Bothsidesism

There has been a lot of talk about bothsidesism. Usually, this is in the form of complaints from liberals insisting that the media should not be giving equal attention to wrongdoing of both major parties. This is even on issues in which Democrats are just as guilty.

Yes, if there are two parties doing the same corrupt actions, they both deserve attention for it. No, that does not mean that I like bothsidesism. Of course, I might have a different reason.

It's actually quite rare that there are only two sides of an issue. Bothsidesism assumes just two. Bothsidesism really only makes sense if you embrace the partisan binary.

We are deeply entrenched in a two-party system, and most people view political issues strictly based on these two parties. Take a look at the COVID-19 pandemic and views on vaccines. Are vaccines beneficial enough to justify mandates? Are vaccines unproven? Are vaccines beneficial but mandates crossing a line? I just shared three viewpoints. While bothsidesism leads to inaccurately portraying the first two as equal concepts, it also ignores the third option provided.

Should schools be allowed to push liberal propaganda? Would conservative propaganda be an improvement? What about those of us who want to bring an end to forcing propaganda onto children? Again, there are more than two options.

How about climate change? This is a popular example of bothsidesism, but a consensus on anthropogenic climate change does not mean a consensus on the extent. There are more than two views on the specifics of how humans are impacting the climate.

Even the issue of bothsidesism has more than two sides. Should we treat both major parties as equals on each news story? Should we side heavily with one party because of problems with the other? Here's my perspective: Should we allow our two-party political system to silence viewpoints outside of the two parties?