Don't forget the material basis for these shifts! While The Discourse of "practical" truangulating centrists tends to show this rightward path, it is because (1) they were already fundamentally reactionary, they tend to just use this logic as an excuse for why they tolerate far-right positions, and (2) the right is supported by the ruling class to address some of the "problems" it creates, like a marginalized underclass that wants enough income to feed their children, housing, and safety from violence.

The shift right is not driven simply by debate or ideology, but by the arenas where degradation in material conditions due to capitalism meet the ruling class' need to deflect blame to the marginalized (who they can reap larger profits from) to placate the less marginalized. Racism, nationalism, and extermination campaigns are created and maintained for the interests of capital, with the common people being pushed and prodded to fall in line with repeating the (usually ad hoc) new or recycled scapegoats and underclassrs. Wouldn't want you to point blame in the right direction!

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 13 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Yep, this is a huge fucking problem.

Top bad the often proposed suggestion of "let's just skip right to the end" isn't actually a solution.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Thank you.

Real sick of this argument right now. Just letting the right win because the left-most party is too willing to compromise isn't a moral victory.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 47 minutes ago

We need ranked choice voting so people can vote for who they actually want without throwing away they vote. The problem is opposing ranked choice voting is one of very few issues both parties agree on, since it hurts both of them.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 15 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

The criticisms of the dem party don't amount to "let the right win", they amount to "the DNC prevents any political resistance to the right, they either need to be coup'd or destroyed if we want to stop the right from winning"

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

This is not how I have understood the criticisms being thrown around Lemmy lately, but I appreciate the perspective. Even so, I'm not sure I can agree that the best solution to dealing with the right is to fight the centrists first, but I can at least appreciate your point in the specific context of the current two-party system.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 hours ago

Even so, I’m not sure I can agree that the best solution to dealing with the right is to fight the centrists first

We aren't able to use electoralism to fight the right as long as the political platform and messaging of the democratic party is 95% the same as the republican's.

[–] hannesh93@feddit.org 1 points 3 hours ago

The sad thing is that it works both ways. If a left party in government is improving things but had to do a compromise and therefore couldn't go all the way the far left is also complaining about that.

Compromise with far right positions should never happen, but compromise in itself is not something bad, and imho it's one of the main problems in today's democracy that too many people see it that way.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca -5 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

This is a bad faith meme that represents anyone making any form of compromise as a rude, close-minded, genocide supporter, posted by an account that frequently posts pro-China, sometimes pro-Russia propaganda, and hops between Western country-focused lemmy's pending election cycles.

Just making sure the context for this post is visible.

[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 1 points 29 minutes ago

This is a bad faith meme that represents anyone making any form of compromise as a rude

They're not depicted as rude, they're depicted as an know-it-all eager compromiser that ends up working for the forces of reaction because they have no real principles or red lines.

close-minded

That is generally the attitude of "centrists" and people that go out of the way to congratulate themselves on "being practical" by triamgulating. If they were open to actual principles they eould no longer be triangulating on them, and triangulating is their primary commitment.

genocide supporter

Like virtually every Democratic member of Congress and both of their presidential candidates? Anyone tolerating that is indeed complicit. It does not require any mental gymnastics to acknowledge this.

posted by an account that frequently posts pro-China

No!!! I almost passed out when I read that. You're telling me there are good aspects of a designated enemy of empire!? Impossible.

Open-minded btw.

sometimes pro-Russia propaganda

Not another designated enemy!!! I almost died when I read this.

and hops between Western country-focused lemmy's pending election cycles.

Is this supposed to imply something bad about them?

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 hours ago

People elect representatives to represent them, not to compromise and pass the opposition's agenda.

It's forgivable if the representative failed to obtain enough power, but if they have literally any means at their disposal and don't use it, an unwillingness to use all the power the people gave them to do what they elected them to do is a betrayal of those people.