Thanks for your comment, the post itself is meant to challenge the reader to question what is really bias, and what is actually an even-handed view with apparent bias, due to the shifted centre. But I certainly take your point, beginning in a clearly partisan manner might not have been the best approach before putting it in context.
I do think there are defences that can be made of the points you raise.
You took one of the tamest aspects of the radical left here
I agree I have taken a tame aspect of the radical left, and the claim you point to, that Kamala usurped power in an undemocratic and calculated way is a much more serious accusation. The thing is though, as serious as the claim is, it lasted about a week in the news cycle, largely because it’s a spurious interpretation of events with no real evidence, and wasn’t politically shifting the needle, throughout that week (I was watching Fox’s coverage, I often do) Kamala was surging in the polls, and Fox moved back to their usual fear-mongering about immigrants and sane-washing whatever abhorrent statement Trump had most recently made. The trans issue however is a perennial touchstone that has been used as the consistent example of radical left woke-ness for years, and throughout this campaign.
There is antisemitism amongst the pro-Palestine crowd
I don’t doubt you are correct that anti-Israel sentiment can stray into anti-semitism. But the point is about motivations, one side is motivated by sympathy for a population with 10s of thousands of people being killed over a year, and millions being displaced and having their homes destroyed, the other is motivated by white supremacy. Do you not see this as a false equivalence?
In the numerous conversations I’ve had and heard, whenever people refer to the radical left as a counterpoint to the radical right, 99% of the time the examples used are the trans issue, or support for Palestine. I have literally never had Kamala’s ascendence to candidacy used as an example of radical leftism—it’s more seen as a risk-averse aspect of democratic orthodoxy and adherence to a boring status-quo, and as mentioned was a short-lived talking point.
In short, I think pronouns and Palestine were fair comparisons. But, again I agree that I should have spent some time explaining the problem of both-sidesism and the shifted centre before acting in accordance with the principles with which the post concludes.
I don’t know nearly enough about economics to know for sure.
I’m in the same position. It’s at these points where I defer to experts, which is what I have advised in the post.
Thanks again for your comment. I hope my comment hasn’t been too argumentative, it’s meant to explain as an extension of the post.
I think you misread my post; I didn’t mention Kamala Harris’ rightful nomination as an opinion of the far left (the far left doesn’t even like her). Instead I mentioned something that I can no longer find evidence for and might actually be wrong (that the far left supports people being arrested for far-right opinions held online). I’d like to update this to people on the far left supporting people who have conservative opinions being exposed and fired. I brought up the issue with Kamala specifically in response to your pair of paragraphs describing each candidate.
I don’t want to engage with the rest right now because, as I said, I don’t want Trump elected and don’t want to write anything that would increase the chance of that occurring. I might reply in a few days.
Thanks for your comment, the post itself is meant to challenge the reader to question what is really bias, and what is actually an even-handed view with apparent bias, due to the shifted centre. But I certainly take your point, beginning in a clearly partisan manner might not have been the best approach before putting it in context.
I do think there are defences that can be made of the points you raise.
I agree I have taken a tame aspect of the radical left, and the claim you point to, that Kamala usurped power in an undemocratic and calculated way is a much more serious accusation. The thing is though, as serious as the claim is, it lasted about a week in the news cycle, largely because it’s a spurious interpretation of events with no real evidence, and wasn’t politically shifting the needle, throughout that week (I was watching Fox’s coverage, I often do) Kamala was surging in the polls, and Fox moved back to their usual fear-mongering about immigrants and sane-washing whatever abhorrent statement Trump had most recently made. The trans issue however is a perennial touchstone that has been used as the consistent example of radical left woke-ness for years, and throughout this campaign.
I don’t doubt you are correct that anti-Israel sentiment can stray into anti-semitism. But the point is about motivations, one side is motivated by sympathy for a population with 10s of thousands of people being killed over a year, and millions being displaced and having their homes destroyed, the other is motivated by white supremacy. Do you not see this as a false equivalence?
In the numerous conversations I’ve had and heard, whenever people refer to the radical left as a counterpoint to the radical right, 99% of the time the examples used are the trans issue, or support for Palestine. I have literally never had Kamala’s ascendence to candidacy used as an example of radical leftism—it’s more seen as a risk-averse aspect of democratic orthodoxy and adherence to a boring status-quo, and as mentioned was a short-lived talking point.
In short, I think pronouns and Palestine were fair comparisons. But, again I agree that I should have spent some time explaining the problem of both-sidesism and the shifted centre before acting in accordance with the principles with which the post concludes.
I’m in the same position. It’s at these points where I defer to experts, which is what I have advised in the post.
Thanks again for your comment. I hope my comment hasn’t been too argumentative, it’s meant to explain as an extension of the post.
I think you misread my post; I didn’t mention Kamala Harris’ rightful nomination as an opinion of the far left (the far left doesn’t even like her). Instead I mentioned something that I can no longer find evidence for and might actually be wrong (that the far left supports people being arrested for far-right opinions held online). I’d like to update this to people on the far left supporting people who have conservative opinions being exposed and fired. I brought up the issue with Kamala specifically in response to your pair of paragraphs describing each candidate.
I don’t want to engage with the rest right now because, as I said, I don’t want Trump elected and don’t want to write anything that would increase the chance of that occurring. I might reply in a few days.
Sorry, you’re right, I did misread that—do you mind if I edit my answer so it addresses your point properly? Happy to continue after the election.