The middle ground of compromise is the marxist's side.
No, thats your argument, that the middle always compromises, while the wild swings in political sentiment in the u.s. contradicts the very suggestion.
Compromise is to choose a side.
I'm talking about ambivalence and hesistation-to-give-aid/participate because of hyperpolarization.
Which is why I support accelerationism.
The more people tune out, the more the left will overreach and alienate people before it has a chance to appeal to them.
while the wild swings in political sentiment in the u.s. contradicts the very suggestion.
What wild swings? We have trended hard left on almost everything for decades. The "wild swings" are just moderates blustering and then re-electing ZOG Team Red who will always pretend they must compromise with ZOG Team Blue over contrived issues, meanwhile the dialectic marches ever onward. When both options of a "compromise" include moving further from your original position, you are losing. That is what moderates have been trained to do.
I agree that accelerationism is a preferable solution.
meanwhile the dialectic marches ever onward.
As polarization increases, the dialectic has to slow down to rebuild momentum, like a big tent swaying worse and worse in a strengthening gale. Thats the premise.
Two outcomes: Civil war/general collapse, or we push through the crisis into its opposite, unification against a common enemy - the federal government.
To get there people have to become so tired of polarization that they make hard decisions.
This disturbs the dialectic because the sliding window is a lot like a river, and society is like a kayak. The regime relies on society's reactions being slower than the regimes plans. When society is moving faster in its reactions and decision-making than the regimes plans, the regime loses control of what happens.
In the same way a kayak must move faster than a river, so that its not taken by the river.
I think thats an understandable-enough metaphor.
I can see your logic. But it seems to be based on the premise that all of this is organic, in which case a natural swing back toward reality would be expected. But I disagree that it's organic in any way.
(post is archived)