Siorac
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2010
- Messages
- 23,789
That's nice but in a lot of issues, there is no "compromise" or a "path that works for both". Let me illustrate with an admittedly extreme example.Sorry Siorac, I don't agree. I feel like I stand for plenty and I like to think centrists are actually realists who understand the need for compromise. The world is a complicated place and one single vision (left or right) will not work for everyone. We are in a serious 'Thought Police' age where both sides are trying to bend the will of the other to match it's own instead of trying to forge a path that works in some semblance for both.
If one side says all blue-eyed people should be exterminated and the other side says no blue-eyed people should be exterminated then what is the centrist solution, what is the compromise? Kill only half of them? Don't kill any but maim them for life or enslave them?
Or, to bring a real life example, look at the American Civil War. Imagine an abolitionist who believes that owning people is wrong. For them, a compromise that says owning "some people in certain places" is OK is not acceptable. There is no compromise to be had there.
This is from the US but then most of the examples of extreme PC in this thread come from there, too: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...rists-2018-were-almost-all-right-wing/581284/Just the way I see it. From my point of view the far left are no better in some respects than the far right. Totally intolerant and aggressive.
The extreme left are mean to people on the internet. The extreme right commit terrorist acts.