The Flaws of Equating Both Sides in Political Debates

Alexander Wright

Updated Thursday, May 30, 2024 at 7:51 PM CDT

The Flaws of Equating Both Sides in Political Debates

The Illusion of Equivalence

The statement “both sides are equally wrong” often appears phony and pretentious. Many people claim both sides are equally wrong without fully understanding the issues. This oversimplification can be damaging, as it often ignores the complexities and nuances inherent in most political debates.

The belief that identifying negative aspects on both sides means they are equally bad is flawed. Two bad things can exist simultaneously, but one can be significantly worse than the other. Similarly, two good things can exist, but one can be better than the other. This is an essential consideration that is often overlooked in the rush to appear fair and balanced.

The Appropriateness of Centrism

The appropriateness of a centrist position depends on the specific issue at hand. On issues like gun control, a middle-ground solution may be considered best. This is because a balanced approach can address the concerns of both sides, leading to more comprehensive and effective policies.

However, on extreme moral issues, such as the persecution of Jews, a middle-ground solution is unacceptable. In situations where fundamental human rights are at stake, taking a centrist stance can be seen as a moral failure. It is crucial to recognize when a centrist approach is appropriate and when it is not.

Forced Patriotism and Religion

Many Republicans claim patriotism but push for forced Christianity, which is un-American. The Middle East’s religious takeover is an example of forced religion leading to societal changes. In the 1960s and 70s, Iraq was more liberal, with women wearing skirts and attending college. These examples highlight the dangers of conflating patriotism with religious extremism.

Forced religion can lead to significant societal changes, often for the worse. It is important to recognize the difference between genuine patriotism and the imposition of religious beliefs. This distinction is crucial for maintaining a free and open society.

Political Manipulations

Sometimes, the differences between political parties are manipulations, making them two sides of the same coin. There is a belief that Republican and Democratic leaders are not truly opposed to each other. Both parties share many of the same donors, social circles, and personal relationships.

This notion suggests that the political divide is more about maintaining power than genuine ideological differences. The idea that one party is less bad is seen as a deliberate strategy to keep the public voting for the lesser evil. Progress toward negative outcomes continues regardless of which party is in charge, though at different speeds.

The Futility of Voting for the Lesser Evil

A system that ensures progress toward evil is ultimately a win for evil. Voting for the lesser evil is seen as a losing strategy because it still allows for negative progress. Being a centrist today is often viewed as being a moderate in a highly polarized political environment.

People who say both sides have significant problems often face backlash from those who follow one-sided propaganda. It is important to critically evaluate the actions and policies of all political parties, rather than blindly following one side. This approach can lead to more informed and effective political engagement.

Noticed an error or an aspect of this article that requires correction? Please provide the article link and reach out to us. We appreciate your feedback and will address the issue promptly.

Check out our latest stories