Actual left, true left, is when you start spending money at the cost of efficiency to further improve quality of life…
On that point, you’re falling for right-wing propaganda. The extreme ends of any spectrum have some pretty asinine views held by profoundly stupid radicalized people; absolute collectivism gets just as ugly and destructive as absolute individualism. Neither represents “true” anything. Heck, even centrism has no pure form, because there is no middle, no single point that marks the right balance for all contexts.
I do agree that we have a big problem with false dichotomies and pseudo-absolutism being used to divide us. The real “them” puts great effort into minimizing and misrepresenting the values and interests that are actually widely shared. And even they would be one of us if better raised or rehabilitated away from the wealth that has captured and corrupted them into such extreme individualism.
Breaking down that assumption is step 1 to fixing things, you have to abandon the concept to fully realize that truly being actually fiscally conservative is synonymous with being pro human rights, pro abortion, pro lgbtq, pro immigration, pro science, pro education, pro healthcare.
In general sure. But you make it sound like there are never hard choices nor compromises to be made. Sometimes we genuinely cannot afford to do right by someone or something. When it comes to new problems, the frontiers of medicine and science, etc. we very often don’t know what is economically efficient or even viable. But I think that’s a little off topic. I don’t think anyone is honestly confused by sometimes needing to spend money to save money.
Individualists love the idea of spending money to either save or make money, which is why they like starting businesses, investing, building passive income, building self-sustaining non-financial supports (a personal favorite), and any grift ready to unburden them of the means to exercise that greed to which it appeals. They just can’t be up front about what it is they really don’t understand: spending money on other people (without a direct personal connection). It is their concept of society itself that is limited/constrained in scope, and that has nothing to do with money.
On that point, you’re falling for right-wing propaganda. The extreme ends of any spectrum have some pretty asinine views held by profoundly stupid radicalized people; absolute collectivism gets just as ugly and destructive as absolute individualism. Neither represents “true” anything. Heck, even centrism has no pure form, because there is no middle, no single point that marks the right balance for all contexts.
I do agree that we have a big problem with false dichotomies and pseudo-absolutism being used to divide us. The real “them” puts great effort into minimizing and misrepresenting the values and interests that are actually widely shared. And even they would be one of us if better raised or rehabilitated away from the wealth that has captured and corrupted them into such extreme individualism.
In general sure. But you make it sound like there are never hard choices nor compromises to be made. Sometimes we genuinely cannot afford to do right by someone or something. When it comes to new problems, the frontiers of medicine and science, etc. we very often don’t know what is economically efficient or even viable. But I think that’s a little off topic. I don’t think anyone is honestly confused by sometimes needing to spend money to save money.
Individualists love the idea of spending money to either save or make money, which is why they like starting businesses, investing, building passive income, building self-sustaining non-financial supports (a personal favorite), and any grift ready to unburden them of the means to exercise that greed to which it appeals. They just can’t be up front about what it is they really don’t understand: spending money on other people (without a direct personal connection). It is their concept of society itself that is limited/constrained in scope, and that has nothing to do with money.