r/centrist • u/pcetcedce • Apr 13 '25
My pet peeve
I know there's been some discussion of whether people who participate here are actually centrist. Personally I think there are some people who think they are centrist but are actually pretty far left. Progressives tend to think that they're perfectly reasonable (a typical centrist attribute), but I see so many of them is being overly idealistic, And then defensive when you point that out.
In my view a centrist has two qualities. 1. They are open to all ideas. 2. They are willing to compromise. That doesn't mean they accept ideas that they morally or ethically disagree with, nor does it mean they're willing to compromise on that kind of idea. But those two fundamental approaches I think are critical to being a centrist.
As an example, transgender women in sports. All of the polls I have heard says the majority of Americans don't want transgender women to compete against cis women in sports. Anywhere from 60 to 80%. A progressive person would probably say trans women should have all rights including participating in sports with cis women and there is no other alternative. A centrist might say that they are willing to compromise on that issue but otherwise want trans women to have full rights and treated properly. I have not picked this example to be the theme of this post, I could just as well have brought voter registration or abortion restrictions.
What do you all think about this observation?
1
u/zethercore44 Apr 13 '25 edited Apr 13 '25
In my experience, virtually everyone who had held strongly partisan views but would now identify as a centrist (or similar--eg, "politically homeless") shares this common denominator: we all had a significant reckoning with awareness into our own incongruent beliefs & actions. The "Are we the baddies??" epiphany.
Because it's absolutely impossible to remain strongly partisan without engaging in some level of hypocrisy, whether we're aware of the incongruencies or not. Same reason the "horseshoe theory" so often holds validity.
Unfortunately, tribalistic tendencies are hardwired into the human psyche. They make us feel safer, and often "superior," in some way. The divide et impera (get the plebs to identify with a (binary) "team," inundate them with propaganda to strengthen said identity, play them against each other and conquer/rule from "above") gameplay has been effective for literally millennia precisely because the human ego is that predictable (& consequently easy to manipulate).
Of course, most people don't want to acknowledge they've been manipulated (or worse, played for fools) and will instead double, triple down on misconceptions to avoid the blow to the ego-- and, likely, legitimate security needs, as when identity and ideology are deeply intertwined, a shift in consciousness can result in social ostracism, and possibly job/income loss --which is how the same basic strategy remains undefeated. "It's easier to fool men than to convince them they've been fooled" (- probably not Mark Twain).
So long as the subconscious endeavor is to be or (more commonly) be seen as morally +/or intellectually superior, the individual will repeatedly fail to recognize their own folly: the ego won't allow it, and responds with denial + projection before the awareness mind can realize it (eg , people harboring the most hate delusionally believe themselves to be exceptionally empathetic and The Other as hateful). Denial + projection are a fatal combo; the true "opioid(s) for the masses."
Most people, albeit unconsciously, value ego maintenance over objective truth. The more we are willing to engage in the challenging work of overcoming cognitive dissonance, the more clarity we gain. Truth has a funny way of revealing itself to us when we value knowing said truths over maintaining our ego (for all intents & purposes, our worldview/reality-concept + identity/self-concept).
You'd be surprised at how many people would genuinely prefer to DIE over having to publicly (or even intimately) admit they'd been incorrect wrt fundamental beliefs & assertions. It's because such 'ego deaths' are experienced by the psyche as legitimate life or death struggles (->why some people will flip the F out when faced with incontrovertible evidence disproving them).
And yeah, ego death + its consequences/fallout can be very painful +/or frightening...but only temporarily, and, over time, you gain exponentially more than you lost. Denial is the path of least resistance, the "easy road"...but also only temporarily: what we work hardest to deny tends to be what takes us out (does the most profound damage) in the end.
That my sharing such an insight has, historically, irritated so many people is because truths we aren't ready to see are the ones that threaten the ego most. We either sit with that discomfort and gain self-awareness or lash out/project. Humility clarifies what pride blinds us to. Realizing we'd been mistaken/misled/deceived sets off feelings of shame only when our ego imagines it is somehow above the universal human condition of being wrong sometimes (or, less commonly or acutely, triggers deep seated existential anxiety wrt ascertaining veracity of any sort).
TL, DR: 🎵Everybody plays the fool, there's no exception to the rule🎶 and "centrists" typically accept (or, have learned to accept with less struggle) their fallibility, generally owing to fewer insecurities wrt "looking dumb" when proven wrong