• kingthrillgore
    link
    fedilink
    47
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As someone who was centrist: you can’t be centrist when one person is motivated by spite to tear it down. You aren’t a centrist anymore. You’re an accessory.

    • hh93
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      Liberals are always the first to fall in line with fascists - the first regional governments of the Nazis in Germany was supported by libertarians and pro-economy-parties, a couple of years ago. 3 years ago the Neo-Liberal party in Thuringia accepted to govern as a minority-government when the only party supporting them was the far-right AfD with a leader that you can legally call a fascist and that is under surveillance by the Verfassungsschutz for being a danger to democracy.

      The CDU (moderate-conservative party) in Germany also won’t work with either the left party nor the AfD but their local politicians are already getting very close with the AfD.

      If someone’s claiming “both sides” in a political issue that’s usually a sign that they won’t oppose the fascists when they try to grab the power

      • @assassin_aragorn
        link
        71 year ago

        At the end of the day, someone who sees both sides as the same is saying they don’t care about LGBT people or abortion rights or ethnic minorities. It’s impossible to care about them and still believe the two parties are close enough that it won’t matter who wins.

        Doesn’t matter if they’re a self described communist or crony capitalist. Scratch them and a fascist will bleed.

      • @banneryear1868
        link
        61 year ago

        Liberals are always the first to fall in line with fascists

        “Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds” is how the saying goes. In the US right now there is no real left political force, despite there being many individual leftists. The one thing the political system has done there above all is remove all impediments for capitalism to flourish. That goes back to the Populist movement and Jim Crow order, Eugene Debs, the Taft-Hartley act, removing any notion of class analysis from academia. Now you have the choice between how you want capitalism to be branded basically, is it Democrat happy everything is fine capitalism, or GOP get rich or die capitalism, but it’s bootstrap policy all the way down.

    • @banneryear1868
      link
      11 year ago

      Not in the US but I kind of apply this to the Democratic party itself. Obviously they aren’t outright fash-branded like this GOP faction and strategically voting for them is like a forced thing at this point, but they are objectively a center-right party, and I believe the economic policies they promote are in effect an accessory to the GOP’s. What’s more is Democrat PACs actually give money to run ads on behalf of the most fash GOP primary candidates as part of a strategy to get them easier opponents, and it’s worked before, but it also directly enables that faction to gain more ground over multiple election cycles. Like Hillary wanted to run against Trump, they helped him get the nomination, how funny would that be if the GOP had Trump as a candidate, they’d be a laughingstock!

      I feel like this whole thing is a downward spiral with two factions that aren’t really even offering economic alternatives at this point because the neoliberal market based “freedom” is basically consented too. It’s like do you want the happy Democrat branding of this or the fashy GOP branding while it all spirals out of control.