Holger Schurig on Nostr: Very easy to be proofable wrong. Just one counter-example will do. But why I bother ...

Very easy to be proofable wrong. Just one counter-example will do.

But why I bother with falsifying it? Because I dislike the mental works-view behind such utterings.

The Roman Catholic Church. You don't need to like this organization, but it was a) founded well before silly people tried to press everything into some left/right agenda. And b) by now it's one of the oldest existing organizations, and still not clearly left-wing or right-wing. E.g. in Franco-Spain it was right-wing, but in some latin american countries it could have been viewed as left-wing. But this was only for some time period, and in only a few selectt places.

Now you could argue that eventually, maybe in another 1500 years, this org will become extremist and that therefore my counter-example isn't logically sound.

Then: every organization founded *and died* before people even thought about left-wing / right-wing is also a counter example. Clearly e.g. the north-german/european "Hanse" federation never went extremist. And with any additional number of years it still cannot become one, since it's already out of existence.

Therefore I encourage you to view the world analogue, not binary. There aren't just two values in the political spectrum, there is a continuum of many diverse views and points. That might not make a simple world-view for people wanting simple solutions. But the word *is* actually complex. And so my witty saying of the day is therefore:

Simple solutions to "complex world" problems rarely work - Holger Schurig