anarchiddy

Don't be dense. Define 'bothsides type' that includes all subsets of the group you're talking about. I'd bet pretty penny it isn't limited to people who use the phrase 'both sides are exactly the same'.

I'm gonna guess this is pretty close: 'someone who criticizes the democrats without clearly signaling their electoral support of them'

Or, put another way:

[in the way they criticize my party]

“I take issue with the presentation of all major sides of an issue to be indistinguishable because they are both flawed, with the *implicit or explicit exhortation to support neither, when there are obvious and important differences between the two with one being unambiguously preferable, and choosing neutrality is siding with the oppressor”?

Criticism of your party doesn't 'implicitly exhort' support for neither, dipshit. It's exactly this inference that's the problem with your categorization scheme. Democracy can't work when any and all dissent is filed under the same category as 'openly fascist'.

Both parties sharing a huge, glaring problem is a pretty valid reason to engage in dissenting speech.

What the ever-loving fuck would be describing a political issue without projecting an ethical framework onto it?

That's the fucking point. Having the disagreement is politics, but framing that disagreement as 'opposition' is willfully malicious and you know it.

“‘Bothsides’ attitude is bullshit and, ultimately, right-wing bullshit”?

Nah, man. I know full well you've read MLK, don't be the patronizing white-moderate. Both sides are shit, we should be arguing for changing that not just signing blank checks for the less objectionable one.

Dems have been supporting the genocide since before I was born.

Yep.

They were still, in reality, the only chance of ending it in any way that does not involve the end of the Palestinian people

Fucking gross. You can't acknowledge that the genocide has been happening 'for decades' and still believe they were the only option to end it without the end of Palestinians - the only way this would be true is if by what you mean as 'end' you mean 'complete, but slower'. Up until now the genocide might have been 'gentler', but it wasn't by any measure slowing down.

It seems that we actually agree on a lot though you seem to be operating under the assumption that I only became aware of this bullshit when my privilege stopped being as significant as it once was.

No, I'm saying your anger is justified, but you simply aren't granting that same righteous anger to people who have long since given up on the democrats and democracy. Yes, trump is fascist, yes, democrats were better. But popular discontent has been building since long before this election, and it was the Democrats who chose to not to pull those people back in and instead pushed them away.

I don't care about your leftist credentials. I want people to acknowledge that the problems with this election were so much bigger than the individual voter's shirking of responsibility. Placing the blame on voters isn't just selfish, it also deflects blame from democrats who have been fomenting the popular discontent for decades. If a fascist wasn't voted in this election, it would have been the next, or the next. Fascism is a systemic issue, and unless you're willing to deal with it systemically then the only possible outcome is violence.

I hope the party in-totallity has more maturity than you do.

I'm not kidding. I don't think you could explain the thing you're taking issue with without projecting your ethical framework onto it.

We can have a conversation about effective/acceptable methods of activism without all this bullshit posturing. Just say the thing you mean and leave the agitprop to the activists.

Bothsides types are indistinguishable

... Yea, see there it is. "Bothsides types are indistinguishable [in the way they criticize my party]"

Only someone with an agenda would take 'exactly the same' to mean 'identical' in this context. I don't even care if you could source someone using the word 'exactly', which I would guess is far less common than you're suggesting.

I think it's malicious that you use 'centrist' in this way, because anyone pointing to similarities between the parties would likely be the furthest thing from 'centrist' on any commonly use political scale (as flawed as those are)

This is some crazy doublethink shit. It's clear just looking at the inconsistent interpretation from all the top-level comments that 'centrist' is a blanket term that both describes 'centrist' positions and also 'left/right radicals'. The only consistent is whether the subject is subjecting the in-group to criticism

The same user constantly harps on 'far-left' progressives complaining about democratic positions, and calls himself a centrist.

This is just standard 'out-group' gatekeeping. "If you're not with us, you're against us" shit.

Someone: "both parties share this specific commonality"
PugJesus: "oh rly?? Both sides are LITERALLY the same??"

Don't you dare suggest that my party has a common flaw with the other party and can be responsible for their own losses, you fascist.

I mean, that sounds so reductive to me, but it's the only thing that makes sense.

He's paranoid and seeing shadows, but he supports Israel so it doesn't matter if he's losing his mind. As long as his hallucinations are telling him to vote with the major party positions, they might as well just be another staff advisor.

I think the dems are trying hard to resist the popular momentum in the progressive side of the party, and letting his seat be re-filled would open a vulnerability. There's a small chance that a special election would cause them to lose the seat entirely, but the nationwide sentiment is in their favor - it seems to me they're more worried about a progressive challenger. But that's just speculation.

WHY IS THIS MAN STILL IN OFFICE

Between this and the other story earlier this week, its crystal fucking clear that he is not well. Does nobody close to him care about his clear brain damage from his stroke? It's like the entire federal government is weekend at bernie's and the whole thing is being run by staffers

Everything i disagree with is propaganda

Like that?

Lol, well, uh... then fuck you?

Jesus christ. Maybe i don't care about Ukrainians or Europeans because they were mean to me once? If you think the genocide in Gaza doesn't 100% have the risk of spreading through the Middle east and into Europe, too, I don't think you're worth the time. And anyway, those weren't the genocides I was referring to.

Feels a little like you just don't like Arabs or Muslims.