5 ms·
an axis is literally dichotomizing, and dichotomies don't aid understanding of complex, dynamic systems because of the numerous chaotic (i.e., higher order) dri
by clairity 5y ago
an axis is literally dichotomizing, and dichotomies don't aid understanding of complex, dynamic systems because of the numerous chaotic (i.e., higher order) drivers of phenomena within the system. dichotomies provide faux-understanding, allowing the speaker to feel esteem for knowing about the dichotomy, not the underlying system of which s/he speaks. it is literally bullshit.
i'll repeat that the only useful dichotomy when talking about political systems (practically tautologically) is that between the powerful and the powerless. left/right, liberal/conservative, even bulldozer/vetocrat are all distractions on this fundamental characteristic of political systems. it's especially important that when we voters consider elections and policy positions, we do it based on a critical reasoning of the issues at hand, not a political affiliation or chosen dichotomous self-identification.
- Ajedi32 5y agoI actually appreciate the introduction of additional axis into the discussion, as I feel it helps cure that sort of dichotomic, tribalistic thinking. No model is perfect, but better to have a dozen different arbitrary dimensions of ideological spectra than just one. It's certainly a better model of reality than the strict left/right dichotomy that dominates modern political discourse.
- clairity 5y agofor personal edification and rumination, sure, having more perspectives tends to lead to more breadth and depth of thought. but when it comes to mediopolitical rhetoric, make no mistake, it’s about railroading thought down one of two rigidly constructed alleys. it’s this latter discourse where dichotomous thinking is much more prevalent and insidious.