Practically speaking, I fear, that puts you in the position of the Liberal Democratic party in the UK, without its advantage of now and then being able to form part of a coalition government.
Being extreme gives people a lot of energy so these activists put a lot of effort into lobbying for their view. It’s hard to get centrists fired up to fight for their beliefs with the same intensity.
"First Things" https://www.firstthings.com provides an authentic and sympathetic view into conservative thought. Regrettably, Fox News appears to have more influence, and in the handful of hours I've spent with that it was an abyss of greed and hatred.
And yet, in America at least, there's only two parties representing those beliefs, so by being aligning to either side you're stuck voting for both the bad and the good.
>And yet, in America at least, there's only two parties representing those beliefs
There's still a diversity of opinions within those parties and you get to vote for those during the primaries. You can't say that Sanders is the same as Clinton, or Trump is the same as JEB.
There also seems to be a deep American belief that there are exactly two sides to an issue. And if you find one of them wrong then the other is right automatically.
Yup, and in debates they even prop them up as a pair of talking heads, giving them the veneer of equal weight, no matter the merits or general agreement.
That's the so-called Aristotlean viewpoint, which has been common in Western thought for thousands of years. Brought to a peak in British and American politics.
No, in this context educated means having a higher level of degree (high school, BS, MS, PHD). I'd argue that that only increases your experience of knowing both sides of the story if your focus is a subject such as Political Science. Having a degree in mathematics or chemistry would not affect your political knowledge at all. While having a degree in a subject such as gender studies or sociology would probably just expose you to a high degree of far-left opinions.
That’s the problem. People are applying the template for being a sports fan to politics. In sports it’s OK to be a blind believer or believe nonsense but in politics this is very damaging . I have wished before that some people who are into partisan politics would cheer for a sports team instead.
Take this with a grain of salt: it's based on a study by a group called More in Common [1], which exists explicitly to spread information that supports this conclusion.
At first blush the paper itself doesn't look very interesting. Everything in the paper hinges on its use of the term "extreme views," which in their usage is about perception and has nothing to do with the objective reality of what constitutes an extreme view (pp. 56-67).
23 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 52.5 ms ] threadPaying attention to political media does not make you educated.
There's still a diversity of opinions within those parties and you get to vote for those during the primaries. You can't say that Sanders is the same as Clinton, or Trump is the same as JEB.
[1] https://www.moreincommon.com
https://twitter.com/jbenton/status/1142891539598852102
At first blush the paper itself doesn't look very interesting. Everything in the paper hinges on its use of the term "extreme views," which in their usage is about perception and has nothing to do with the objective reality of what constitutes an extreme view (pp. 56-67).