• Cowbee [he/they]
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    How would you propose left/right be divided, if not by the commonly accepted mechanics by which they differ?

    • SexWithDogs@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I’m so glad you asked.

      commonly accepted mechanics

      I’m beginning to feel a little gas-lit.

      • Cowbee [he/they]
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        That refers to the Overton Window, as you can see it’s generally just vibes, and not actual measurable mechanics.

        • SexWithDogs@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Right. I must’ve missed that because I don’t care about this conversation at all. Labels were never my thing to begin with. But you can call me right-wing if it makes you feel better, as long as I get to keep my trans boyfriend.

          • Cowbee [he/they]
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            You asked me, so I answered. Personally, I think left/right is hopelessly reductive, it ties too many unrelated things together, and says nothing of social views, of which you’re presumably very progressive despite right wing economic views.

            That’s why I wouldn’t call you “right wing” before I called you a liberal, which I’m sure we are both comfortable with.

            • SexWithDogs@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Hey, you’re the expert.

              I personally couldn’t care less about economics. There are too many things to be right and passionate about for me to start worrying about all that theoretical insanity.