1931
both pretty extreme (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 week ago by not_IO to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Emmie@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

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 ~~Redditors~~ internet 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mke@programming.dev 5 points 1 week ago

I think you might've accidentally added sarcasm tags to your admission.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ApexHunter@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Far left: everyone must conform to my world view

Far right: everyone must conform to my world view

Centrist: just leave me alone

[-] not_IO 6 points 1 week ago

"we should stop attesting, torturing and killing minorities"

centrist: leave me alone

[-] not_IO 5 points 1 week ago

on a more serious note, you are speaking about performance rather then content, everybody could talk like that even centrist.

Taking the legitimacy off things by calling them annoying is not fair and doesnt proof anything

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 week ago

~~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.

[-] Staden_@pawb.social 11 points 1 week ago

I used to say that because I though "the left" was Putin and Xi Jinping

[-] menemen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Lol, how did you get the idea Putin was a leftist?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] lath@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I thought tankies were the far left? Or are they.. further left than that?

[-] SuperNovaStar 8 points 1 week ago

If we're using the original definition of left and right, they'd technically be on the right.

The original meaning was whether or not you supported the monarchy. I'd say that a dictatorship is close enough that it applies.

Of course, politics isn't one dimensional. Even the "political compass" isn't really enough, here, there's probably an axis of the political graph for each major axiom of governance.

Honestly the best descriptor for tankies is just "authoritarian communists." That tells you where they stand better than any attempt at a spectrum or graph.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] seeigel@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago

The underlying split is that the right wants a homogenously united community while the left is united in the acceptence of their differences. This makes me wonder why the right doesn't want communism. Could this be like homosexuality, that the right secretly wants it and just doesn't dare to say it?

[-] KSPAtlas@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 week ago

Because the economic right is capitalism, not communism

[-] SuperNovaStar 5 points 1 week ago

I'm not even sure capitalism is the right word, at least not in the US. I'd almost describe their ideology as neo-feudalism.

The republicans have always paid lipservice to the idea of meritocracy, of an even playing field, and fair competition. But that isn't what we're seeing from them - they're merging economic and state power in a way that serves to lock in the existing class structure and remove what little social mobility remains. They may pay lipservice to the idea of a free market liberal democracy, but that isn't the government they're creating.

[-] tibi@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Dictatorships are dictatorships, regardless of the political ideology. Both sides did horrible things, like purging intellectuals and anyone seen as a potential threat, mass murder of entire social groups, maintaining informant networks to instil fear etc.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Dictatorships are dictatorships, regardless of the political ideology.

A dictatorship of the bourgeois is radically different from a dictatorship of the proletariat, both in form and in function.

Both sides did horrible things

Guys with their "Ask me about the War of Northern Aggression" baseball caps are constantly saying this

purging intellectuals and anyone seen as a potential threat, mass murder of entire social groups, maintaining informant networks to instil fear etc.

DSA: "We should open up the Medicare rolls to anyone who wants it and grant everyone in the country universal basic income through Social Security"

Libertarian: "This gives the government way too much power. If you can give someone health care or a basic income, you can control who gains access to very fundamental basic human needs. And that will lead to tyranny."

Also Libertarian: "I love the DHS. I love the DHS so much. Strong borders! Private prisons! Deportations without a court hearing! This is the network state I always dreamed of! Can't wait until Trump starts issuing EOs to form charter cities and America is just 1000 Singapores in a trench coat. Also, everything Javier Milei is doing in Argentina is fucking based. I love how MBS is running Saudi Arabia. And I can't wait to join the private mercenary army that reclaims Greenland from those weak-kneed namby pamby socialists in Denmark."

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Denixen@feddit.nu 6 points 1 week ago

Or maybe we shouldn't exterminate anyone, nor let millions of people die in starvation in a failed attempt to "get everyone's basic needs met".

You know, the actual centrist position.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Who killed more Soviets? The far-right, or the far-left?

I’ll just take a pass on the far-anythings.

(Anyone who tries to paint this as pro Trump needs to reread it)

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Who killed more Soviets? The far-right, or the far-left?

Flipping through my big book titled "Victims of Communism" and it says here that the German Nazis and Italian and Spanish Fascists were both Far-Left and Victims of the Far-Left. Also, I see hear that every unborn child out to the latest generation resulting from famines common to the 1930s through the 1960s is a Victim of Communism. Nothing in the fine print about lives saved through the universalization of health care, housing, groceries, and pensions, though. Neither can I find anything about the Peace Dividend reaped by the industrialized Soviet world following the end of WW2.... weird.

Also, absolutely nothing in here about the Bengal Famine, its causes or the millions of tons of relief the USSR sent to end it. So strange. Michael Parenti, do you have anything to say about this?

“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”

-Michael Parenti Blackshirts and the reds

[-] arc@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

The far left and far right are both bad. If in doubt, look at any country which has gone down either path.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] just_Seven@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

To some extent I’m still a centrist mainly, because I think that dems have their own hypocrisies and are a little too naive. However I side more with democrats for the fact that republicans actively spew hateful, dangerous, ideals that actively put others in danger and hurt people. So I might not always agree with democrats I would most likely never agree with a republican

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 week ago

The democrats are right wing

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Don't worry, most of us on the left hate the Democrats too, just less than the Republicans. This has been said a million times so sorry if I'm overstating it but the Democrats would be a center right wing party in most of the developed world.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
1931 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

7234 readers
2390 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS