<Thread> Is there a thing in politics called "compressed perspective?" If not, let me coin that. Bear with me. In photography (and other optics) if you are far away from an object, and there's another object, yet father from that, viewed through a long lens --
2 -- the two objects, while not close to each other at all, will appear to be close to each other, almost on the same plane. Compressed perspective. The farther you are from those two objects, the closer they will appear together.
3 (that's how they do those pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge or Eiffle Tower with a ridiculously enormous moon). So, politically, what I'm seeing in politics in the U.S., is that the far right and the far left, are so far to each side...
4 that they begin to see those who are less radical in their party as the enemy. This has been going on a little longer on the right, I think, with the Bannon/Brietbart wing (and farther right) viewing old line Republicans as enemies, of sort ---
5 while on the left, the Bernie/Socialist left is so far to the left that compressed perspective gives them the perspective that Democrats or more tradition Liberals are the enemy, despite how many values they might share with them...
6- maybe this is all blindingly obvious, and I'm just slow to recognize it, but it seems that this compressed perspective is wildly counter-productive to the both sides' agendas and mis-identifies their real opponents --
7- it would appear, so far, that the right is better at implementing their agenda, and have a plan (primary candidates who aren't conservative enough). Perhaps they're just further ahead, time-wise. But they are alienating their intellectual wing. ---
8-The far left, this comes from MY perspective, from people I've communicated with, doesn't seem to have an agenda -- or if they have an agenda, there doesn't appear to be a process. The "there" seems some form Democratic Socialism, which isn't incompatible with most--
9 "Centrist" liberals I know, but there doesn't seem to be any method, process, or plan of action. The process as explained to me in abstract, sounds like Anarchy with the capital A, wherein systems are torn down and a more just and egalitarian society rises out of it...
10. I don't have a proscription for this, I'm not sure if it's even a problem, I'm merely observing, but it does seem to further divide us as a people. If, for instance, your goal is to achieve, say, gender equality but you demonize those who agree with you, your goal recedes---
11. If your goal is, say, smaller government, and you hold establishment Republicans in contempt, your goal will be more difficult to obtain. Other than my perspective in observation, how I feel doesn't matter, and maybe it speaks to a need for a non-binary political system --
12. But lest we forget, Bernie ran as a Democrat, and Trump ran as a Republican, despite neither being part of those parties, because the most direct path to power goes through capturing a majority that will back you. The alternative, burning it all down, may work too...
13. But that said, clearly the right is much closer to being able to do that right now, and whether they, or the left manage to burn it all down, there is a very likely chance that the revolution will be followed by a Reign of Terror. Purity has it's price.
See you on the guillotine, I guess, no matter who gets their way.
Meanwhile, my personal recommendation for change? Mobilize. Organize. Vote.
Meanwhile, my personal recommendation for change? Mobilize. Organize. Vote.
