How could both sides be right? They couldn't. How could both sides be wrong? They might. So there tends to be three sides to every political issue—conservative, liberal and objective reality.

Being right is rationality applied to objective reality, which produces truth. Being wrong is arbitrarily picking a version of reality aligned upon motives.

Any side that is wrong is trying to fit reality to motives, which will always produce wrong. They don't do that knowingly, they have no way of knowing what objective reality is. In fact, they have no way of knowing that there is such a thing as objective reality.

An analogy is looking at a bunch of lines which appear to be random. Someone says they see Lincoln's face in the lines. Couldn't someone else see Jefferson's face in the lines? Can't you find whatever you want to find in random realities?

That's the problem the wrong side has. Realities are randomly scrambled together for them. They don't have realities sorted out. So they aren't going to let someone tell them reality works against them. They are going to find a version that fits their motives.

The differences is whether a person has sorted out realities in their own minds, which means aligning upon objective reality. The persons who haven't cannot align their realities upon objective realities and must pick a version of reality by some other criterion than the pattern that objective reality creates.

We see this endlessly in science. Those persons who are clueless on science find a version of science that is acceptable to them. Nonscientific liberals tend to assume carbon dioxide is destroying the planet, because some liberals (green types) say so. Nonscientific conservatives assume global warming is a hoax, because persons such as Rush Limbaugh say so. Persons who understand science have been saying for two centuries that a greenhouse effect in the atmosphere is absurd with no connection to liberal or conservative politics.

Some persons have the same problem with economics and social justice that they have with science. They are clueless; so they look to the political agenda to see what other like-minded persons are promoting.

Notice that the alignment is not an attempt to determine what objective reality is. Such an attempt would result in study and increase in objective reality. The problem is that such a path is not followed. So the alignment is upon motives.

When the alignment is upon motives, realities can change minute by minute. Whatever is exploitable at the time will do.

That means, trying to pin down realities for persons who do not have objective realties in their heads is total futility. Such persons don't know or care what objective reality is. Their realities can change minute by minute.

There are objective realities to economics and social justice. Corporations burning tax dollars is never going to improve an economy. Shoving 90% of society out of the economy is never going to make America great. Destroying some persons for the benefit of others is always going to destroy a whole society. Insiders are always outsiders relative to something. Winners are always losers relative to something.

It means there is an objective reality element to social polarization. Two sides are not always equal and both sides are not always wrong.