Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 70 of 70

Thread: Are you a leftist or a rightist?

  1. #41
    an object in motion woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,961
    Mentioned
    240 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default boo @ dialectics

    answer: no/yes

    the best of "right" is foundational to the best of "left", both are important and incomplete

    many shitholes in USA/world are pre-"right" and pre-"left"; pre-humanism, pre-ideals

    I go with whatever's necessary atm -- Se-SEE 8/9 + 5/4
    (test)

    some Pandora stations I've made:
    https://www.pandora.com/station/play/3153497051677296014

  2. #42
    Destroyer of Wyrds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Inside you
    TIM
    C-xIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,549
    Mentioned
    120 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hitta View Post
    What you're saying with right and left leaning libertarian is far different though than the way people like Noam Chomsky use it. They think that you can have a form of socialism that fits under the umbrella of libertarianism and to me that just makes no sense.
    Liberty is concerned with negative rights ("freedom from"). A libertarian society is only possible if we exercise restraint in our personal lives, and this is often overlooked, especially by the so-called "left-libertarians". Therefore some objective morality (from religious and ethnic identity) is necessary, not only as a check on state power, but also to prevent people from becoming too indulgent, dependent and weak.

    People must understand that they have agency. Ultimately, you will determine your own success or failure. Nobody has a right to take things which don't belong to them already (theft) or to perform actions that would injure either an individual (violence, coercion) or the nation they're a member of (treason), either now or in the future. Only then will freedom begin to grow again.
    Last edited by Destroyer of Wyrds; 12-23-2017 at 10:19 PM.


  3. #43
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4,534
    Mentioned
    355 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    negative rights are indistinguishable from positive rights when you get down to it, a freedom from having your things stolen is a right to personal property, etc

  4. #44
    The Ubiquitous Mr Lovegrove Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    15,321
    Mentioned
    255 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." ~ William Shakespeare
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    negative rights are indistinguishable from positive rights when you get down to it, a freedom from having your things stolen is a right to personal property, etc
    interesting claim but it's not entirely true because the rights are propositions for action within an assumed circumstance. For example you already have the right to personal property... and that is part of the assumed conditions, and the proposal is to repossess your farm and redistribute it... the right to property is thought of more like an inalienable right. I think people who came up with these terms would argue there are inalienable rights that are neither positive or negative.
    Last edited by rat200Turbo; 12-26-2017 at 01:21 PM.

  6. #46
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4,534
    Mentioned
    355 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    if you can come up with an example of a negative right without a corresponding positive right I'd like to hear it

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If the right to your own labor is inalienable...
    If someone tries to infringe on that inalienable right they are claiming a positive right to your labor.
    If you deny them the right you are claiming the negative right to abstain from providing them.
    The negative right is not to your own labor - that right is inalienable... the negative right is to abstain from providing for them, it is a response to their proposal.
    Now... if they claim a positive right to your labor, you could comply with them and relinquish your inalienable right, and become a slave... you need not claim the negative right and refuse.
    Basically the positive / negative claim to a right is dependent on the inalienable right, not the inverse right.

    As far as a negative right not dependent on a positive right goes...
    Peoples inherent right not to be murdered is inalienable. The inalienable right is derived from our humanity and existence and so on.
    So people have a negative right not to be run over by cars that is derived from the inalienable right.
    So if someone fails to look out for pedestrians and runs over one of them, they are prosecuted, they don't have the right to run over pedestrians and they never did.
    The negative right is not dependent on anything positive because it is based on the inherent right basically.
    Last edited by rat200Turbo; 12-26-2017 at 01:43 PM.

  8. #48
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4,534
    Mentioned
    355 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    negative right to not be murdered is the right to life

    if I understand your first part you're talking about a right to fair compensation for your work, which is really a right to property in terms of a negative right to not be stolen from

    all rights have to be acknowledged of course to have an effect, my only point was that negative rights do not somehow become more meaningful than positive rights or are somehow "freer" or less restrictive, because they're essentially just the spin you put on what are really all just rights in general and all act as restraint on other people's behavior in some positive sense

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, the right to not be murdered is not a negative right it is an inalienable right. It is never considered possible that murder is permissible.
    A positive or negative right is applied, and it progresses the law forward.
    You are merely framing the same inalienable right in a way that sounds positive or negative but which amounts to no functional difference.
    Last edited by rat200Turbo; 12-26-2017 at 02:03 PM.

  10. #50
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4,534
    Mentioned
    355 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I mean there are plenty of societies that do not recognize a right to life and thus murder (intentional unlawful killing) is a crime against property (in societies that recognize property rights but not the right to life, which believe it or not happens)

  11. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My point is simply there is no applied difference between those two phrasings of that right - right to life vs. right to not be murdered. It's an inalienable right.
    If you were to consider the right to murder others as a real right than you'd be engaging in positive vs. negative rights.
    A positive or negative right does implicate a hypothetical inverse right but its true legitimacy is based on the inalienable rights, I suppose.
    I think you can come up with a hypothetical inverse of any statement, whether it is applicable and a legitimate right is the real question.
    I would simply say those societies do not obey the actual law and they are not even functional societies, they may not even be considered societies.

  12. #52
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4,534
    Mentioned
    355 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah I agree my point was only ever that negative rights aren't some magically distinct category of rights that are somehow less intrusive into the lives of people. negative/positive qualifiers just add context but function in recognition of the same underlying, what you would call, "inalienable" right. which are really just values officially recognized by society and backed by force of law

  13. #53
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    1,031
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Usually I'm moderate left. I have a few exceptions, such as abortion, but generally I believe that market relations degrade everything without scaffolds.

  14. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I understand Bertrand, I am just fleshing out my thoughts on the matter of inalienable rights, ... sometimes I have to ramble in order to understand something. carry on

  15. #55
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,057
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I used to vote for the Green Party. And I think that when I voted for Justin Trudeau, I voted for the Liberal Party for the first and last time. I'm not sure how I'd define myself politically. I think politics can be misused by people as a way of showing how morally superior they are and that someone who doesn't believe the same things is a terrible human being and/or has a lower IQ or whatever.

    I ended up becoming a "Donald Trump supporter" in certain respects, although maybe at least part of that was reactionary because I had bad experiences with liberals (especially in real life, in the past) who weren't always that nice and accepting of me, and plus I can be hypersensitive, and I hate myself because I have a Russian name, Eastern European accent, etc. and it's not like liberals can't be mean-spirited, cold, fake, two-faced, disrespectful, opportunistic, manipulative, hypocritical, etc. Yet I probably got what I deserved. I'm not really Russian, my mother was half Romanian from her mother's side (they were born and raised in Romania), and my biological father was also Romanian. Romania is a member of the European Union and NATO, and the Romanian language has more in common with Portuguese than Russian. I flirted with socialism in the past, although I hardly read Marx or anyone like that. Now I think that socialism and Marxism are very empty, sterile, boring and potentially dangerous. I don't believe in using physical violence to solve problems (unless someone is actually trying to use physical or sexual violence against you and/or someone else) [i.e. if it's actually happening in the moment--as opposed to hypothetically in the (distant) future]. I don't agree with Antifa. I think liberals (including women) can be prejudiced, chauvinistic, mean, hypocritical, petty, violent, etc. just like anyone else.

    At the same time I know a lot of people don't like Donald Trump. Yet Azealia Banks voted for Donald Trump. Kanye West said he would've voted for Donald Trump. Billy Corgan also defended and supported Donald Trump. My aunt said, "I am really disgusted by this idiot [Donald Trump]. He is the embodiment of idiocy. He is a cunning monkey that appeals to the public with his entitlement and self-confidence."

    I like Stefan Molyneux, Camille Paglia, etc.:







    Last edited by HERO; 12-31-2017 at 02:27 AM.

  16. #56
    Destroyer of Wyrds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Inside you
    TIM
    C-xIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,549
    Mentioned
    120 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idontgiveaf View Post
    Wow politics is really a big hit
    Yeah, politics is good for ratings.

    But sex is even better


  17. #57
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,057
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post
    answer: no/yes

    the best of "right" is foundational to the best of "left", both are important and incomplete

    many shitholes in USA/world are pre-"right" and pre-"left"; pre-humanism, pre-ideals

    I go with whatever's necessary atm -- Se-SEE 8/9 + 5/4

    I think there’s a lot of truth to this. It’s probably a more enlightened perspective than my own. I’ve never really thought too much about how I identify politically, except that I’ve never voted on the right (i.e. for a conservative candidate) so far. Would someone who’s voted more for the Liberals, Democrats, Greens, etc. be more of a leftist while someone who’s voted more for the Conservatives and/or Republicans be more of a rightist? And then of course there’s the Libertarian option (especially in USA) [I don’t remember seeing it as an option when I voted in the provincial and federal elections in Canada, although it probably is an option in at least some ridings/districts.] Is it usually the case that people who are perceived as being more anti-war, anti-imperialism and/or anti-American are considered more left-wing (and occasionally ‘extreme left’ or ‘Marxist’/ ‘socialist’)?

    Regarding ‘shitholes’ in the world, I think there’s a lot of truth to that. Most of it has to do with abusive childrearing and childhood traumas. My parents were from Romania (part of Eastern Europe). I knew a guy online whose parents were also from Romania, and I think he voted Republican. I also know Romanians who said they admired dictators like Stalin and Ceausescu. I don’t know anyone in my family who’s like that. Yet I think that childhood physical abuse and neglect can increase the chance that someone would admire tyrants and/or vote for reactionaries. In other words, people who support reactionaries (especially right-wing ones), often had more childhood physical abuse and neglect than a lot of the people who support progressives. Yet even people on the left who may admire dictators (e.g. Stalin) may also have suffered more physical abuse, neglect, etc. in their childhoods than leftists who don’t admire dictators. Of course admiring dictators doesn’t mean that one will engage in (‘politically-motivated’) violence, yet it doesn’t preclude that possibility either. Significant unresolved childhood traumas may increase the chance that one may sooner or later condone, tolerate, or support violence. (And is violence even effective against the potential future threat of fascism?)

    Romania had a pretty bad communist dictatorship, and it was the only European nation that got rid of its communist regime through violence (maybe the violence was necessary in Romania’s case; I’m not sure). I’m sure at least some people would probably still consider Romania a shithole, in part because it’s one of the poorest nations in Europe, and also because it has more child abuse and neglect than many Western nations. I know some Romanians (maybe the minority) may have considered Russia culturally and artistically superior to Romania, yet I’m not convinced that Russia had better childrearing than Romania. I can’t help wondering if my childrearing/psychoclass (Ambivalent? and/or definitely inferior to many North Americans and Westerners) along with my Romanian background precipitated my psychological decline and political tergiversation. Do Romanians suffer more from personality disorders like borderline, etc.? Or is it just a certain level of abusive childrearing that exists in many parts of the world (with Romanian parents being more abusive and neglectful on average than parents in the Western world)? Or perhaps most people will just say that it’s my fault that I took a wrong turn and/or that I have to at least try to have more self-control regardless of what’s happening. I think the guy I dated once may have used the term “shithole” (or something similar) when talking about nations like Romania and Bulgaria (in Eastern Europe). I mentioned that my parents were from Romania.

    I occasionally listen to and read right-wing journalism, articles, shows. (I think I first started doing that around 2016). Here’s an article: https://www.infowars.com/report-trum...ole-countries/

    I don’t think Donald Trump mentioned abusive childrearing. Yet I think the best way to improve one’s nation and society is to improve the childrearing and also provide more and better psychotherapy for those who suffered from childhood traumas that may have adversely affected their health, decision-making, self-esteem, etc.

    Edit: I took these tests a couple of months ago (maybe I should take them again in the future):

    http://www.people-press.org/quiz/political-typology/

    Your best fit is...
    Core Conservatives

    http://gotoquiz.com/politics/politic...m-results.html

    You are a centrist moderate social libertarian.
    Right: 0.33, Libertarian: 3.02


    I also got these results with other tests (I might look for the links in the future):

    52% Economic Leftist: "Opposes deprivation and subordination. Supports solidarity and mutual aid."

    66% Social Liberal: "Supports tolerance, exploration, and diversity."

    71% Civil Libertarian: "Supports robust debate, intellectual engagement and free expression."

    65% Antistatist: "Rejects centralized violence and authority as unnecessary and detrimental."

    72% Anti-Militarist: "Opposes the non-defensive use of military force and highly resistant to incurring collateral damage."


    - My match for the Political Spectrum Self-Test is:
    Populist
    “Must get that Capel street library book renewed or they’ll write to
    Kearney, my garantor. Reincarnation: that’s the word.

    — Some people believe, he said, that we go on living in another body
    after death, that we lived before. They call it reincarnation. That we all lived
    before on the earth thousands of years ago or some other planet. They say we
    have forgotten it. Some say they remember their past lives.

    The sluggish cream wound curdling spirals through her tea. Better remind
    her of the word: metempsychosis. An example would be better.”

    —from Ulysses by James Joyce

  18. #58
    killer wolf lemontrees's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    emotionz
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    1,163
    Mentioned
    102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Most certainly a leftist, although I find a lot of leftist people too harsh. But I would love universal healthcare, basically free college (at least community college), etc etc and I don't mind paying for it. I think I've read articles about how this sort of stuff actually saves society money as a whole, because when people don't get preventative health or education they end up in more strenuous situations. And I think it's irresponsible to not have a social safety net when the US is extremely economically productive and jobs lost to automation are not coming back. If only a small subset of skills are marketable and those skills generate enormous wealth then the wealth should be shared to some degree.

  19. #59
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,035
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know if I'm left or right anymore. I don't know what is *right* anymore. I've been starting to search for humanists and what their political stances are and why. My side isn't globalist, it's humanist and I feel like there is so little nuance these days. I've been coming to doubt the left because it's becoming increasingly radical. I no longer know if I can trust the liberal media at all. The agendas are 100x larger than the news. Who cares about the news, the facts or the truth as long as it supports a certain narrative or agenda, right? Just siding with the left or the right because both are becoming more radical seems like a process of radicalization and I've already been somewhat affected. My head is spinning. I need to figure out whose side is whose, what side is what, and why. And the other fear is to express anything other than the left is increasingly associated with being racist, sexist, and anti-democracy, when it's possible the very things the left is standing for mean the end of Western civilization entirely (and by that measure, the end of democracy). And all the shame/guilt I may feel don't support the destruction and crash of the civilization I come from. Should that civilization change? Yes. But sometimes how something is changing and what it's changing to is what matters most. I want a world where all human beings are safe, free and equal. The left says that's what they want too. So why, oh why, am I beginning not to believe them?

  20. #60
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,946
    Mentioned
    111 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inumbra View Post
    I don't know if I'm left or right anymore. I don't know what is *right* anymore. I've been starting to search for humanists and what their political stances are and why. My side isn't globalist, it's humanist and I feel like there is so little nuance these days. I've been coming to doubt the left because it's becoming increasingly radical. I no longer know if I can trust the liberal media at all. The agendas are 100x larger than the news. Who cares about the news, the facts or the truth as long as it supports a certain narrative or agenda, right? Just siding with the left or the right because both are becoming more radical seems like a process of radicalization and I've already been somewhat affected. My head is spinning. I need to figure out whose side is whose, what side is what, and why. And the other fear is to express anything other than the left is increasingly associated with being racist, sexist, and anti-democracy, when it's possible the very things the left is standing for mean the end of Western civilization entirely (and by that measure, the end of democracy). And all the shame/guilt I may feel don't support the destruction and crash of the civilization I come from. Should that civilization change? Yes. But sometimes how something is changing and what it's changing to is what matters most. I want a world where all human beings are safe, free and equal. The left says that's what they want too. So why, oh why, am I beginning not to believe them?
    Congrats, you're just beginning to wake up from the propaganda from the media. I find the best way to look at politics is to ignore the semantic us vs. them thought control (left vs. right) and just side with the issues you like and reject the issues you don't like.

    You may very well end up being majority left, right or even center, but that is irrelevant as long as your views coincide with your true values and not what the team you are supposedly on is expected to have.

    Then you will progress towards having views that align with who you are and you will develop the critical thinking needed to reject propaganda from any side of the fence. It is only when you feel obliged to pick a side's overall values that you fall into the trap as both sides have values that are harmful to society and individuals in different ways.

    Another important trait to have is to respect people regardless of the side they choose, there is no need to be tangled in the us vs. them mentality, which achieves little to nothing and distracts you from the true culprits behind society's problems.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  21. #61
    Nebula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    ....in a galaxy far, far away....
    TIM
    Ne-ENTP 🤔
    Posts
    2,704
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    To align with the "pure" right or the left is intellectual suicide. Both have very dogmatic factions. Pseudoscientific Free market dogmatism and Marxist dogmatism. Which poison do you want to take? Align with truth concerning the issues at hand. Choose the best course of action to solve the problems we currently face, not to promote a particular ideology that isn't open to change, evolution, new knowledge. You must be well learned to navigate the intellectual substrates of political factions.

    I tend to align with the left more often than the right because the right is very radicalized in America. As a concerned scientist, no one on the right seems to understand the philosophy of science and have a false equivalency, where belief is weighed equally against facts against reality. There is a problem with tribal epistemology in the world at the moment.
    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...l-epistemology

    The left has many anti-science stances as well with its anti-vaxers, anti-gmo, and environmental alarmism that seems to rather stoke fear and create panic than solve problems in a reasonable manner. It is often self-defeatist. It's not that science has all the answers. It's that its opponents do not.

  22. #62
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,035
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I just can't get past these contradictions...

    The radical left social justice movement is Marxist and it currently operates by shutting the dominant group up because they are too dominant. The more privilege you have the less you should speak, is the idea of how to obtain equity. This doesn't square with freedom of speech because freedom of speech is incompatible with Marxism. So what future will society have with this movement?

    I'm seriously forming conspiracy theories about this. Russia lost the Cold War supposedly. Western Europe and the United States have been shifting towards Marxism in subtle ways and that trend has been increasing. Western Europe will likely become Muslim after being eroded by Marxism. Russia has had really good relations with Muslim nations in the past (though the present is uncertain). Russia has really good relations with China I think? Israel wants Russia and the US to get along. If the US and Russia ally it will further Marxism in the United States. China has been heavily involved in Africa. Anti-Western and anti-white sentiments are so high that I don't know if the US would find any allies, not with other countries and not even among its own citizens.

    So I think there are four competitors here:

    1. West Asia/Islam - Most Islam leaders probably don't want their nations Westernized and their cultural values destroyed. Their strategy is make the world Islam.

    2. Russia/Marxism - Russia still has an agenda of global conquest. Though it lost economically and militarily to the West, it knows how to use ideology to destabilize other nations.

    3. US/Europe/Western civilization - Western civilization is mainly rooted in Europe and the United States, though of course for better or worse, it has extended everywhere and is still the dominant world power (sort of--just wait 15 years). This civilization has deep ties to Christianity. Western civilization is capitalist and also socialist. I think socialism is the better angel and capitalism is the devil.

    4. Israel/Judaism

    These four forces are vying for control of the globe. And I am guessing that 1, 2 and 4 have all aligned against 3, which is why this is the end of Western Civilization.

    I suppose the other nebulous force is Globalism. There are people in power who understand that we need a mono-culture and we need to be controlled for the future of humanity.

    The distinction between socialism and Marxism is important.
    Last edited by inumbra; 05-01-2018 at 05:06 PM.

  23. #63
    I sacrificed a goat to Zeus and I liked it Pallas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Durmstrang School
    Posts
    2,845
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm a leftist and pretty strongly against the "social justice movement." I would've voted for almost any right-wing candidate over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election but fortunately I wasn't forced to. I don't like these kinds of cultural revolutionary movements where people try to throw out all the old stuff people have made. I do support moderately left-wing economic policies. A country needs to support its citizens to make them more competitive globally. I noticed most right-wing people tend to come from Fuckville, USA and competing with other countries isn't even a concern for them because they only see their neighbors once a week. I don't support: Marxism/"to each according to their need" (if everyone gets paid the same no matter how much they work, they will get lazy, I've seen this myself,) government handouts (for the same reason, though I think the government can have job creation programs and such,) Tumblr SJWs (for being anti-culture and anti-individualism and trying to throw everything out,) "globalist" policies since they seem to just mean supporting trash giant corporations and giving foreign aid which are both huge wastes of money. Cultural globalization and global trade are just human nature though because everyone wants to wear a kimono and drink Irish whiskey and stuff like that. I also think we need to cut government spending which is one thing I agree with with people on the right. We can raise our spending again but now it's horribly inefficient. Legalizing drugs is probably also a good idea but it needs to be done really matter-of-factly so it doesn't turn into a giant heroin injectionfest, and some sort of mandatory military service and civil service type thing to get people more publicly involved so people can't stay in Fuckville, USA or be bums.

  24. #64

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,915
    Mentioned
    527 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    the main difference is between liberals (individualists, aristocrats) and communists (collectivists, democrats)

    the opposing of republic and democracy is lol

    at least I see there democracy and communism in the same group. for USA propaganda it's a greate achivement
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  25. #65
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,035
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This gets at more of the contradictions:

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1...erals-leftists (sorry, I know this is focused on Islam)

    I almost wonder if the current Left movement is some kind of secret communist take-over. It's an extremely forceful ideological movement and it doesn't care for its own contradictions. There is what it likes (Islam and gay rights, for instance) and what it dislikes (anything Western, unless it does like it, then it will be redefined in a non-Western way) and in all of this there is this massive minefield of contradictions. It doesn't make sense. It's driven more by emotion than reason. And there is a lot of fear... certain topics must NOT be discussed.

  26. #66
    Washington delenda est totalize's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Great Britain
    TIM
    Untyped
    Posts
    595
    Mentioned
    90 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am pro virtue and anti mammon. American centrist (read: national suicide) politics don't affect me ha ha ha


  27. #67
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,035
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think I'm just going to switch to the Green Party for now. I don't know if they are bought out (yet). Maybe everyone is bought out. The Democrats and Republicans make me sick however and I don't see the point in voting for either party on anything.

    Really all political parties have to do is find people who are actually for individual humans and their quality of life but who don't realize their political involvement is undermining the very things they support; and/or find people who are for whatever big money agenda they are in with and who are good at saying the right things so the people think they are actually for individual humans and their quality of life.

    And one thing I don't understand is the idea that Trump is somehow outside of the "establishment" and legitimately wanted to "drain the swamp." It seems to me that Trump is in place to create further divides and chaos, to spread fear. I don't really understand how he is accomplishing anything good.

  28. #68
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,035
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ns-the-future/

    Why can't there be globalism and nationalism? Nations that prefer nationalism can stay nationalist. Nations that like globalism can remain global together. Why must everyone do the same thing? If the world is safe, it will end up going more global eventually anyway. Why force the hand?

    Is the war in the Middle East globalism vs. nationalism???

  29. #69

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    127
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I broke through the edge a long time ago. Corruptions is just as much as part of this as anything always has been always will be, might as well buckle up and enjoy the ride. Enjoy the quality of life but dont mistake the thin veneer, its always been thin. Think for yourself trace the conceptual lines to their origins. Start from your earliest memories and move forward from there. You are always watching a quarter of a second behind the act.

    Get what you can and experience as much as possible dont worry about the quotient affairs of man, stay concerned for your chunk and participate as much as you need to for you cause the game is unfolding exactly as it needs to.

  30. #70
    Singu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,317
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well I guess the left and the right are in some ways, just a new kind of neo-tribalism. I'm sure if you're a rightist or a leftist, you go along with some policies of the "tribe", even if you don't agree with them or care about them.

    Our tendencies toward tribalism can't be changed, but the circle of the tribe can be expanded.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •