of a person hopping the border.

illegal border crossers are not unicorns, they make up about 1/3 of deportations.

Leftists who say "at least I'm not the right" to defend their shitty behavior are annoying people

Norman_Smiley posted...

illegal border crossers are not unicorns, they make up about 1/3 of deportations.

There are currently an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the US. In 2022 there was a total of 72 thousand people deported. This means that even if 100% of all deported people were illegal border crossers that would amount to a .6% rate of an illegal immigrant being so because of a border crossing, and if we us your 1/3rd deportation metric then it is actually just .2% in realty.

So yeah, "unicorn" is an apt term. It's an event that is extraordinarily unlikely to the point that you look dumb trying to "fix" it compared to the literal 99% of the actual problem. Trying to view illegal immigrants in any way other than "expired work visas" is the mark of someone desperate deepthroat easily debunked propaganda.

Yeah fuck critical thinking

voldothegr8 posted...

Yeah fuck critical thinking

Centrists who "toe" the line aren't thinking critically.

stage4saiyan posted...

I have very little respect for anyone that immediately jumps onto a side in an argument without educating themself on that matter. Being neutral until reviewing the facts isnt being a fence sitter, its being intelligent.

Most political disagreements aren't rooted in factual disagreements.

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

Centrists who "toe" the line aren't thinking critically.

Neither are those who pick a color and toe that line

ellis123 posted...

There are currently an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the US. In 2022 there was a total of 72 thousand people deported. This means that even if 100% of all deported people were illegal border crossers that would amount to a .6% rate of an illegal immigrant being so because of a border crossing, and if we us your 1/3rd deportation metric then it is actually just .2% in realty.

So yeah, "unicorn" is an apt term. It's an event that is extraordinarily unlikely to the point that you look dumb trying to "fix" it compared to the literal 99% of the actual problem. Trying to view illegal immigrants in any way other than "expired work visas" is the mark of someone desperate deepthroat easily debunked propaganda.

This has zero to do with the stance that there wouldnt be as many illegal immigrants if it was easier/cheaper to become a citizen. Which is what I originally said.

Whether someone came here on a visa that has since expired or illegally crossed the border.

My best friend came here from Guatemala when he was 12. His mother brought him here illegally back in the early nineties when she was here on a work visa. It took him literally 27 years and THOUSANDS of dollars to become a U.S. citizen.

The stance of Please come here, do it the correct way, but lets make it cheaper and easier is, in theory, a both sides stance. But (Im my opinion) is also the correct stance.

just argue your point and be done with it ffs

no need to get entangled in semantics

ellis123 posted...

There are currently an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the US. In 2022 there was a total of 72 thousand people deported. This means that even if 100% of all deported people were illegal border crossers that would amount to a .6% rate of an illegal immigrant being so because of a border crossing, and if we us your 1/3rd deportation metric then it is actually just .2% in realty.

WTF are you talking about? You realize only a tiny portion of people get deported each year, right? Like if you successfully sneak in, and avoid the police, pretty low odds of getting caught once in the US. So dividing total illegals by deportations is a nonsense number to get the actual % of people here through illegal crossings.

Part of the reason there has been a trend in fewer deportations is because the US has gotten a lot better at catching people at the border and turning them back rather than going through the deportation process.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/01/13/monthly-encounters-with-migrants-at-u-s-mexico-border-remain-near-record-highs/

Border Patrol is stopping over 150k illegal crossings every month since 2021 with as many as 224k in November 2022.

I can't find any newer data, but in 2017:
https://www.npr.org/2017/03/07/518201210/how-did-we-get-to-11-million-unauthorized-immigrants

An estimated 40 percent of unauthorized immigrants did not sneak into the country; they entered legally and overstayed their visas.

So according to NPR, as of 2017 of the 11.x million illegal immigrants residing in the US, 60% entered the country illegally and 40% entered legally and overstayed. The numbers have probably shifted a bit since then.

man people on this board have really dumb and incoherent political ideas

Norman_Smiley posted...

WTF are you talking about? You realize only a tiny portion of people get deported each year, right? Like if you successfully sneak in, and avoid the police, pretty low odds of getting caught once in the US. So dividing total illegals by deportations is a nonsense number to get the actual % of people here through illegal crossings.

Part of the reason there has been a trend in fewer deportations is because the US has gotten a lot better at catching people at the border and turning them back rather than going through the deportation process.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/01/13/monthly-encounters-with-migrants-at-u-s-mexico-border-remain-near-record-highs/

Border Patrol is stopping over 150k illegal crossings every month since 2021 with as many as 224k in November 2022.

I can't find any newer data, but in 2017:
https://www.npr.org/2017/03/07/518201210/how-did-we-get-to-11-million-unauthorized-immigrants

So according to NPR, as of 2017 of the 11.x million illegal immigrants residing in the US, 60% entered the country illegally and 40% entered legally and overstayed. The numbers have probably shifted a bit since then.

What am I talking about? I'm pointing out that the metric you do is utterly bunk. There is some logic at the point of pointing out that deportations are utterly useless as a metric, but then you just fall back into the whole "the total number of illegal immigrants by %" is what matters, which is what I talked about in the first place. Similarly pointing out that we've gotten a large number of people turned away at the border doesn't mean that we suddenly have more illegal immigrants through border hopping: it means that we have the same amount, but we have more people who failed to get into the country illegally. No matter how people people fail to be an illegal immigrant the number of people who count as such will not rise.

And that 40% number wasn't from NPR, but from a study from the Center of Migration Studies: a think tank based in New York. As they have made an updated (well, it was in 2019) version of the report you should stick with that: https://cmsny.org/publications/essay-2017-undocumented-and-overstays/

Unsurprisingly, though, when you look at the actual report the title says it all.

what you're describing sounds more like right-leaning individuals under the guise of being a "centrist"

although it's understandable given how many online personalities refer to themselves as "centrists" when all they are is right-wingers that don't want to be labeled as such

PMarth2002 posted...

Both sides-ing right wing bullshit is bad, but it isn't worse than right wing bullshit.

What that guy said

BoTh SiDeS

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Also a fair point. Much of our media (and media consumers) are good at framing and perceiving debates in terms of tone without engaging with substance. Anger on the left gets painted as the same as anger on the right, and the actual facts of what's being yelled about don't get through.

Antifar posted...

Also a fair point. Much of our media (and media consumers) are good at framing and perceiving debates in terms of tone without engaging with substance. Anger on the left gets painted as the same as anger on the right, and the actual facts of what's being yelled about don't get through.

I feel like this has to be related somehow to the conflation of having a couple vague positions on social issues that aren't completely horrid (e.g. "I support gay rights") with actual meaningfully progressive or left-wing politics

Being right is bad.
Being center is bad.
Being right-wing is very bad.

Spiritlittle posted...

Being right is bad.
Being center is bad.
Being right-wing is very bad.

But the question is, how far "left" does one have to be in order to be "ok".

Like, if you're in support of Government assistance for anyone that needs it, but want to punish those that abuse that system, I've been told you're still to "center' to be one of the "good guys".

bigblu89 posted...

But the question is, how far "left" does one have to be in order to be "ok".

Like, if you're in support of Government assistance for anyone that needs it, but want to punish those that abuse that system, I've been told you're still to "center' to be one of the "good guys".

that's because people "abus[ing] that system" is not a statistically significant problem that actually merits addressing, while other things are.

averagejoel posted...

that's because people "abus[ing] that system" is not a statistically significant problem that actually merits addressing, while other things are.

While I agree that it's probably a relatively insignificant number when compared to other issues in the country/world, "People shouldn't abuse the government assistance programs" shouldn't necessarily be considered a right-wing talking point, and should be just considered something that should be fixed.

Kinda like my earlier statement that being for an overhaul of the US Firearms laws that fall short of "ban all guns" is considered "right wing" to some on the far left.

Geiki_Ganger posted...

In other words, pick a side you coward.

I'll pick a side when both sides stop being cringe-y af.

Is the stigma against centralism something thats only found with online (aka left-leaning) sites? I never hear this stuff with people that arent terminally onli err, I mean, frequently visiting social media sites.

bigblu89 posted...

While I agree that it's probably a relatively insignificant number when compared to other issues in the country/world, "People shouldn't abuse the government assistance programs" shouldn't necessarily be considered a right-wing talking point, and should be just considered something that should be fixed.

it is objectively a right-wing talking point though. it doesn't need fixing because it isn't a problem. they made it up

averagejoel posted...

it is objectively a right-wing talking point though. it doesn't need fixing because it isn't a problem

Define "problem".

The fact that it happens at all makes it a problem.

I'm talking about things like disability fraud. You may think it's not a problem, but it's literally a $300 Billion issue in the US.