Are Politically Neutral People and Moderates above it all?

The answer is yes and no.

While I still follow the word that I won’t air my opinions on social issues or any political issues other than civil issues on this blog, I did want to come up with a point in defense of people who are neutral or indifferent to political or social issues. Without singling out specific cases I’ve been involved in or naming certain people or organizations that wronged me, here is what I have to say about today’s issues.

In today’s polarized climate, it’s clear that both sides are extreme. One side is fighting to strip human rights away from many various groups, either to preserve the cultural norms that many younger people struggled to follow or to get back their pride after losing it during the Civil Rights Era. The other side is pushing for extreme measures to protect or ensure human rights and behaved like animals to get everything they want. And another thing, both sides are close-minded. When one side is fighting for oppression and the other side is using extreme means to fight against it, it’s really difficult for me to take sides. As you know, I will never bow down to the Social Justice Warriors or the Neo-Nazis. Want me to teach the theory of White Privilege? Forget it! I believe that the theory was clearly made to bully white people into admitting they’re guilty and to give up their wealth and free time to others. Want me to teach the Great Replacement Theory? Forget it! That is clearly one of the worst ideas ever, even worse than communism. Any conspiracy theories that promote hatred towards minorities should not be taught at all.

And then there is the third group, the politically neutral or moderates. These people will not take sides with either the left or the right. Some don’t even want to get involved in politics. And the ones that do, they are willing to compromise or negotiate or take a 50/50 stance. For instance, let’s talk about abortion. These people would be a bit pro-life and pro-choice. While they support legal abortions for cases other than rape, incest, health issues, or to save the mother’s life, they oppose elective abortions (i.e. the sole reason being that they don’t want children at all). They would support overturning Roe v. Wade, but they also oppose both nationwide bans on abortions for any case and bans on interstate travel. While these people aren’t going to help either the left or the right push their agenda, they are more pleasant to talk to or reason with, as they are better at maintaining viability for the country.

The politically neutral people and the moderates aren’t the only people who won’t get along with the alt right and progressive extremists. Average liberals and average conservatives don’t like them either. Those who aren’t on the same side won’t get along, but neither would the ones who are on the same side. The average liberals may agree with the progressive extremists on what they stand for, but even they don’t like how they behave. The average conservatives found the alt-right to be too extreme, even for them.

Here’s the problem with today’s society. The radicals may be a smaller percentage of the population, but they have the loudest voices and are thus the ones who pull the strings. If you aren’t liberal enough, you’re not welcome on the spaces that the progressive extremists control. If you aren’t conservative enough, you are a RINO. And the moderates and the politically neutral people get the most hate. There are memes mocking on centrists on how they support acts of inhumanity to compromise with those who support it and those who oppose it. But these memes miss the point on why centrists won’t take sides. It’s not because they want to compromise on stuff that can’t be compromised on. It’s because both sides are uncivil, immature, hostile, and sometimes extreme.

Bad Political Beliefs:

To show where I stand on politics, I came up with a list of issues that you should not support by all means. Not every opinion or belief of this nature will be listed here, but what they all have in common is that they are too extreme and are beyond the bounds of sanity. I’m going to leave out LGBT issues, the Israel-Palestine Conflict, and COVID-19 issues since they are too controversial in today’s age (like at the same level slavery reached in the 1850’s). It’s okay to take sides on any political issue, whether it be economic, social, environment, diplomatic, or democratic, but these opinions are unacceptable by any means. Avoid supporting them at all costs:

• Teaching the idea that white people are inherently racist or inherently evil.
• Teaching the idea that white people get everything they want because of skin while ignoring other achievements they made.
• Teaching the idea that mainstay systems that have no intent to discriminate (like math, standardized testing, or the electoral college) are racist and/or should be thrown out completely because of unintended racial inequity.
• Reparations for slavery or other past acts of discrimination done by the ancestors of today’s citizens.
• Approval of racial slurs, stereotypes, threats to discriminate, or bigoted opinions, especially in a public setting.
• Hate crimes or legalization of hate crimes.
• White supremacy or any other forms of pride towards one demographic.
• Discrimination based on skin color, ethnicity, or nationality, as well as sex, religion, age, class, ability, or sexual orientation.
• Death penalty or life imprisonment for abortions.
• Bans on abortions in case of rape, incest, or to safe the mother’s life.
• Right to have sex-selective abortions, partial-birth abortions, or after-birth abortions.
• Easy access to abortions for illegal immigrants (such as free abortions at the expense of taxpayer funds).
• Legalization of heroin.
• Easy access to gun ownership for minors.
• Safe spaces in college campuses or in public.
• Mandatory trigger warnings.
• Bans on words, symbols, or phrases that don’t apply to everyone (such as when New York banned the word “birthdays” on standardized testing, or when five students got suspended for wearing American flag shirts on Cinco de Mayo, or the “war on Christmas”).
• Speech codes in college campuses.
• Pardons or commutations for hate criminals and terrorists.
• Taxpayer funds to bring back deported criminals.
• Bans on meat consumption, airplanes, plastic bags, or plastic straws.
• Bans on private transportation.
• Dismantling the EPA or commonsense environmental regulations.
• Bans on eco-friendly alternatives to environmental hazards.

Some of these opinions or beliefs may have stemmed from fallacies or conspiracy theories, but regardless of how many people believe them, you shouldn’t support them anyways. They are either too extreme or approving of what’s actually harmful. No sane person would support any of that.

Everything Wrong with Today’s Generations:

When it comes to today’s political debates or online behavior, there’s many things that I am appalled at by most people. In fact, I have been bullied or harassed by some of these lunatics. I won’t tell you who or where I was since I want to respect the privacy of others, but it’s clear that people these days are not civil. Other than the fact that they have no tolerance towards people who are neutral or indifferent to social issues and their support towards extreme ideologies like listed above, here is everything that is wrong with both the progressive extremists and the alt-right:

• First of all, they have used labels or accusations against others for not agreeing with them. Are you against Obama or his policies? If yes, then they’ll call you a racist. Do you oppose letting trans women into women’s sports? If yes, then they’ll call you a transphobe. Do you support Palestine over Israel? If yes, then they’ll call you are an anti-semite. They don’t care what reason you have for these opinions, and there’s nothing you can do to defend yourself or your points. If you don’t agree with them, then you are going to be labeled a bigot, communist, terrorist, or whatever destructive label that can tarnish your reputation. This is McCarthyism, which is very dangerous. It also shows immaturity in debating topics.
• Going even further, they will use the same accusations for almost anything they don’t like. It’s not just different opinions. If you voted against a black liberal or voted for someone who is basically like Trump except not a pervert or an attention whore, you will be smeared as a racist. If you used a microaggression (i.e. “America is a land of opportunity”), you will be smeared as a bigot. If you said something that you didn’t even know was wrong, or isn’t normally bad but you offended them, they will accuse you of being a racist, homophobe, or pervert. They will not bother taking any excuse. They don’t even care if you are oblivious. They will attack you if you bother them once, and they are hellbent on harassing you or ostracizing you. Worse yet, they will try to harass you or ostracize you for something you did a long time ago that you don’t do anymore.
• Just as you think it’s bad enough, they also are unwilling to forgive you once you did something wrong or what they perceive is wrong. We all make mistakes. Nobody is perfect. And not everyone are going to agree to the same standards. But to these lunatics, if you bother them once, they aren’t going to forgive you for as long as you live, and they will use that as an excuse to harass you. They also have no qualms digging up your personal history from a long time ago and using your past antics against you.
• Moreover, these people are hypocrites. They are willing to pull the race card if you disagree with them or have said something insensitive (or not even offensive at all, but they are offended by it), but they would also say some actual racist comments or defend allies that make racist comments. They would also do everything to oust people they accused of sexual harassment but worship an even bigger pervert like if they’re a god. They will also get riled up if you got rude to them when they have been even ruder.
• When you make an argument, they get very nitpicky. If you made a constructive argument for something they’re against, but one of the things in your argument you said was off topic, they will only focus on the off-topic part of the argument. If you said something that bothered them, but someone else apologizes for you, they will specifically demand an apology from you, and they would reject it if you didn’t give them an apology on time. You could also make a long argument for something or against something with as many points as possible, and they will only focus on the few points that may not be the main point. Or if two points seem contradictory to them, they will nitpick that and say it’s an oxymoron.
• They don’t know how to debate maturely either. Aside to being nitpicky and using personal attacks, they also use logical fallacies to prove their point, jump to conclusions to make assumptions, twist your words against you, and may even bring up something irrelevant to the debate to attack you. And there’s also those who use profanity when making their points. There’s no need to use profanity when arguing with someone on political or social issues.
• This may be a redundant point since I already mentioned it a few times, but they are very close-minded. If you disagree with them, they will assume that you’re evil. They don’t want to learn opposing viewpoints either. If you did something they don’t like, they will assume that you do this for a living. They won’t give you second chances, they don’t think you’re going to change for the better, and they refuse to listen to any excuse you make.
• In case if you don’t know what offends them, they are too sensitive. They’ll get easily offended at almost anything, not just something everybody can agree that are wrong. Whatever was acceptable 20 to 40 years ago that is acceptable in nature, you can easily get in trouble for saying it or doing it today. Not because it really is unacceptable, but rather because people these days are too sensitive. You can make a valid and logical viewpoint, only for others to shoot it down because they put emotion in front of reason. They also want safe spaces and trigger warnings because they can’t stand opposing viewpoints or average everyday words or phrases that offend them.
• They aren’t willing to accept criticism for their behavior or their views. If you criticize their views for being too radical, they will get offended and fight back to defend their views. If you call them out for how they express their views, they will feel like you’re trying to silence them.
• They not only bully people who disagree with them, but they also deny bullying. It’s okay to be blunt when arguing in politics, but if you’re going to use personal attacks, intimidate your opponent, and nitpick their arguments and guilt them in a way that would strike them in the heart, that is bullying. To say that it’s not bullying or even not rude is utter nonsense, and by doing that, you are not only lying to your opponents or anyone else, but also to yourself.
• They have no tolerance towards any rules or policies that restrict the discussion of politics. Banning political discussions from certain spaces like gaming forums would be beneficial since political discussions do more harm than help. But these people aren’t tolerant of such rules, for that they deem them to be silencing or offensive.
• Finally, and most importantly, they are willing to harass, threaten, or doxx people who disagree with them or have done something they don’t like. If you reach this point when debating someone or responding to their views, then you have crossed a line so far that there’s no point of forgiveness. Smearing people as racists or acting immature in arguments is already bad enough, but this is extreme behavior. I don’t get why it’s justified to do this.
  • Although this is rare, some are even willing to kill people for having different viewpoints or for saying stuff that they are bothered by. While we all know about the assassination of Charlie Kirk last year, I do want to bring up another example. In 2020, some woman got killed for saying “All Lives Matter”.

And all of this isn’t just limited to politics. People have taken video games, tv shows, and sports way too seriously to the point that they would behave like this. But it’s even worse in politics. I’m not sure why people have gotten less mature these days, but if people are going to behave like this, it’s going to divide society even further and bring it down to its knees. This isn’t just in America. It’s everywhere. I’m not sure if the internet is making them more insecure, but it’s clear that in today’s polarized climate, these people are unwilling to change their views or the way they behave.

I do have another thing to say. I agree that it’s rude and harsh to call protestors or other people like that “barbarians”, “savages”, “extremists”, “spoiled brats”, or “zealots”. I also agree that it’s rude and harsh to use the phrases “too sensitive”, “false sense of safety”, or “grow up” when criticizing someone for their behavior. However, these people have been confrontational, aggressive, militant, belligerent, disrespectful, defiant, ungrateful, entitled, or uncivil. If they cannot show any respect, we shouldn’t have to respect them either. Now two wrongs don’t make a right, but this is the golden rule. If this is how they’re going to behave, this is how they’re going to be treated. Therefore, I would defend these harsh words or phrases until everyone can get along.

And one more thing. If someone behaves this way to push their political agenda down other’s throats, it makes it difficult for some people to support their views. If they behave like this, not only would others have a bad impression of them, but it would also taint their ideologies as this would make people associate them with violence. This could lead to people taking the opposite side or not even getting involved at all. Those who already are on the opposite side would be pushed further to the extreme. This is a reverse Streisand Effect. Those who are weak may give in, but they wouldn’t truly support their cause. What if someone said “I support Black Lives Matter because one of their supporters bullied me into supporting them”? This isn’t true support. Statements like this are ignorant and highly insulting. But this is the price of using aggressive means of spreading your views.

Politically Neutral People:

Finally, let’s go to the third group, the politically neutral people. These include the following:

• People who are silent, neutral, or indifferent to politics.
• People who are willing to compromise or negotiate on issues.
• People who are mediators on political issues.
• People who call for civility.
• People who enforce bans on political or religious discussions.
• People who are political but are neither left-winged or right-winged (also known as moderates).
• People who are political but aren’t left-winged, right-winged, libertarian, or authoritarian (also known as centrists).
• People who think both sides have good points or both sides are bad.

The good thing is that these people would not exhibit the same behaviors the radicals from either side have. But, they aren’t the best for political debates. Without conflict, you can’t make progress. Without progress, you can’t improve every day of life.

Reasons why being neutral is good:

This section explains why those who are politically neutral are above it all. Here’s why:

• They are willing to get along with either side.
• They are willing to compromise.
• They are not willing to let politics divide family or friendship.
• They are not willing to support extremes from either side.
• They won’t take sides if the issue is too contentious.
• If they choose to debate, they can debate more maturely than the left or the right.
• They believe that it’s more important to remain civil and would condemn both sides if they get riled up.
• If they’re the ones in charge, they are fairer than the left or the right.
• If they’re the ones in charge, they will suppress political discussion if it gets too toxic.
• They will never promote hate or discrimination against others based on demographic.

I will have to say, it bothers me that some people, usually the left-wing, hate the neutral folks. They say that it’s dismissive to tell them to calm down when they’re acting like spoiled brats. People who use profanity to prove their point tend to shoot down any calls for civility when it’s unnecessary, unprofessional, and immature to use profanity in a debate.

Those who criticize neutrality do have a point that being neutral would enable the oppressors to continue their antics, but from my personal experiences, these are the same people who are rude, act like spoiled brats, and have no regard for the rules. In other words, those who criticize neutrality aren’t really nice people at all. They’re bullies. There’s a polite way to explain why being neutral is bad, but when you smear them as “evil” or accuse them of being complicit in oppression, that’s rude.

Remember when Bob Chapek got criticized for remaining silent when Florida restricted LGBT education for those below the 4th grade? Many people think that this was one of the biggest mistakes (if not, the biggest mistake) he did as CEO of Disney. Actually, the real big mistake was that he spoke out against the law. By doing that, the state of Florida took away their construction rights to Walt Disney World. Getting into a fight with Ron Desantis was so bad that he lost his job as the CEO later that year. In my opinion, he was right to remain silent because in 2012, Chick-Fil-A, Papa John’s (now Papa Johns), and Olive Garden have learned the hard way that political opinions are bad for business because the CEO represents the company, and if they air controversial opinions, the company will be synonymous with these opinions. Why isn’t Disney held to the same standards Chick-Fil-A was? What’s the difference?

I will tell you this. If you’re a news reporter or a politician, politics is something you shouldn’t avoid. Being in power requires taking risks. Even a house of all moderates won’t function. But if you’re in charge of a business or organization outside of politics, you have no reason to get involved. If you take sides with one party, you may alienate the customers of the other, which may hurt you. But if people refuse to show business because you remained silent or neutral, forget about them. You can do well as a business without them. The one big mistake all businesses have made was trying to please everybody.

Reasons why being neutral is bad:

While we’re at it, I would also like to know that they aren’t above it all. While they are the ones in the right when we talk about being civil, they may not get the point of either issue. Being neutral may lead to ignorance, and chances are, they may not care if the world is falling apart.

• For economic issues, the rich need the lower classes to keep them in business, while the poor need the upper classes to support them. Getting rid of the poor (which includes taking away all wealth from the poor and ending all support for them) is like taking out the producer in an ecosystem. When you get rid of that, you wipe out the entire ecosystem. Getting rid of the rich is like taking out the farms. The farms provide all of the food, and without them, there will be no food. We also need the middle class to support the rich and the poor. Foxes don’t eat grass, and people don’t eat straight from the farm.
• For social issues, when humanity it at a stake against another force, you should always take the side of humanity. Human rights (including the right to live) are not debatable. Even though needs are not rights, the right to have a need is a right.
• For diplomatic issues, you should care if something bad happens to your country. You should also care if other countries are hurt because they also provide the resources to your home country. Without them, costs may go up.
• For democratic issues, if you don’t care about the right to vote or how voting rights are suppressed, then you may not be able to vote, which would lead to the wrong people in control.
• For environmental issues, global warming is a serious threat, and our carbon emissions are responsible for it. If you can’t take care of the Earth, it won’t be hospitable for any life, including human life.

By choosing to be neutral or indifferent, you wouldn’t care about any of the issues from above. You don’t have to talk politics for a living, but if you don’t care if the world is falling apart, you will eventually go down as well.

Another problem is that some issues can’t be compromised on. Remember the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850? In 1820, Henry Clay came up with a solution, where all new states north of the 36-30 line will become free states (where slavery is illegal), while all new states south of the line will become slave states (where slavery is legal). In 1850, California (which was on both sides of the line) became a free state, but other states can vote on slavery. They also passed the Fugitive Slave Act while ending slave trade in Washington DC. The purpose of these compromises was to have a balance in power. But here’s the problem. Slavery is absolutely evil and immoral. Even disregarding the racism and abuse, the very idea of owning a person and depriving them of their freedom and liberty is immoral. You cannot compromise on that. You also can’t compromise on what followed slavery – Jim Crow Laws. If something is a human rights violation, you can’t compromise on it.

Handling Opposing Viewpoints:

I’m going to go ahead and give out one important rule. Under no exception is it acceptable to bully, intimidate, or harass other people. People have been doing this to those who disagree with them. There’s two types of bullying in this case. One of them is “Punching a Nazi”, and the other is “Political Discrimination”.

• “Punching a Nazi” is defined as hostility towards anyone who pushes or supports harmful views. It’s not just limited to physical violence, and it’s not limited to antisemitic, fascist, Hitler fans. Online, it would be starting arguments, dogpiling, threats, and insults. In person, it could be physical violence or verbal violence. The target of the violence would always be a bad person. They could be a racist, homophobe, transphobe, sexist, ableist, or simply a fascist, as they constantly use hate speech or advocate for extreme ideologies.
• “Political Discrimination” is defined as hostility towards anyone else for political reasons. Like I said, above, any act of hostility, such as violence or discrimination, isn’t acceptable. But this time, the target isn’t even someone who is harmful, but rather has opinions that you don’t agree with or that you find bigoted when most people don’t.

I’ll tell you why neither of them are acceptable behavior. Regarding “Punching a Nazi”, if someone is spreading a hateful rhetoric or harmful views, they should not be allowed in public places, nor should they be listened to. However, if you’re going against them, you also need to consider the average everyday person. Most people don’t care about politics, but they do care about personal safety. Therefore, you need to give them a good reason not to shun you. If the Nazi or some other harmful person is going to cause discord, they will be removed. But it doesn’t make you any better to get into a fight with them, because at the surface, it doesn’t matter what the person is talking about. If you violently assault another person, people will see you as a violent psychopath, and you could be getting in legal trouble too. Granted, the Nazi will also get in trouble for provoking the fight, but you wouldn’t have gotten in trouble if you didn’t fight back in an aggressive manner. Online, starting a fight with a bigot will give average people an impression that you are rude and aggressive, and would thus not want to be around you. If you want to be fair, there are no special cases.

As for the other kind, “Political Discrimination”, any act of bullying of this kind is clear hostility. If you can’t tolerate opposing viewpoints, then you are the one in the wrong. While it may be understandable if the target said something offensive, but not everything is going to be offensive. Now some phrases like “I personally believe marriage is a union between one man and one woman”, “there are two genders”, “white privilege is a myth”, and “all lives matter” are highly controversial. While most people don’t find them to be offensive, many people are offended by these phrases. But if they’re not using any of these phrases at all, as well as logical fallacies, conspiracy theories, or attacks towards others, then there really isn’t anything wrong with the opposing viewpoints. Either way, it’s not acceptable to bully, intimidate, or harass these kinds of people. If you do, then you are the villain.

Finally, let’s look into the neutral party. If you are part the neutral group, it doesn’t make you any better to think that you’re more superior or to mock both sides for being rude. But to those outside the neutral group, you need to be more accepting of a mediator if fights get out of control. If you break the rules, you are going to get in trouble. And if you fight against the rules, you will be seen as a rebel. Also, if you’re not tolerant of the neutral part, then you have shown to others that you’re difficult or impossible to reason with.

To summarize this, politically neutral people are above it all because they are more civil and unwilling to pick fights or get rude to others. But they can also be ignorant and uneducated about the issues, while also open to compromise on what couldn’t be compromised on.