On Extremism: What it is and how to stand up to it.

@engineer,

Engineer is full of crap.

I am defining a set of behaviors that I am labeling extreme. This is the opposite of an ad hominem attack. Yes, I am saying that the political left is pushing a narrow ideological narrative and is ignoring facts.

That is a criticism of a specific behavior. I can give you a list of things with which I agree with the political left. It will be fairly long list, on policy I am a liberal.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

1. Extremism is based on a narrow ideology that is held as an absolute truth. An extremist can not accept that competing perspectives have any valid points.

2. An extremist is unable to accept facts that run contrary to one single narrative on any given topic.

3. An extremist believes people who disagree with them are ill-intentioned and evil.

This is how I am defining extremism. I am open to alternative definitions. Any definition of extremism must be independent of ideology or it has no value.

My thesis on this thread is that the US has split into two extremes. Neither the left or the right is able to see outside of a narrow ideology or consider facts that question their own narrative.

No one seems to be addressing the main points in my criticism of the US political sides.

Can anyone make the argument that either political factions in the US is able to accept the validity of facts or perspectives from the other side?

Does anyone disagree that each side sees the other as "ill-intentioned and evil"? (Whether more than 70 million Americans are actually ill-intentioned, evil or part of a cult is another question).

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

No one seems to be addressing the main points in my criticism of the US political sides.

That's because you've framed your question in a simplistic manner which validates your personal perspective but remains either unconvincing or simply irrelevant to others.

Quote:

Can anyone make the argument that either political factions in the US is able to accept the validity of facts or perspectives from the other side?

There aren't simply two political factions in the USA, there are many. Some of them accept other political perspectives in varying degrees but prefer one particular group's methods as more in line with their personal values.

Quote:

Does anyone disagree that each side sees the other as "ill-intentioned and evil"?

If anyone did you'd just say they were "full of crap".

1 Reply

maxdancona wrote:

1. Extremism is based on a narrow ideology that is held as an absolute truth. An extremist can not accept that competing perspectives have any valid points.

2. An extremist is unable to accept facts that run contrary to one single narrative on any given topic.

3. An extremist believes people who disagree with them are ill-intentioned and evil.

In other words, progressives are extremists (in addition to being traitors and terrorists).

I thought I might meet your definition of extremist as well. But I fail on requirement #2. Whereas progressives reject all facts, I accept all facts.

I probably fail on #1 as well. I do recognize that competing ideologies can have good ideas.

I'm all on board for #3 though. Progressives are bad people through and through.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Orally, you are particularly bad at accepting facts that don't match your ideological narrative. I do appreciate your examples.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Hightor, are you really arguing that the US is not fractured now between left and right?

74 million people voted for Trump in 2020. This is 47% of voters. A slightly larger number of Americans voted for Biden.

If we all agree that Trump voters (and Biden voters in Oralloy's case) represent diverse experiences and valid points of view, than this thread is unecessary.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Biden voters are evil. Evil does not represent a valid point of view.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Oralloy, you are particularly bad at accepting facts that don't match your ideological narrative.

That's a lie. I always accept all facts.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

1. I have posted numerous postings on the issue of voting rights.

2. I have on numerous occasions indicated my position on the issue of voting rights.

3. Max, how do you perceive me on this one specific issue?

4. Before you say that this is not related to this thread, it actually does relate to this thread.

5. How you perceive my stance on this specific issue is relevant to this thread.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

1. Based on what you have written, you believe strongly that everyone should vote. You support efforts to make voting easier, and registration automatic. This is a standard liberal viewpoint.

2. I believe the liberals have valid points on voting rights. I actually believe the liberals have a better case on this issue.

3. I do believe that conservatives also have valid points on restricting "voting rights" (this is a politically slanted term) in some cases.

4. I believe you support the right for Trump supporters to vote for Trump, and that should Trump win the election in 2024, you would accept the election results and support Trump being president for another term.

That is what I think your stance is, am I wrong in any way so far?

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

This is the relevant question (and I am not actually sure how you will answer this).

1) Do you believe that Trump voters (47% of the electorate) represent a diverse group of perspectives and that they have valid points of view on many issues?

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Based on what you have written, you believe strongly that everyone should vote. You support efforts to make voting easier, and registration automatic. This is a standard liberal viewpoint.

Okay.

Quote:

I believe the liberals have valid points on voting rights. I actually believe the liberals have a better case on this issue.

Okay.

Quote:

I do believe that conservatives also have valid points on restricting "voting rights" (this is a politically slanted term) in some cases.

I strongly disagree.

Quote:

I believe you support the right for Trump supporters to vote for Trump,

1. Yes, I do support anyone's right to vote for whoever they want to vote for.
2. Anyone who wants to, has the right to vote for that horrible despicable person named Donald Trump.

Quote:

and that should Trump win the election in 2024, you would accept the election results and support Trump being president for another term.

1. Although, I felt sick to my stomach when Trump had won in 2016, I still accepted the results.

2. Of course I would accept the election results, just as long as the GOP don't follow through with their plans of overturning any election results they don't like.

3. The best solution of preventing such acts by the GOP, is to pass a meaningful voting rights act into law.

4. The GOP has already shown the world that they will resist all efforts of allowing any meaningful voting rights act from ever becoming law.

3. Here is a link to provide more clarification:

https://able2know.org/topic/559086-1

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Do you believe that Trump voters (47% of the electorate) represent a diverse group of perspectives

Your question is clearly an oversimplification.

Quote:

and that they have valid points of view on many issues?

Once again, your questions are an oversimplification.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Frank, do you agree that the US has split into two distinct political sides?

You have a tendency to over-simplify very, very complex matters, Max. I disagree with your comment, "My thesis on this thread is that the US has split into two extremes."

Quote:

It seems that you are arguing that one side is extreme and the other isn't.

Is it even remotely possible that I am arguing that there is an extreme at both sides...but that not everyone in the country is party to either one or the other?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Is it even remotely possible that I am arguing that there is an extreme at both sides...but that not everyone in the country is party to either one or the other?

I've brought this up before and maxdancona just ignores the possibility, probably because it doesn't comport with his "ideological narrative©". In maxdancona's world, the USA is neatly halved into extremist factions, all marching and voting in lockstep with their ideology. I don't know where this leaves the substantial body of independent voters (34% in 2020). I know a few independent voters, all small business owners, who voted for Trump – solely because they feared a tax increase under Biden.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Quote:
Is it even remotely possible that I am arguing that there is an extreme at both sides...but that not everyone in the country is party to either one or the other?

I've brought this up before and maxdancona just ignores the possibility, probably because it doesn't comport with his "ideological narrative©". In maxdancona's world, the USA is neatly halved into extremist factions, all marching and voting in lockstep with their ideology. I don't know where this leaves the substantial body of independent voters (34% in 2020). I know a few independent voters, all small business owners, who voted for Trump – solely because they feared a tax increase under Biden.

It does seem that way, Hightor.

And Max seems to be comfortable with the balance between flat Earthers/and round Earthers mentality.

I certainly am not saying I am equidistant from extreme left and extreme right. If I were forced to choose, I would choose to be associated with the "extreme left" over the "extreme right" in a nanosecond. Life under the extreme right philosophy seems unbearable to me...while life under the extreme left philosophy seems tolerable, although not totally recommendable.

Hitting a median point in argument presentation seems difficult for Max.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

1) Do you believe that Trump voters (47% of the electorate) represent a diverse group of perspectives and that they have valid points of view on many issues?

This is vintage maxdancona. Note that the way the question is posed; if you agree that there is some diversity within this 47%, you must also accept that these voters have "valid points of view on many issues". We'll skip over trying to determine what makes a particular point of view a "valid" one. We know that maxdancona believes that liberals have "valid points on voting rights" and that he also believes that "conservatives also have valid points on restricting voting rights". He probably thinks that both sides have "valid" points of view on climate change, reproductive rights, and immigration.

At some point you actually need to make a decision. How do you reconcile the differences in complex policy issues at specific points of disagreement? If one side wants to limit global temperature rise to 1.5ºC and the other says 2º is okay, is it "extreme" to demand that the choice be made according to the best scientific consensus even if that conflicts with the preference of one political faction? If one side wants to impose photo ID requirements on voters and the other vehemently objects, how do you reconcile these two "valid" positions?

Choosing what seems personally or politically preferable in a binary field isn't "extremism". It's just the way our political system has developed. When the sides are as far apart as they are now, any choice has the potential to leave one side or the other egregiously offended. But it isn't "extremism".

1 Reply

If there are (at least more or less) only two options, only two parties (at least according to many) in the elections, then I have to choose the one that is more in line with my views than the other.

We'd got 33 parties on the election ballot across Germany (plus some dozens independents in some voting districts and the Magdeburg Garden Party in the state of Saxony-Anhalt).

Since many voters had no ideas, the 'voter tool' Wahl-O-Mat (roughly translated as "Vote-O-Metre") is an success since nearly 20 years now (Wahl-O-Mat has been used in Germany since 2002. The idea came from the Netherlands, where an also-popular Dutch equivalent, StemWijzer, has been in use since 1989):
The Wahl-O-Mat is a question-and-answer tool that shows which party admitted to an election is closest to one's own political position. 38 theses can be answered with "agree", "disagree", "neutral" or "skip thesis" - all parties admitted to the election can participate in the Wahl-O-Mat. In this way, users can compare their own answers with those of the parties. The Wahl-O-Mat then calculates the degree of personal agreement with the selected parties.

0 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

1) Do you believe that Trump voters (47% of the electorate) represent a diverse group of perspectives and that they have valid points of view on many issues?

You are avoiding the point, Hightor.

Part of extremism is the inability to accept that people outside of their ideology have diverse experiences and valid points. The question I posed challenges you to accept a significant group of Americans.

If you can provide a serious answer to how Trump voters make a valid point, then you will seriously damage my argument.

Fortunately you are unable to do this. This is common in for both of the political extremes. So far, no one has addressed any of the three points I raise in my original post.

I agree there are Americans who don't fit into the left-right categories. I do believe that Americans are more divided into left and right than ever in recent history. The constant name-calling and outrage on both sides is evidence of this.

I have repeatedly challenged liberals on able2know to point out issues on which they feel conservatives make a valid point. So far, no one has even made the attempt. Anyone who can find valid points on both sides of the political chasm in the US has my respect.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

If you can provide a serious answer to how Trump voters make a valid point, then you will seriously damage my argument.

I'm really not interested in seriously damaging your "argument" – it's simply your own personal opinion which you obsessively feel the need to promote.
I don't consider "Trump voters" as a monolithic group of people who all believe the same thing. They may have many different reasons for having voted for him, some of which might be shared by Biden voters or non-voters. As I said, I know some people who voted for Trump based on one issue only — taxes. And there may be people who didn't vote for Trump who share this concern but were motivated to vote against him because of some other issue, like his handling of covid.

What constitutes a "valid point" anyway? The auto body guy I know who supported Trump said he was afraid about Biden raising taxes. Is that a "valid point" or is it just a personal reaction based on his specific situation and not concerned with the larger issue of funding government spending? Or someone voted for Trump because Trump is "pro-gun" – is that a "valid point"? If so, is it one you agree with?

Quote:

I have repeatedly challenged liberals on able2know to point out issues on which they feel conservatives make a valid point. So far, no one has even made the attempt.

You're a liar. I've answered your question before. For instance, on the issue of immigration, I agree that it needs to be addressed. But what invalidates the issue is when the rationale is provided or solutions are proposed. I don't share the Trumpian concern with immigrants being rapists and murderers. I don't agree with building a border wall. So an issue where I might have a measure of agreement in the abstract becomes an issue invalidated by the racism and jingoistic nationalism which motivated Trump to campaign on it. I'm not like you, who can say that liberals have valid points on voting rights and so do Trump supporters who want to restrict voting rights. The details matter more than the f***ing sound bite.

0 Replies

On Extremism: What it is and how to stand up to it.

Quick Links

My Account

able2know