"true" communism is kinda impossible as it require everyone to think the same thing without descent, socialism is meant to be a transition to that but its all a pipe dream

a regular centrist would compare both possitions and pic the one that suits him more, but the enlightened alt centrists do everything half

everyone who says that "real communism/socialismm has not been tried" is an self absorbed idiot. seriously... do they REALLY think that somehow THEY know better than any leader that tried it?

From what I've heard, the only time "true communism" works is when it's a very small, tight knit community wherein everyone *trusts* one another.

Moment the trust is gone and there's uncertainty things go out the window. This is ignoring human nature as well but, yeah.

I do find interesting how social values can shift through "the left" and "the right" .. like religious conservativism used to be "the right", but now its on the left.. and free speech was on "the left" but now its on "the right"

you can make anything work with a small group of people

Honestly? No. I've yet to see a community where it really goes that deep and nobody has to worry about trust issues. At least, if we're talking more than a handful of people at best.

@Giant Energy Penis very true. It require no outside interference as well. Which is why Marx said it needed to be a world wide revolution all at once for it to be successful

@wacka I've also been considering that the old standards of "left vs right" really are just that. Old and antiquated.

Might need a new system to properly define things.

Marx also said that he is not a Marxist

Penis, people have been saying that for years now

lol yup, Marx def wasnt a marxist

well.. people could start using left-authoritarian and left-liberal... same with right-authoritarian and right-liberal

I haven't heard too many people talking about it. Just using the terms "the left" and "the right" to explain the systems we have in place.

people are kind of using it already

@wacka Wait... so you assume that if people aren't in the center they are close minded? Reallly?

For me it's been "libertarian/authoritarian" "globalist/..nationalist"?

but I would say antifa confuses that... they preach authoritarianism but practice liberal anarchism

Forgot which word I've been using as the opposite of globalist, it's been a while.

antifa confuses fascist with cars

@.B I didnt mean close minded - just closing their minds of some ideas on the opposing compass side

so you are assuming that when you see the other extreme that would push you to their side

I think it is exactly the opposite

there is a term

you have the regular run of the mill non extreme liberal types

and then the other liberal sjw antifa race baiting types are shitlibs

The more I see welfare, the more I side with nationalism. Though ideally I'm for free market and not protectionism

I've been on both sides of the whole welfare thing. And lemme tell you. It's not pretty.

Technically I'm still on one side of it but yeah.

thats what Im saying... open up to the ideas... find compromises

@>Cytos, de lieve goede synth How do you define that by the way? Is it how they define themselves or how they act?

Open to new ideas means understanding them and their points. What most would do is swing more to their side because they understand that it's "needed"

i guess a smol test would be in what they think of conservative

like

if you are for welfare you HAVE to be nationalist, otherwise you are just bad at maths

Exactly

Nonsense, just give everyone $0.50 in bread. It'll be fine, right?

literally hitler = shitlib
disagree passionatly but still human/allowed/etc = liberal

have debt? just print more money!