[huytersd]

(But just the right wing stuff)

[wafflemaker]

For other brothers who are by character and upbringing on the right side, but want to and put work in understanding and keeping connection with the left side, I'd recommend this Jordan Peterson's podcast episode: 395. Difficult Conversation as the Precondition to Progress | Adam Smith. It helped me understand the steelman version of argument behind diversity, equality and inclusion, which are often ridiculed in the traditional right wing bubble.

[huytersd]

There really can be no meeting in the middle to the left because the ideas being opposed by the right are those that involve fundamental rights for those groups.

[adhesive_wombat]

The "fun" thing about this sentence is about the same number of people will vehemently agree with it as it is and if you swap "left" and "right".

[huytersd]

I don’t think it’s swappable. No one on the right is losing fundamental rights due to the lefts views. They might see a decrease in the quality of their lives (reduced privilege, sharing job options with immigrants etc.), but it’s not a fundamental attack to their personhood.

[ImPostingOnHN]

the fun thing about that argument is it can be applied to creationism vs. science, too, but we know that one of those is wrong and the other right

turns out "a minority of people with me" isn't that convincing of an argument

[sebastiennight]

"fundamental lefts"?

[nvoeiah]

And that's perfectly fine. Not everything needs to be a "meeting in the middle" or a "compromise". Ideas need not be watered down.