10 votes

Who's your favourite personality on the "other side", politically?

Whether on YouTube, some sort of press outlet, maybe an author, take your pick!

32 comments

  1. kfwyre
    Link
    I don't follow a lot of political discussion or commentary, so I can't really specifically identify a full favorite, but I did recently read an "across the aisle" book that I can share here. I...

    I don't follow a lot of political discussion or commentary, so I can't really specifically identify a full favorite, but I did recently read an "across the aisle" book that I can share here.

    I would describe myself as pretty far left. Ben Sasse is a Republican Senator who is pretty far right. I didn't really know a whole lot about him other than some of his policy positions and that he got press for being one of a handful of Republican voices to openly criticize/oppose Trump. While I'm certainly a fan of Trump critics, particularly if they're on the right, that's about where our alignment ends. For example: he doesn't support marriage equality, and I'm a man with a husband.

    Nevertheless, on account of its premise and good reviews, I read his book Them: Why We Hate Each Other - and How to Heal, and I was surprised to find myself mentally agreeing with it more than I was criticizing it. Part of its accessibility is certainly simple politicking, but beyond that I think the book is a nice reminder that people are more than just their policy positions.

    Sasse is thoughtful and principled. There was a thread a couple of weeks ago about good right-wing values, and I feel like he is in alignment with many of those. Even though I don't necessarily agree with his principles, I can appreciate that he has them and, more importantly, his book helped me understand why he has them in the first place.

    I think there's something to be said for a sort of "personal open source" politics discourse. It's not enough for us to just talk policy and beliefs--we have to show the human story behind where those beliefs come from. This is how so many people in my life changed their minds about gay people. They got to know me and hear my story and they then had to confront, often for the first time, the idea that their beliefs might have been out of alignment with their compassion.

    This is not an issue exclusive to one-side, either. Sasse's book helped me understand that much of his conservative beliefs come from his own experiences growing up. He has had a good life through and through, and he genuinely wants others to experience that same thing. Many of his political beliefs stem from his idea that if everyone could experience what he did, we'd have a better country.

    I fully agree with that, but we fundamentally disagree on how to get there. Nevertheless, I can still appreciate that at least I know where he's coming from.

    Again, I can't say he's my "favorite" person on the right or anything, since I only read the book and haven't really followed him past that. I can say, in the spirit of the question, that I think the book was a good example of a right-wing book that can still be read and appreciated by leftists.

    11 votes
  2. [9]
    Neverland
    Link
    This is an excellent topic, and just a great question. It made me realize something about myself. I am so pissed off at the right for abandoning many of their supposed core principals that I can't...

    This is an excellent topic, and just a great question. It made me realize something about myself.

    I am so pissed off at the right for abandoning many of their supposed core principals that I can't use the word "favorite" to describe anyone that still supports the GOP. I have truly lost all respect for them and that makes me really sad.

    9 votes
    1. [5]
      BuckeyeSundae
      Link Parent
      You could interpret "the other side" as more of an ideological question rather than a strictly party based one. (Especially since that's basically mandatory if you're not from the US.) Have any...

      You could interpret "the other side" as more of an ideological question rather than a strictly party based one. (Especially since that's basically mandatory if you're not from the US.) Have any people who you see as ideologically right-wing who you like?

      5 votes
      1. [4]
        Neverland
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        Thanks for this reply. Yes, on a personal level I have always seen the commonality in us all. Left-wing, right-wing, whatever. I still like my stepfather who somehow voted for Trump. What I find...

        Thanks for this reply. Yes, on a personal level I have always seen the commonality in us all. Left-wing, right-wing, whatever. I still like my stepfather who somehow voted for Trump. What I find intolerable is the normalization of the extreme right, especially by the talking heads.

        I would like to think that I am secular, Independent, and a humanist. I despise tribalism, especially in the form of politics. We should stand for our principles, not some affiliation. I feel that claiming a party bias is just a way for the oligarchs to divide us further. I grew up in the USA, but was born in Poland where I currently reside. When I speak in absolute terms like "the right," it is unfortunately in the terms of the US political environment. Although the disgusting turn in US politics, which I largely blame on Rupert Murdoch and his disciples, has leaked into Poland as well.

        When I travel and meet new people we are all the same. Even if people have very opposing views, I excel at finding the common ground. I was able to sit at most of the lunch tables in school.. jocks, nerds, etc.. This is what troubles me so much regarding my current state of mind about understanding "the other side." What makes me sad is that the state of political affairs has made me state something like "I have lost all respect for the right." But at some point the line must be drawn, correct? Or am I just another victim of the divide and conqueror strategy? I am extremely conflicted here and again, I am very appreciative of your question.

        Edit: lots of edits as this opened a floodgate for me and turned into some sort of diatribe/confession. If you made it this far, thanks :)

        6 votes
        1. BuckeyeSundae
          Link Parent
          A lot of what you said here resonates with me. I grew up in the Midwest in a mixed-politics home, a mixed religion home, and mixed class home. I basically flinch any time someone says anything...

          A lot of what you said here resonates with me. I grew up in the Midwest in a mixed-politics home, a mixed religion home, and mixed class home. I basically flinch any time someone says anything about another group of people in broad sweeping terms because chances are I know someone they're generalizing into that term, and I probably like that person.

          I gave a little bit of my hand away in my own answer to this question, but a lot about politics for me that I enjoy comes down to coalition building and finding common ground to work forward with. It's one of the main reasons I struggle ideologically to cope with someone like Sanders, who looks to accent disagreement as a way of building a stronger base of support for his views.

          I think at the end of the day, a question like the OP asked here does a lot to help people look for people who they can disagree with and still respect (which is the lifeblood of any healthy political system). Unfortunately, there's a lot going on that prevents people from the traditional right wing of US politics from acting in a way I can engage with myself, but I also know they're not starting from nothing in that rudeness. It often takes two to tango, and there are a lot of rude things "my side" has done to them before I entered the conversation. They bring that baggage when they talk to me, even if they don't always mean to. And unfortunately, I often do too in reverse, even as I try not to.

          2 votes
        2. [2]
          NoblePath
          Link Parent
          Just for the record, “politics” is not a form of tribalism, just like “communication” is not a form of language. It’s the other way around.

          Just for the record, “politics” is not a form of tribalism, just like “communication” is not a form of language.

          It’s the other way around.

          2 votes
          1. Neverland
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            Interesting.. would you mind explaining that a bit? When I look up "tribalism" I see: The way that I was thinking was that, for example: "I am a Republican/Democrat because I find commonality with...

            Interesting.. would you mind explaining that a bit?

            When I look up "tribalism" I see:

            Tribalism implies the possession of a strong cultural or ethnic identity that separates one member of a group from the members of another group. Based on strong relations of proximity and kinship, members of a tribe tend to possess a strong feeling of identity.
            wikipedia

            The way that I was thinking was that, for example: "I am a Republican/Democrat because I find commonality with other people who believe in my core values, I find other people with other values as part of another group."

            I now realize that I was using the term "tribalism" very liberally, and possibly inappropriately, but I don't understand how:

            It's the other way around

            I learn a lot from comments here on Tildes, so I would just like to know exactly what you meant there.

    2. [2]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. Neverland
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        Well this was a post about opinions, was is not? I was extremely verbose and I apologize for that. To my own disappointment the only person I could name in that regard is Sam Harris, who Google...

        Well this was a post about opinions, was is not? I was extremely verbose and I apologize for that. To my own disappointment the only person I could name in that regard is Sam Harris, who Google suggests is "regressive-left." That's all I got, but I do respect that man even though I disagree with many of his public statements.

        3 votes
    3. [2]
      Eva
      Link Parent
      I agree, more or less, though the GOP isn't all of conservatism.

      I agree, more or less, though the GOP isn't all of conservatism.

      1 vote
      1. Neverland
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        This is what I always thought, until post-2016. edit: tbh, your comment requires more thought on my part

        This is what I always thought, until post-2016.

        edit: tbh, your comment requires more thought on my part

        1 vote
  3. [2]
    NaraVara
    (edited )
    Link
    Honestly I just don't have any anymore. I used to follow a fair number of conservative and libertarian leaning bloggers and news outlets, but since around 2012 the best of them have just stopped...

    Honestly I just don't have any anymore. I used to follow a fair number of conservative and libertarian leaning bloggers and news outlets, but since around 2012 the best of them have just stopped being political. The rest have descended into full-on paranoia to where I can't respect their opinions anymore. A statistician I used to follow, W.M. Briggs, is now posting a bunch of trans panic nonsense and trying to carry water for Charles Murray.

    I used to think he was at least level headed and intellectually honest, but he drank some serious kool aid. Others where I went to at least find some contrarian but well formulated thoughts, like Reason magazine, are just so painfully tiresome, only able to deliver stale, warmed over takes that we've heard 1,000x before now. It's like the brainpower and ability to make reasonable arguments that aren't ridiculous on their face is just gone. They're just all bullshit artists now or content to churn out the most intellectually lazy and poorly articulated points possible. I think everyone with actual capacity for independent thought stopped joining up with movement conservatism. It's a spent force.

    I think over the past few years the "mask" has come off respectable conservatism and it's just devolved into White identity politics. They don't even feel any impulse to try to rationalize the baseline fears and anxieties that drove their conservative beliefs before because they're so deep into filter bubbles where this is normal that they view even bland mainstream Democrats as being outside the pale of acceptable discourse. It's just impossible to have a discussion or conversation with these folks that is at all congruent with objective reality. The ones who I still have respect for have mostly flipped over to be centrist Democrats or registered Republicans who have voted steadily for Democrats the past few elections. So while we disagree on a lot, we're not on "opposite sides" anymore.

    I never thought I'd see the day where Marxist-Leninists seem more historically literate and intellectually honest than your run-of-the-mill Republican, but here we are.

    6 votes
    1. Eva
      Link Parent
      I absolutely agree, for the most part (especially on Reason).

      I absolutely agree, for the most part (especially on Reason).

      3 votes
  4. [3]
    mrbig
    (edited )
    Link
    I'd have to say Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), the 34Th President of Brazil. He identifies himself as part of the third-way, but his presidency was that of a progressive neoliberal. He is also a...

    I'd have to say Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), the 34Th President of Brazil.

    He identifies himself as part of the third-way, but his presidency was that of a progressive neoliberal. He is also a respected sociologist and brilliantly represented our country abroad. During our military dictatorship, FHC was an important voice, defending freedom and democracy.

    Some of his policies had terrible consequences, others prepared Brazil to become a more modern and dynamic economy.

    During his administration our health system was in a state of despair: this is something a neoliberal approach will never handle right.

    He dilapidated some of our greatest high-education public facilities, responsible for most of our research, but at the same time debureaucratized the process of opening private universities. He created lines of credit for students, but with absurd interest rates. Following administrations made those rules more reasonable and accessible, but FHC has the merit of creating those policies.

    He also had social policies similar to Zero Hunger that would take millions of Brazilians out of poverty during Lula's administration, but with a much smaller scope.

    Even though FHC did not hit social issues with the straightforwardness of other administrations, it is very clear he was concerned with the welfare of the people. He just thought the economy would heal the country by itself. While I do believe the economy is of the utmost importance, I also think that sometimes, when the wound is too deep, major direct intervention is required.

    As a true believer in small government, FHC ended the public monopoly on communications, one of his best decisions. Before that, landlines were so expensive that most people (like my family) couldn't afford. Instead, we had to RENT A LINE from intermediaries, in addition to what we paid to the phone company. We also paid pulses for the duration of the call. ANY CALL. It's my understanding that, back in the nineties, local calls in the US you had a flat fee. If FHC kept this monopoly, this would take much longer to change. Today we have multiple companies competing in a relatively healthy environment. And I believe that makes a lot of sense for technology.

    I don't think the same approach is good for other essential things like oil, water, social justice, healthcare, and education. And that's where he made monumental mistakes. But I don't think FHC did any of that out of shady interests. He truly believed he was doing the right thing, and I respect him for that.

    Edit: forgot the most important! As economy minister, FHC ended the hyperinflation and gave buying power back to the middle class! Before him, the same item could have at night a different price from the morning. It was CRAZY. We never knew how much our money was worth.

    6 votes
    1. [2]
      Eva
      Link Parent
      That's fascinating! Thank you for sharing; I'd only heard about him tangentially!

      That's fascinating! Thank you for sharing; I'd only heard about him tangentially!

      2 votes
      1. mrbig
        Link Parent
        Yeah, he is my favorite from the other side but I wouldn't say I'm an admirer. I was, but when Brazilian Hitler (Jair Bolsonaro) rose in the polls last year he didn't take a stand. That really...

        Yeah, he is my favorite from the other side but I wouldn't say I'm an admirer. I was, but when Brazilian Hitler (Jair Bolsonaro) rose in the polls last year he didn't take a stand. That really hurt me.

        1 vote
  5. [4]
    Eva
    Link
    I'm pretty decently left, I think (I loved when Ngo got popped a week or two ago, for example, and I was a big fan of Warren initially (~2014 and before), though that's faded with her recent rise...

    I'm pretty decently left, I think (I loved when Ngo got popped a week or two ago, for example, and I was a big fan of Warren initially (~2014 and before), though that's faded with her recent rise in popularity a touch, and one of my favourite political books ever (despite being a bit baby's-first-political-book-ish) is Rules for Radicals), but I find it hard not to love Nick Fuentes. You can tell he doesn't believe a single thing he says, and there are so many layers of irony behind it it's pretty obvious he's just a run-of-the-mill lowercase-L libertarian channer at the end of the day. It helps that he's pretty hilarious (the point in the video linked is about him mocking Candace Owens for her comment on Hitler being entirely innocent outside of being a globalist, granted, in a very Nick Fuentes way) at points.

    3 votes
    1. [2]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. Eva
        Link Parent
        That's the fun of it, right? I'd normally see it in that light, but... Every single one of his comments are like that; he never doesn't use a strong sense of irony. He even breaks character on...

        That's the fun of it, right? I'd normally see it in that light, but...

        Every single one of his comments are like that; he never doesn't use a strong sense of irony. He even breaks character on occasion to call out how dumb a bit he's done is.

        The slight pause before he does it, the sort of smirk that slowly takes over his face, the change in tone, and then the acknowledgement after the second joke that he thinks the joke went a bit too far (granted, not admitting fault, unlike he occasionally does).

        He does this all the time (description of clip: first, it starts with him going on a rant about how outer space isn't real, despite the beliefs of redditors, and then the clip after is him smirking while he's talking in real life to people, and, much to their chagrin, pulling up his 23andme results), and it's really beautiful.

        More than anything, he seems intent on ruining the ability of conservatives to actually form coalitions; he insults (and especially goes out of his way to make uncomfortable) conservatives more than anyone.

        He's banned from CPAC, and despite that, regularly shows up at CPAC. (A bit ago, one of the things that caught media attention was him talking a guard into thinking he was an entirely different person and being able to fuck off for the rest of it all, and another thing was him baiting the CPAC twitter account (post-ban, mind you), into putting him and a literal Nazi (a person so far right they've done stuff on The Daily Stormer) into their highlight reel for CPAC 2019 (naturally, doing something as dumb as "T-Posing" and "dabbing").

        His entire public persona seems to be predated almost entirely on highlighting how absurd the modern conservative movement is, albeit in a really sort of Monkey's Paw sort of way. He's probably one of the only people who's convinced their base into hating both Richard Spencer and almost everyone in Trump's cabinet.

        2 votes
    2. [3]
      Comment removed by site admin
      Link Parent
      1. [2]
        Deimos
        Link Parent
        Stop shoehorning the exact same argument into every thread you can.

        Stop shoehorning the exact same argument into every thread you can.

        1 vote
        1. [2]
          Comment removed by site admin
          Link Parent
          1. Deimos
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            Okay, I've deleted your account. If you change your mind or want all of your posts deleted as well, email me (deimos@tildes.net) from your account-recovery address within 30 days.

            Okay, I've deleted your account. If you change your mind or want all of your posts deleted as well, email me (deimos@tildes.net) from your account-recovery address within 30 days.

      2. Removed by admin: 4 comments by 2 users
        Link Parent
  6. [3]
    alyaza
    Link
    i dunno, probably metokur? but that's because metokur's videos aren't inherently political, they're about funny shit and eccentric people and drama sometimes that involves politics and other times...

    i dunno, probably metokur? but that's because metokur's videos aren't inherently political, they're about funny shit and eccentric people and drama sometimes that involves politics and other times it doesn't. beyond him i guess the answer would be sargon because everybody loves watching his dumb ass collapse like a house on fire regardless of where they stand politically. but like, really, most big right wing youtubers are so glaringly stupid or bigoted even in their ostensibly "non-political" videos (or their glaringly stupid and bigoted opinions hang over those videos) that i can't say i like any of them even as memes to watch explode every now and then. they're just shitheads boosted by youtube algorithms, and i go out of my way to avoid the lot of them.

    3 votes
    1. [2]
      Eva
      Link Parent
      I'd tend to agree; outside of the really blatantly obvious imageboard people, popular right-wingers tend to lean toward an unfunny/less intelligent side, unfortunately enough.

      I'd tend to agree; outside of the really blatantly obvious imageboard people, popular right-wingers tend to lean toward an unfunny/less intelligent side, unfortunately enough.

      2 votes
      1. culturedleftfoot
        Link Parent
        I was trying to think of any (intentionally) funny conservatives the other day and I actually couldn't come up with any (although a lot of that is probably me just not paying attention to media...

        I was trying to think of any (intentionally) funny conservatives the other day and I actually couldn't come up with any (although a lot of that is probably me just not paying attention to media personalities). Even when I thought of comedians, the ones I like who are probably right-leaning are nowhere near those who lean left. I suppose it's easier to be funny punching up than punching down.

        1 vote
  7. [5]
    BuckeyeSundae
    Link
    I used to be able to confidently say that while I disagreed with David Brooks a lot, I respected where he was coming from. But his desire to see a moral language reassert its dominance over the...

    I used to be able to confidently say that while I disagreed with David Brooks a lot, I respected where he was coming from. But his desire to see a moral language reassert its dominance over the national political dialogue isn't one that I can more than shrug disagreement about these days.

    But if he doesn't count as being on the "other side", then I don't really have an answer. I don't like both-sides-ism for a different reason than I often read other people articulating. I don't like both-sides-ism because I reject the idea that there are only two sides to any issue. The world is complicated, and just because the US has a two party system entrenched by a double First Past The Post system for the presidency doesn't mean that only two sides exist even within that framework. I also don't see politics as inherently about conflict, but inherently about conflict resolution. How do we find common ground to work together on the things we do agree on? And how can we summon grace to allow our erstwhile ideological rivals to get some praise for working together with us on those issues?

    On this point, I think David Brooks and I agree almost too much to be on opposing sides ideologically (even though we very much disagree about what values ought to be most important to us as a society).

    3 votes
    1. [4]
      Eva
      Link Parent
      Oh God, I've never seen anyone like David Brooks before (I've found Parker Molloy's rants on him for the past few days especially enjoyable). That's really interesting! I tend to agree with what...

      Oh God, I've never seen anyone like David Brooks before (I've found Parker Molloy's rants on him for the past few days especially enjoyable). That's really interesting! I tend to agree with what you said in theory, but interestingly, I've never taken Brooks as a type to espouse those kinds of views.

      3 votes
      1. [3]
        BuckeyeSundae
        Link Parent
        He once wrote an article back in 2003, at the start of the national push to legally prevent gay marriage at a state level through state constitutions, that conservatives needed to be defenders of...

        He once wrote an article back in 2003, at the start of the national push to legally prevent gay marriage at a state level through state constitutions, that conservatives needed to be defenders of marriage and needed to insist on gay marriage, rather than the direction he saw his fellow conservatives going. I mean, he says a lot of obnoxious things, but I can't fault the guy for inconsistency of character. The guy has values and tries his best to stick to them.

        2 votes
        1. NaraVara
          Link Parent
          HA! I remember that article, and I remember after reading it thinking "Maybe this gay marriage thing is a bad move and we actually need to just get the government out of the marriage game...

          that conservatives needed to be defenders of marriage and needed to insist on gay marriage, rather than the direction he saw his fellow conservatives going

          HA! I remember that article, and I remember after reading it thinking "Maybe this gay marriage thing is a bad move and we actually need to just get the government out of the marriage game altogether."

          Edit: I was also reading "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" at the time, so I was a bit on a "why not have weird forms of poly marriage if that's what people want?" kick too.

          1 vote
  8. NoblePath
    Link
    Davids brooks and frum, rich Lowry. Cass sunnstein. Thomas Barnett. What they have in common is thoughtfulness. They take the time to dive deep and have exceptional insight and communication. They...

    Davids brooks and frum, rich Lowry. Cass sunnstein.
    Thomas Barnett. What they have in common is thoughtfulness. They take the time to dive deep and have exceptional insight and communication. They make poor assumptions and have separate subjective values, but they all want to speak truthfully and they all want to see the world and it’s people prosper.

    3 votes
  9. [2]
    Bullmaestro
    (edited )
    Link
    Nigel Farage. There are several reasons why I like him: Farage seems like a very approachable guy. Probably because he resembles the regular you'd meet in your local pub rather than the out of...

    Nigel Farage. There are several reasons why I like him:

    1. Farage seems like a very approachable guy. Probably because he resembles the regular you'd meet in your local pub rather than the out of touch Eton educated toffs that you see in the Conservative Party. This is also unlike other alternative right wing figureheads like Tommy Robinson who is pretty much a Fascist with his own posse of brownshirts ready to beat up and hound anybody who stands in his way, and Sargon of Akkad, a YouTuber who has said some pretty nasty shit to female politicians and who has questionable views in many areas including Britain's age of consent.

    2. Farage has been campaigning for decades to get Britain out of the European Economic Community/European Union so he's had many years to figure out what kind of relationship Britain should have with the rest of Europe. His attitude is that we should establish a free trade deal (not single market access) with the EU, which none of the Tories are following. Unlike the many Tories who suddenly jumped on the Brexit bandwagon in 2016 because they wanted to leap at a shot of becoming leader without any clue as to how to deliver Brexit (such as Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and the other Brexiteers within the party), Farage seems like a genuine Euroskeptic.

    3. Farage didn't exactly represent the racist bigotry of UKIP, which the party embraced further following his resignation as leader. If anything he turned his back on UKIP because they were starting to embrace more problematic figures within the UK's far right like Tommy Robinson and Carl Benjamin.

    I voted Remain in 2016 and I very much like our country being in the EU, but with Brexit looking increasingly likely due to the sheer incompetence of the other parties, I've actually been tempted to vote for the Brexit Party in the next general election, because I would rather trust Nigel with our departure from the EU than whoever will end up leading our country on 23rd July (it's either going to be Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt, and both of them are assholes.)

    In my eyes, Labour have no chance of winning a General Election unless they get rid of Corbyn because he's a pro-Brexit leader holding back a pro-EU party, the Liberal Democrats are a wasted vote especially after they backstabbed their own supporters by trebling tuition fees nine years ago, Change UK is another wasted vote and it looks like that party was dead on arrival the moment they broke away from the mainstream factions, and the Greens won't get my support unless they scale back some of their more unpopular policies like opposing nuclear power. I also can't vote for the SNP or Plaid Cymru because I'm not based in Scotland or Wales. That leaves me with no Remain parties.

    2 votes
    1. Eva
      Link Parent
      Ooh, this is a really interesting one!

      Ooh, this is a really interesting one!

  10. [3]
    Comment deleted by author
    Link
    1. [2]
      JakeTheDog
      Link Parent
      So a strawman is your favorite pick? I think the spirit of what OP is asking is someone you'd pick who you might find some common ground with despite large differences, for the sake of bridging...

      So a strawman is your favorite pick? I think the spirit of what OP is asking is someone you'd pick who you might find some common ground with despite large differences, for the sake of bridging the partisan gap.

      5 votes
      1. [2]
        Comment deleted by author
        Link Parent
        1. JakeTheDog
          Link Parent
          TBH, yours was the first I saw so I didn't mean to pick on you. Many other replies here hedged their choice with "but everyone on the other side is an idiot anyways so this is the best I could...

          TBH, yours was the first I saw so I didn't mean to pick on you. Many other replies here hedged their choice with "but everyone on the other side is an idiot anyways so this is the best I could do". I'm a bit appalled at the answers here (kfwyre and Bullmaestro had good ones, though).

          4 votes