Opposing fascism isn’t far left. That’s just being a decent person.

The US doesn’t really have a far left. It barely has a left. What MAGA calls left tends to be rather center, like the position that people should be able to afford healthcare.

Advanced strawman. Opposing fascism isn't far left. It's just not-right.

What if I informed you that there are more than two options, and they don't have to be extremities? And what if I followed up by informing you that what we have in the US, for a political spectrum, is not the norm elsewhere in the world?

Too bad there isn't a political party representing "The Left"

Centrists are actually with maga, they just don't wear the hat. See Fetterman, Schumer, Jeffries, etc

Yet another poorly made fallacy meme. Is there a bot just crapping out this same template every few days?

Far left citizens may oppose fascism but their leaders aren't doing a good job of it. America needs a better left wing party.

Why does the left have to keep being represented as long hair, man bun hippy types?

We hate centrists. Everyone hates centrists

Yeah, both are too loud and impeding the centrist ability to go back to Brunch lmao

Brunch: May or may not include stuffing their own pockets

From a Canadian instance, really? This shit is so frustrating to see. The whole two party nonsense that this bullshit pushes is exactly why the usa is in the mess they are in now.

No, people don't have to "pick a side" the ones who think in terms of teams are our enemy.

i think the "current far left" supports authoritarianism, so not the opposite, just different flavor of the same side.

How about we stop pretending that the left doesn't have its own share of emotionally damaged asshats and try to pick leadership that solves problems instead of pandering to one side or the other?

Social democrats are what centrists actually are and they're generally on board.

"Centrists" tho

Far [insert preferred political allegiance] simply means extremist, usually unwilling to compromise. Whether you think that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on your personal political opinions, but generally speaking an inability to reach a compromise is not a desirable trait regardless of your political leanings.

As a saying goes, perfect is the enemy of good. We don't want people refusing to embrace more libertarian policies simply because they don't get everything that they want. Progress is achieved by steadily grinding away at the norm, not by having a big explosive change all at once. That's what communists want.

The only thing I gather from these posts.

The right: We prefer a two party system.

The left: a vote for a third option weakens us in the battle against the right.

Centrists: I just want a third option that isn't democrats or republicans...

Well, if youre a "centrist" like me, then you used that designation to try to get out of talking about politics with ass holes on both sides. And also i hate getting "prejudged" -everyone does- because i might like or dislike a certain politician. I am a centrist, truly, but I dont need to prove that to any of you. And this is what I mean when I say "both sides are the same" I mean you assholes harras, insult, degrade, tease, berate, and nearly threaten about how your side is "the good side" and the "otherside" equals the destruction of America. Yeah, well, both sides do that annoying shit. You want to tell me "there's no such thing as a centrist anymore" and that i am actually on the _________ side. Well f you, you dont get to tell me what side im on.

Maybe you just feel that since im not with you, that I must be against you? If that overly simple reasoning is where you are at, I dont think we should be friends anyway.

I dont want to be identified as red or blue, dem or repub. Honestly, im pretty conflict avoidant in general, and politics gets to be such nasty topic and can ruin family and friends. I see it happen more in the past few years than ever. Its really sad! And you know it too!

Can everyone please just put a sock in it for at least the rest of December? Can we all look for common ground and the things that we can share? Dont look at family through red or blue tinted glasses, but through the lens of love. Let's put our pride aside for a while and produce good times and love this holiday season.

Done :).

Isn't it just left & right ?

Because both make money.

"Centrists" are those that oppose authoritarianism in all forms. The far left and and far right make rationalizations about why their preferred flavour of authoritarianism is good (it just gets a bad rap!) while pretending to vehemently oppose the other side's flavour of authoritarianism.

But in the end, those who rationalize in favour of any kind of authoritarianism could easily be manipulated into supporting any other kind of authoritarianism. There's a reason the Nazis called themselves the Nationalist Socialist party, just a small amount branding can get a good number "leftists" to support fascism. Because few people actually think in ideological terms, they just go along with the group and repeat whatever ideological bullshit they've heard to conform with the group. It's easier to turn a socialist into a fascist (and vice versa) since it's mostly just about branding.

Socialists and Fascists love the concept of political spectrum they can put themselves on opposite ends of, but that's all an artificial construct to allow for fear of the other to rationalize the need for a strongman to protect them from the other side that supposedly has completely different values than them. But the "far right" and "far left" have both been conned into being willing to give up their rights in fear of the other. Fascism is a convenient rationalization for communism and communism is a convenient rationalization for fascism. These "ideologies" has a symbiotic relationship with each other.

Those who fall for these grifts believe the verbal diarrhea of demagogues that use a lot of words and say little other than give a vague feeling of "trust me, give me power, I will make you stronger / more equal". The stupid see someone using a lot of words and don't notice there isn't any real explanation of how the demagogue will deliver on their vague promises. They just need to hate the same people their audience hates and use a lot of words, and the stupid will eat whatever bullshit is thrown at them.

Internet podcasting has allowed people to have an endless selection of small time demagogues to choose from. The flavour of authoritarianism the stupid will fall prey to is entirely dependent on which content an algorithm selects for them. And that is based on content they may consumed before puberty. These grifters need to get them while they're young, someone with more life experience will be more likely to say "yeah sure that's a lot of fancy words, but how does any of that help me right now?" which they don't have an answer for.

WTF happened to centrism, instead of measured response to right and left it has just turned into the place where cowards hide

If you can only paint 'your side' as the hero, then you are a naive child with 0 life experience.

EDIT: after thinking about it for a couple of hours, my take was really bad, and i'm gonna clarify:

There is significant difference between the republicans and the non-republicans in the US, which is that the republicans are extremely racist. And that's not just a "little bit of racist", but a "fucking huge bit of racist", on top of that. So there's a clear distinction.

As a side fact, i'd still like to point out that "fascism" as a term is surprisingly difficult to define. Everybody likes to be "against" fascism, but it's an emotional catch-phrase without a cut-and-dry definition. That's why i tend to avoid it in discussion, or if i do use it, i give it the following meaning: "Fascism is an illegal way of seizing power in order to do something that you want." Note that illegal does not inherently imply immoral. There can be moral causes for why somebody does something illegal, such as with slave uprisings as happened around 1800 in northern america. That, according to my definition, is illegal (in the sense that the law said it's illegal), but not immoral, but since the definition of "fascism", according to me, concerns whether it's illegal to do something, not immoral, it would have been fascist too, by that definition. That's to show that fascism is not inherently good or evil, but it depends on what you do with it.

the original comment is below for historical purposes

I used to think that "left" and "right" were diametrically opposed terms, but i don't see it that way anymore:

• imperialism: Imperialism means to conquer other countries for the sake of imposing your own norms and values on them. That's actually what the northern states of the US did to the southern states of the US before they became the US. sure, lots of people argue that the values were worthwhile (being against slavery), but it's still imposing your values on somebody else.
• fascism: at this point, i'm not sure what "fascism" even means anymore. isn't it just to do something illegal to get what you want? isn't every change in human history illegal, before it becomes the new norm? wasn't it illegal for gay people to stand for their rights in the 20th century?
• because it's a recent topic, i'd like to give another neat example: liberals from the coastline will loudly proclaim that the conservative "child marriage" (starting at age 14) laws are a monstrosity (because that's, idk, child abuse or sth), but at the same time, you will find in many schools in the coastside a subject called "sex education" where people learn to use condoms and such. such classes are typically held at about age 13 or sth (well, it was for me). guess why they do it? because they recognize that teenagers do in fact have desires to experiment with sexuality, and offering the courses is simply recognizing that and making the best out of it. [EDIT - ok nvm this point, i don't actually know exactly what the "child marriage" laws say precisely, and i'm not aware how they're actually interpreted in practice, so i guess this point is void.]