Sargon Is Still A Centrist
(nitter.net)
Comments (35)
sorted by:
That's not even remotely centrist no matter how much he wants to cling to the label.
It seems less like clinging to a label and more about branding right wing ideals as moderate and anything to the left of that extreme, which is the opposite of what the left does.
I considered that that was what he was doing, but thought 'that would never work, nobody would be dumb enough to believe that was a centrist position', yet I've been proven wrong by people trying to argue that yes, it is.
If this is Sargon using The Big Lie, then fair play to him I guess. It somehow fucking works, at least with people who want to believe it.
If the bar for center gets moved there then I’d consider it a major victory
If the bar for center gets moved to zero immigration you are almost certainly living in an authoritarian police state where the government will kill you for saying the wrong thing.
So, full disclosure, I do watch the Lotus Eaters podcast.
That said, I'm pretty sure that Sargon's "zero immigration" policy idea is specific to the UK. For about two plus decades, the UK has been receiving absolutely insane amounts of both legal and illegal immigration, which is absolutely not sustainable for a relatively small island nation.
He's stated a number of times on his segments that his best-case is to stop immigration entirely, kick out the illegals, fix the ever-ballooning national spending apparatus (like the NHS), and balance the economy to the point where British citizens can afford to buy houses again without bulldozing the entire country into Megacity One.
I can certainly support that viewpoint; I can't imagine "stop importing people, we're full" as an extremist position.
Is Sargon arguing for 0 immigration? And how is a country allowing 0 people to move into it from foreign countries an authoritarian police state? Like not allowing emigration would be a red flag. If a countries emigration policy is this place is so great it’s illegal to leave sure. But saying we don’t owe you a spot to come to our country and leach off our social safety nets is not really authoritarian.
He says 'Sensible centrism is: Reducing legal & illegal immigration to zero.'
Again, I say, which countries on earth, past or present, have this policy, or something close to it? Authoritarian, totalitarian states, every single time.
Japan is a totalitarian state?
From a purely economic standpoint, ignoring party policies and social insanity, it is actually centrist.
Regardless of your other beliefs, it is purely observable fact that labor works on supply and demand principles, and immigration reduces wages and unbalances this in favor of corporations. If you explain this in terms of workers rights it could technically be a democrat argument (and was a few decades ago) but the modern left trades in denying reality.
Restricting immigration when we are having a declining middle class, when we have no shortage of labor and our economy is going to shit is an obvious action with no actual functional arguments against it, ignoring ideological ones. If we had an enormous demand for labor and no supply and that was hampering economic activity, then opening immigration again could be a centrist policy.
Don't be so small minded that you define politics purely in the terms of current western elites. That would disregard the majority of countries in the world and history. The center is where you frame it.
It's not centrist anywhere.
How many countries have policies of zero legal and illegal immigration right now? North Korea and Sentinel Island?
'Zero immigration' is not a centrist position and has not been widespread around the world in probably 500 years or more. It has never been the default.
Zero immigration is absolutely the centrist position. The far right position is to immediately execute any foreigner found on our soil. This was the policy of sengoku era Japan.
Edo Period. Sengoku had a Catholic infestation that threatened to cause a religious civil war on top of the political one currently occurring.
I mean, it has been the majority opinion of every prosperous nation since always, but our leaders have never cared about that.
I doubt a majority opinion across the world has ever been 'zero foreigners whatsoever'. But even if we stretch and assume it once was, the majority will always be against immigration because the majority are the poor and immigration almost always negatively effects the poor.
...But at basically nopoint in history was 'zero immigration' ever mainstream position adopted by rulers of lands. Those on top did not discover the benefits of allowing foreigners in yesterday. They have been doing it for longer than the written word has existed.
sentinel island's immigration policy is based.
I must be a left-wing activist, because I'm ok with some merit/points based immigration, but only with the endorsement and liability assumption of a 2nd generation native-born citizen. (this should replace marriage visas) Also any crime no matter how small gets you sent back.
Promotes “white” births, clearly far right
I don’t see anything wrong with this. But I am a far right kkk member of course. I believe in the importance of family
Well fuck, guess I'm a centrist, even though when I disclose any of my values I'm usually called a Nazi, bigot, shill or an excuser depending on the audience.
I just define myself as a pragmatic realist and these are the measures you would need to take to remove the corruption and degeneracy from every Western country.
In the minds of the popular zeitgeist this translates to RIGHTWING DEATHSQUADS ((some obscure but catchy retro synthwave track))
I honestly cannot wait for R-pop death squads slaughtering regressive leftist degenerates though.
It's about redefining perfectly reasonable attitudes as sensible and taking the centrist definition away from what the progressives would have it be.
He never did take the plight of our fellow Kekistanians seriously
I think anything short of "purge all the invaders the way the Inquisition would purge heretics" is left wing and inadequate to address the situation.
Based
I agree that those are absolutely moderate, sensible, practical positions, especially to the UK.
I wouldn't even say that reducing legal immigration to zero is inherently a sensible position to most countries, but it's absolutely imperative to the UK.
The UK needs mass deportations... today.
I must be far left then, because I disagree about reducing immigration to 0 (close is enough), and having a death penalty.
Combine them?
Imp, I want you to realize something - despite you hating the stormfags, you are literally cloning their collectivist ideology and replacing jews with women.
Stop it. Get some help.
Stop posting if you can't post responsibly.