- cross-posted to:
- libjerk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- libjerk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
Americans are so far to the right that minimum wage, affordable housing, free schools and healthcare is considered “far left”. These are given and common sense in the rest of the world 🤣
In developed countries*
I’m not sure if the USA qualifies for that status
Even in developing countries, governments do their best to provide free services for those in dire poverty, especially those considered “poorest of the poor”.
The poorest of the poor cost society money but can never invest back into it. Bringing them to a level where they can pay taxes to invest in the services they are provided while also getting a better quality of life is such a basic concept that it’s just stupid that a modern society would oppose it!
The purpose of having extremely poor people is to act as a warning to everyone else; “Stay in line or you’ll end up like them!”
Good thing russia gained 50 oblasts, those magatards are getting their social programs once putin openly takes over us government.
Welfare policies are common even in developing countries. They simply don’t have the kind of capital accumulated by European welfare states because they don’t outsource their industrial manufacturing to poorer countries. Hence, the implementation is difficult and bureaucrats are often corrupt. Reagan won an election calling universal healthcare ‘communism’ and actually opposing something so obviously in favour of people – this would not have happened in most poor countries. At least in mine, people consistently vote in favour of better healthcare, public transport and free food regardless of ideology. Fear mongering about ‘commmunism’ has been tried in urban areas, where people have the luxury to care about something like that, and it backfired spectacularly. The phenomenon of voting against one’s self interests because gommunism and freedom seems to be a uniquely American thing.
Did you know theres even a subminimum wage in America? 2.13$ an hour.
The more… favorable right wing points I’ve heard are more along the lines of “I’ve busted my ass for what little I have! How dare you ask me to pay to subsidize the lives of people who aren’t trying to work?”
Completly ignoring the fact that better welfare programs should help them to not have to work so damn hard for so little in the first place. Or the fact that the welfare cliff and other various systemic problems make it that much harder to get out of that pit no matter how hard you’re trying.
It’s not even quite “fuck you, I got mine” because so many of them barely “got theirs” as is, which makes them even more protective. The ones that do have, have latched on to this idea of the entirely self made man, which ignores all the public welfare systems they used on their journey. Like schools, or roads. You can hardly exist in modern America without using multiple tax funded public works/welfare things every day.
Then you add in the hard spun rhetoric that taxes they already don’t want being taken from them might be paying for things they personally disagree with and things get extra firey.
Meanwhile the richest people on earth have spent more money than is comprehendable on convincing people that going after rich peoples’ money will just make everything more expensive for the normal folk.
But that would imply that they were currently leaving potential profits on the table. They’re already charging absolutely as much as they can, and constantly trying to shift it higher. I’m sure they’d still fuck us on the way down, but we’re never going to fix things unless we find some way to adequately tax the rich.
The “barely got mine and defending it” thing really sticks in other ways too.
When I wanted aid for school “sorry, we ran out. Should have gotten here earlier.”
When I wanted to get food stamps “sorry, you don’t meet the qualifications on a technicality.”
When I finally got Medicaid but couldn’t use it “not enough spots for you to be seen, sorry.”
Many times the administrators that gave me this news implied it was because too many people asked for it. Being young and stupid (and let’s face it, indoctrinated), it made me put the blame on the other people asking for aid. If there were less people that asked for aid, I wouldn’t be starving and sick. I thought that I was more worthy of the aid because some people are cheating the system and I deeply resented them.
Fortunately I grew the hell up and pulled my head out of my ass. It’s all a distraction we get fed from the news that other needy people are the reason why we suffer. It’s so hard to fathom how much the rich actually waste when all we see is our fellow working class folk.
To add a voice to the choir, I was raised like this too. We went the other direction of feeling guilty for needing aid though.
Like they weren’t completely wrong, you really should be able to raise a family off a single full time job, the problem is that said jobs don’t pay enough for that. But the broken system is good at defending itself, and politicians are quick to point out all the ways it does work, so you wind up with a ‘well, it works for them, guess I just have to try harder’ mindset. Like, I spent hours each week as a teenager helping mom do the extreme couponing and do stuff like take a cart through another line to get around limits on sale items.
I’ve been shit at math for my whole life, so maybe I’m just hoping I’m not alone in this, but I really think a lot of people are number illiterate. I’ve spent so much time learning to be grateful for my shoe-string budget, I have a hard enough time envisioning double my salary, and that’d just make me middle class. I literally don’t have a way of conceptualizing what 200x my salary would be like.
Getting everyone’s basic needs met is more of a centre-left ideology.
Many centre-right parties believe in things like public healthcare, because it has a net-benefit to the economy.Centrists don’t sit in the middle of every issue or make an exact 50/50 compromise on everything. That’s a really poor strawman argument from someone who clearly doesn’t understand global politics.
I guess you’re confused with people in the U.S who think having views somewhere in-between those of democrats and republicans makes you a centrist.
That U.S-specific ‘centrism’ is really just right wing politics.Centrists don’t sit in the middle of every issue or make an exact 50/50 compromise on everything.
I seriously don’t understand how fucking difficult this is to understand. It’s why I largely ignore political discussions on Reddit/Lemmy/all social media.
I don’t look at one person saying “Murdering 5 year olds is bad”, look at another person saying “Murdering 5 year olds is good!” and try to find a way where both are right.
I don’t look at one person saying “Murdering 5 year olds is bad”, look at another person saying “Murdering 5 year olds is good!” and try to find a way where both are right.
This is literally what centrists all over the world (well, the parts that show up in English-language news anyway) think about Palestine, though.
And you missed the entire point. Centrism isn’t about trying to find a perfect middle ground to every individual subject.
Of course there will be centrists that support Israel carpet bombing everything. There are other centrists that don’t support them. There are some that will support them with conditions. I know someone who is broadly centrist who thinks Israel should be dissolved entirely.
It’s not a fucking hivemind.
It’s not a hive mind, but centrist parties almost invariably have pro-Israel/“it’s complicated” positions. There will always be individual variation, but the pattern is clear.
Maybe we should stop with left, right and centrist all together.
It’s a stupid way of defining politics. If you ask a random person what being left means it can vary from anything between hugging a tree or wanting good health care.
By calling yourself “green” or “social” you are immediately putting a label on yourself and a lot of people won’t vote for you because they’re too dumb or lazy to actually read into what a party is about. I saw an article here on lemmy that pointed out some moron that voted for Trump in hopes he would save his farm, if he would have read into politics he would have known that Trump was the worst possible choice but here we are…
I’m from Europe and I see the same shit happening here. Call yourself green or left and people will scoff at you.
If there is anything the current “left” parties absolutely suck at its marketing. Call yourself the freedom party or whatever but stop using idiotic terminology that people can’t relate to. Almosr no one will vote for the “environment party”.
I hate the extremist conservative parties here but i have to give them credit for being able to market their party in such a way that people are literally voting on them AGAINST their own best interests.
The biggest party in the Netherlands is called the freedom party, their mainly anti-immigrant and against the freedom of religion and the freedom of education. Totally agree they’re great at marketing (though it’s more about being loud and talking about social problems than it is about having ideas of how to solve them). They’re considered to be far-right populist, their leader (Geert Wilders) is aligned with Marine Le Pen and Georgia Meloni. The left has lost their working class-base traditional base to them because of them being more relatable (and less high-brow) than the labour party, the socialists and the greens.
The word you’re looking for is pluralism.
You are right, that centrists don’t actually sit as a 50/50 middle. But that means that “centrists” always actually side with fascists and the far right when forced to take a position. If you aren’t fully willing to confront capitalism, it means that you will side with fascism before even mild socialism.
Am I understanding you right that you are saying that all centrists will side with fascism over socialism? Because I have some news for you in that case.
That’s your opinion, not a fact.
And the issue with that is you’re only seeing it as two sides and a fence-sitter.
Centrists form their own views and positions, independent of the parties on either side.There’s no forcing them to take a position, they already have one.
And when they have to vote for/against legislation changes, they’ll side with whichever option aligns most closely with their views.US pseudo-centrism is right wing though, which might be what you’re confusing real centrism with.
Fascism is not the same as capitalism. For capitalism to work properly, it is required that market power is minimized and that companies cannot influence politics. The fact that they have been able to do so is not capitalism.
Milton Friedman – In Capitalism and Freedom (1962), he argues that government intervention should be minimal and that businesses should focus on profit rather than lobbying for special advantages. While he doesn’t explicitly state that capitalism requires private companies to stay out of politics, he warns against corporate influence leading to cronyism.
Adam Smith – In The Wealth of Nations (1776), he warns against “the merchants and manufacturers” using their influence to gain monopolies and special privileges, which distort free competition. He emphasizes that capitalism works best when businesses do not manipulate laws in their favor.
James Buchanan (Public Choice Theory) – Buchanan and other public choice theorists (like Gordon Tullock) argue that when businesses influence politics, they engage in rent-seeking, which distorts market efficiency. They emphasize that government should limit corporate lobbying to prevent economic inefficiencies.
Luigi Zingales – A more recent economist, Zingales argues in A Capitalism for the People (2012) that corporate political influence undermines free markets and leads to a system of “crony capitalism,” where economic power translates into political power.
Centrists don’t sit in the middle of every issue or make an exact 50/50 compromise on everything.
In practice, they just capitulate every time.
far left and center left are relative to your own position anyway
They are relative to global politics which most Americans know nothing about, it seems.
Republicans have always been pretty hard right and as of the Trump administrations they are pretty much extreme right. Democrats seem to randomly oscillate between centre right and right.
Pro-Oligarchy vs Fascists, IMHO.
Centrism doesn’t mean that you can’t choose between democrats and republicans, it means that ideologically, you believe in a balance between capitalist ideas and socialist ideas. For example, you can believe in the Hayekian idea that the many interactions between individuals in the market is better at creating prosperity than a centralized government that distributes all goods and services. But you can also believe that the market can’t do everything on its own due to market failures like monopoly power, externalities, assymmetric information. There exists a compromise between the two that is negotiated through politics. A core necessity for this to happen is that democracy is maintained. Democracy is not maintained when elections are bought by companies.
What is happening in the US now is that politics has been taken over by the private market. No economist would have agreed with this (unless they were paid to). It is against everything that we know. This is not a left vs right stance. It’s a democracy vs autocracy stance. Autocracy can happen from both the right and left, and it doesn’t matter who.
The one thing I dislike about the idea of centrism is the idea that you can’t decide on everything because you remain agnostic about every issue. I think a much better idea to advocate for is pluralism: the idea that your opinion on specific issues is not dependent on your politcal stance. Every issue is unique and doesn’t automatically identify you with left or right. You can have different opinions on different issues.
It’s funny because from my European perspective there’s no (visible) left in the USA. Democrats are centrist. Sanders could be social democrat. Otherwise I fully agree with you.
If americans could read, they would be very upset.
Lately I’ve caught myself thinking differently. The left is progressive because they want to progress civil rights. The centerists are conservative because they just don’t want things to change. The right is regressive because they want to turn back the clock. Honestly I think we need to stop calling people on the right conservative and give them the new label regressives.
Conservatives want to go back to the days when mediocre white men were greatly rewarded just for being white.
As a mediocre white guy, I can confidently say that is today. Any white guy who is like “I never got any special treatment for being white” has gone though life and society with their eyes closed.
There’s still systematic racism with America. That being said, everyone’s quality of life other than the uber rich has gone down noticeably. That’s part of the reason populist lies from Trump work so well.
Ugh, market socialism exists.
Not all socialism has planned economies. That’s communism. A specific subset of socialism.
Capitalism doesn’t have a monopoly on market economies. badumtssh
agnostic are agnostic because there is no foolproof evidence basis.
with politics you can clearly see how some stances have been done and their effects. and other instances you also have a basis even in the most unclear case
just had an issue with the negative connotation implied here talking about agnosistics :D
That’s not even far on the left, that’s just some middle of the ground left. Real far left would be burning government buildings while having a heated discussion about the order of the colors for the flag to be raised over the rubble.
Thank you, I know lemmy is left leaning and so am I but let’s not lose our touch with reality here. People can downvote as much as they want but I’d say you’re objectively right. Or does anyone want to place some counter argument instead of downvoting? Because I can’t think of any
You’re right except that my (EU) view of Lemmy is that it’s not really left leaning.
The large amout of anti-Trump/Musk post doesn’t make it so.
A large part of it is US dems/libs making those posts. They are center-right at best.
And I should know since I point that out to them and see the reaction.
Massive downvotes and an avalanche of vicious comments.
To some degree, I agree, including the tendency for infighting among leftists. It’s why I’ve never liked this meme or its variations much. On the other hand, I’ve recently seen only one side actually mobilize to attack government buildings and harm people inside, and it wasn’t the left.
Anecdotally, this week at work, I heard a self-identified rightist argue for banning gay marriage. Others sitting around their table agreed. I’ve also had the privilege of hearing we should get rid of social programs, and too many jokes about killing people they don’t like. Last time I talked to a tankie and they defended oppressive policies saying the ends justify the means, folks around us made fun of them and moved on.
I think one of these groups might not be a real issue. At the very minimum, they’re definitely not as dangerous as the other one, right now. So, is the meme a bit silly? Sure. Does that matter? I don’t feel like it does.
Please don’t reply re: proper tankie political classification. It’s beside the point, I’m using them because it seems to be what most imagine when they think “far left.”
My point, simple and plainly put is that wishing for an egalitarian society (or whatever it is called) isn’t an extremist believe (as in far-x) and most people would usually agree with it.
I just think it is just how much mass media controls most people’s perception, and how is that the key factor antagonizing with finding common ground.
deleted by creator
Oh c’mon, I consider myself to be on the left but this is a strawman and you know it
Edit: if you want this to be more accurate then add this at the end of far left section: “at all cost. And I mean ALL cost.”. And reminder, we’re talking about FAR left here
Yeah someone needs to study the death toll of far left policies.
I’m not sure that’s fair. The “death toll of communism” has more to do with authoritarianism and political maneuvering than economic policy. Also, the people quickest to point out this fact don’t seem to be using the same measuring stick to tally up the equivalent “death toll of capitalism.”
It’s just propaganda that doesn’t hold up to serious scrutiny. All governments - including ‘centrist’ ones - have an awful lot of blood on their hands. Enough blood that I wouldn’t say there’s a significant difference due to economic policy alone.
Authorianism is pretty much how I see the far-left.
Communism, I’m still unsure about.
I’m fine with criticizing the failings of capitalism.
What no theory does to an mf
Uh… The farthest left ideology out there is anarchism, which is long story short the abolishment of the top-down state. That is literally the opposite of authoritarian.
Political theory is not a two dimensional line.
Those of us who recognize that organization is the most powerful force in human history recognize anarchism for the controlled opposition it is.
Capitalists love anarchists. What isn’t to love about an ideology that wants to overthrow the established structure but ideologically refuses to use any strategies that have historically actually, you know, have worked?
P.S. for the intellectually honest anarchist, what was the outcome of the Paris commune, or Spain?
More people die every year due to the lack of food, medicine and clean water than whatever made up number you can come up with for “far left” policies.
Indeed, studying it is the best way to learn that the huge numbers that get thrown around in pop-history are completely made up cold war propaganda.
A more real scenario.
European country bans far right candidate with conections with Russia trying to poison their democracy.
Le centrists: What about muh freedoms!?.
US Government forces Universities campuses to remove degrees of students for protesting (by threatening cutting funds) and threatens foreign students with deportation if they protest.
Edit: Just read the news that an University caved to Trump’s demands to be able to get funds. Among the demands is for police to be able to arrest students.
Le centrists: Well they were asking for it…
Centrists in the EU don’t think like that at all. Centrists can hold strong opinions, their position isn’t just do not pick sides and play devil’s advocate at all times. As a centrist, both scenarios boil my piss.
You’ve just described two extreme situations, that any centrist would instantly notice are extreme.
Define centrism.
Centralists define centralism as whatever their personal particular political views are at this exact moment in time. They also like to try and claim that anybody who disagrees with them is either ultra right wing or ultra left-wing. Rather than just somebody who doesn’t think that everyone’s opinions are equal.
Everyone will have a slightly different understanding and perception of centrism. That goes for all words and ideas. Conversation is so vital because it helps us iron out the differences. Most people want the same thing at the end of the day; peace, prosperity, and love. All of the misunderstandings we have get in the way of that.
in america: whatever you want the strawman to be this week, usually an enemy of the left or right whenever conveinent for the echo chamber you find yourself in…
Rest of the world: someone who likes some ideas from camp a and some ideas from camp b, dislikes some ideas from camp a and some ideas on camp b and is neutral on issues from camp a and from camp b. Eg, free education, citizen pay, more renewable energy good but unchecked, uncontrollable immigration bad.
Eg, free education, citizen pay, more renewable energy good but unchecked, uncontrollable immigration bad.
That just sounds like a center-leftist with one extra step, and that’s the problem with centrism: The right has little to no good ideas, so someone who thinks critically about their positions will strongly lean left, and someone who doesn’t will strongly lean right. “Centrists” are therefore people who simply don’t care about politics and not subscribers to a coherent political ideology.
Really because I’m not at all on board with allowing self-serving oligarch to play act as being a legitimate political positions.
Yeah neither are centrists, even the US definition of Centrists would nope that
That’s my point though. I’m not a centralist and I never claimed to be one.
I’m definitely not in favor of centralism I don’t think it works, I think it allows for dangerous situations like the one I just described where people who absolutely need to be stopped are not stopped because “what about their freedom”. But I am not some left-wing extremist simply because I don’t think Nazi should be allowed to go around being Nazis. If you think that’s radical then I think your political dial is somewhat misconfigured.
The thing is the US has freedom of expression laws, most of the world doesn’t because it turns out that unconstrained freedoms like that aren’t really a very good idea. If it weren’t for the Constitution, which Americans seem to be obsessed with, I’m sure the US wouldn’t have unrestricted freedom of expression either.
The fuck are you on about? I’m a centrist and if Iwas in the US I’d be out protesting right now. Where are people getting these backwards ass views on what centrists represent?
European countries haven’t banned the far right, the AFD, Sweden Democrats, Front Nationale, Orban, etc. are not banned and they are the results of their own political failings. Not that Putin magically conjured them forth with a wave of the hand. Playing into the meme… Germans do anti-semitism and fascism Germanly… “what are we, a bunch of Russians!”
The most popular romanian fascist candidate (who allegedly was supported by Russia) has been banned
But only after it no longer was ‘allegedly’ if I understand correctly.
The media went real quiet when it turned out not to be Russia.
Looks like it worked to fool some gullible people and simply leave them with the wrong culprit, but the right one to fit the narrative.
https://www.politico.eu/article/investigation-ties-romanian-liberals-tiktok-campaign-pro-russia-candidate-calin-georgescu/You are wrong, the article you mention states “According to the snoop.ro report, the Romanian tax agency found that the Liberals had paid for a social media campaign on TikTok through influencers and by promoting a hashtag which ended up being hijacked to benefit Georgescu instead.” It has been proven that his TikTok campaign wasn’t organic while he declared not paying for it. The fact that the liberals where the first to use a certain hashtag doesn’t mean they were involved in his campaign. He is still under investigation. Do you have any sources backing up your claim it wasn’t Russia? Politico doesn’t mention it. For others interested in reading more, here’s an explainer by Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/why-is-calin-georgescus-romanian-presidential-bid-being-blocked-2025-03-10/
Jeez you people. Are you having trouble reading or are you so rabid in your Russophobia that you can’t handle the truth?
You’re blatantly cherrypicking and selectively choosing a minor detail, that hashtag as if that was the only thing.
The article gives details about them hiring Kensington Communication, and no less than 130 media influences were involved.
Really not wasting time on people who act on this level.Blatantly cherry picking lol, your claims are baseless. Get a life.
Even though it’s been proven it was their own liberals did it
That real scenario is BS.
European country bans far right candidate bcs LIBERAL party is trying to poison their democracy by paying for that social media campaign.
Monolith European regime press blame Russia as usual.
When the facts came out they suddenly were real quiet and didn’t feel that was newsworthy.
Better to let people believe the lie bcs that fits their narrative, and it worked apparently.Only people arguing that far rightr parties are not part of russian warfare and destruction of europe are on russias payroll.
LOL
Americans with their white or black bullshit
Party A… We want to kill 1.000.000 people
Party B … We want to kill 0 people.
Centrist… Lets just kill 500.000 people.
Sometimes there IS no centrist position
I used to say that because I though “the left” was Putin and Xi Jinping
Lol, how did you get the idea Putin was a leftist?
No idea. It was when I was 14 or something
Love to see the compromise for that one.
“What if we let them kill some of that social group so everyone gets what they want?”
Sure, the 1% it is.
We’re going french style.
😎
Some kind of national socialism
Lol that’s not the far left’s position get the fuck out of here. The first paragraph is describing center/center-left.
Far left in America just means tax dollars going towards actually helping the people.
Sadly in America meeting everyones basic needs is socialist and too close to Communism for our poor brain washed masses. Sadly the country culture is summarized in “fuck you i got mine” mentality and not community based.
What gets me is that socialism and communism are totally different things. They’re different means to a similar goal of an end.
Jesus Christ.
Yeah sure, and what is far lefts position then?
Reduce or eliminate private ownership of capital.
Centralists… they are Libertarian, which means they don’t care what anyone else does, even if they are dictatorial or authoritarian, as long as the libertarian is left alone and are not affected. They wouldn’t mind watching the world burn or even care so long as their part of the world was not on fire.They are individualists, they care about others, all they care about is themselves. They don’t want to see the world as a community of fellow equal humans, they see others are either servants to serve them, people they can exploit or individuals they can take advantage of.
in my book far left are hexbears hence centrism is something like social democrats a la usa bernie
gotta hate politics and its muddy definitions but I unironically like to call myself centrist. Then I am surprised how controversial it is on the interwebs because apparently everyone has different definitions. They routinely make them up on the fly 🪰
For me centrism is a fine art 🎨 of staying far away from the madness of extremism 🤪. I love centrism. I huff centrism. I breathe centrism.
I fuck with centrism.It is deeply based in the sense of superiority and moral high ground. As all politics but this is a fundamental part of centrism. Centrism is saying “You all suck” I am better than you and enables feeling of superiority over the biggest swath of
Redditorsinternet activists 🤓 which is a lovely perk. It is a true essential trick of the ultimate hedonist. If politics were about sex, centrist would be someone jerking it off to the mirror.Ah yes, despicable Hexbears, and their, checks notes, support of trans and anti-Imperialist struggles. I love being a centrist and hating such tankie-ism.
Nice cherry picking chef. Might try career in confectioning 💩
Yeah the far leftists kinda have the problem of full com is never going to work in the states at least not for a while. We’re going to have to deal with capitalism in its current form, and that means changing how housing is done and how politics works. Eat the rich can work with centrism. Theyll say oh centrist that means you ally with the fascists! No… there are people on the right who arent that extreme that can come back left
I think you might’ve accidentally added sarcasm tags to your admission.
sarcasm tags are for the weak willed, we don’t do such things even in the autism central online. What happens, happens
I have unironically read my comment 10 times already just to savor how perfectly and tastefully it is composed. Truly a masterpiece of some kind.
Poe’s law has bested me. I’m just gonna hope it’s all a joke and leave, now.
You are free to leave.
Far centrist.
Meeting everyone’s basic needs isn’t even far left. This is how far the Overton window has shifted to the right. Meeting everyone’s basic needs is left-of-centre. Far left would be state owned and controlled everything, redistribution of wealth via any means necessary, all public services fully state funded and free for all at the point of use.
Noam Chomsky is Far-Left, and he advocated for a stateless society. But yeah the idea of liberty has definitely changed in
AmericaThe U.S.
