Well said, BK. I find it infuriating how some people think they alone can define what is "moderate" and the entire political spectrum must revolve around their special snowflake selves.
I don't know. I'd argue everyone has their own definition of where the "center" of the spectrum lies because there really isn't one. The spectrum is by its nature a subjective and arbitrary creation that evolves has societal Overton windows evolve. It has ordinal properties, but not cardinal ones. Of course, placing yourself as the fulcrum of this scale is rather narcissistic, I'd agree.
Yes, and some of the things that circulate as acceptable and normal in the social-liberal free-for-all, for instance all this transgender nonsense, are so offensive to people on what used to be the moderate right
The only "nonsense" is that bigots can somehow consider it 'offensive' to know that it's wrong for them to be openly bigoted and hateful
Ah, exactly the attitude Runeghost/SillyAmerican are describing.
I'm sorry realisticidealist but I fail to see how this is a subjective issue in the slightest. SillyAmerican there literally dismissed an entire group of people, a group with whom I identify, as "offensive nonsense". The notion that Republicans are somehow becoming more extremist on a wide range of issues just because I chose to be open about my gender identity, (let alone the notion that members of the Democratic party are somehow inherently accepting and supportive) is patently ridiculous.
It's also a false comparison to equate "Democrats move to the left because Republicans are intolerant extremists" with "Republicans move to the right because Democrats are accepting of ideas I personally find repulsive" and then yearn for some "reasonable positions from the center" to the people "struggling in the center".
The entire argument is disingenuous because it's clear he's not in the center. It's not even about left vs right; he's on the objectively wrong side in an issue that's honestly just black and white - whether to accept people for who they are (which, after all, is what Christ taught us), or whether to be intolerant and offensive to groups of people you dislike and those who support them.
His plea for the middle ground is just Moderate Hero Fallacy and he's using it to act like his views are reasonable when they have no place in a civilized society. There are literally dozens of issues he could have used and made a reasonable point, maybe, but instead he brought up something that clearly demonstrates that sometimes the truth isn't actually in the middle.
Well, the transgender issue really isn't "objective" per se. There are objective elements that can be tested scientifically, but the crux of the political question is completely subjective. How should transgenderism be treated in policy? That's not something that can be empirically determined. You can argue that "objective fact" + "subjective norm" = "more objective opinion", but that's not the same thing.
You raise a number of questions that aren't objective: "What does it mean to accept someone for who they are?", "What are acceptable limits to personal expression?", etc. that you answer one way and the right answers another. This doesn't inherently imply bigotry as you initially stated. Most things are more complicated than that. To me, it seems that the mainstream right and the mainstream left have lost the common vocabulary to even express why these divisions exist; they make logical leaps without even realize they're doing it.
I think it's fairly undeniable that both the left and right have moved further in their respective directions; the pivot from gay rights to transgender right
is a move to the left. The respective distances probably aren't equal, but that ultimately doesn't matter that much.
There is a hollowing of the pre-Obama "middle" in mainstream political discourse, regardless of whether SillyAmerican resides on that region or not, and with it has come a harsh, acerbic tone. Hillary's statement about how proud she is that she's enemies with Republicans, the incessant personal attacks in GOP debates of Hillary and Obama. The left calling previous allies who don't fall in line with their new campaign "hateful", the right refusing even a modicum of compromise... It's a race to the bottom on who can repel the other side more, and each act builds on those before it. The Republicans push. The Democrats push back. The Republicans push again, etc.
It's easy to see the dismay of people not in these camps. This war between parallel zeitgeists is not their fight, but they are more and more unable to escape it; the middle bleeds people to which ever narrative and bubble they find more appealing. It's easy to fall in line inside a feedback loop where everything you believe is righteous and true and everything they believe is evil and repulsive, the work of people trying to destroy all we hold dear. That's what sells. That's what motivates. But at a cost: gridlock, vindictiveness, self-righteousness, hatred.
I'm a communitarian, though I'd like to think a moderate one. There's no political home for me in this country. I don't have a stake in any party or the left-wing Democratic bubble narrative or the right-wing Republican bubble narrative. I don't believe that makes me better or worse. Being near the current center isn't becoming better, but it sure
seems like it's becoming lonelier.
