THE PROBLEM OF HARD RIGHT AND HARD LEFT OK. So, there is moral righteousness, co

THE PROBLEM OF HARD RIGHT AND HARD LEFT
OK. So, there is moral righteousness, conviction in it, and then there is operational possibility and practicality.

Every person’s moral position is a NEGOTIATING STRATEGY: an advertisement for demands for terms of his or her cooperation. The problem is, your cooperation must have value sufficient to compromise. If it diverges to far it has no value, and therefore your cooperation is not only unnecessary, but unwanted, and harmful.

This means that the hard left and hard right are both correct in their complaints but incorrect in their prescriptions for correcting them because they project their frames, biases, wants and wishes as universals rather than particulars.

We must govern with the people we have, producing institutions that can cause them to behave productively, despite the spectrum of their differences.

We have developed the science of explaining these negotiating positions whether genetic, cultural, or temporal.

We have advocated, whether from my optimistic or your pessimistic position, for the use of this science in limiting arguments to truth under the conditions of this science – despite that we might prefer different systems to bring about different ends, for our ouwn benefits as individual and groups.

You can’t get what your faction wants, you can only get what the minimum set of factions capable of expressing power share.

Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @pundasdad @whatifalthist