Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2016 10:10:37 GMT -5
Why didn't Bush or Reagan get that effect? They did. You just don't remember it.
”Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse,” the president wrote. ”The politics of racial hatred and religious bigotry practiced by the Klan and others have no place in this country, and are destructive of the values for which America has always stood.” <----------------------Reagan's response to the KKK endorsing him.
And hey, the KKK also endorsed BEN CARSON (and Trump, and Hillary) this year so things have changed a bit. (lol)
Point being: Much ado about nothing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2016 10:10:44 GMT -5
Toehold, you seem to be falling for the same line of schlock that the rest of the left is falling for. Because a very small % of whites (the supremacists) found Trump's positions on certain things appealing, that means that everyone who voted for him "supports racism". That's the line of reasoning I've seen coming from the left. And I've been having a field day with people who think like that on my sister's FB page. It's a treasure trove of ill informed dunder-libs who think their blanket statements carry weight. They tend to be 100% shocked that their friend's brother voted for Trump, proclaims it proudly, and trounces them on their allegations of racism. My "Trump" card - "Oh yeah I'm such a huge racist. Ask your friend, my sister, how many of her black boyfriends I've allowed into my home, fed, let smoke my stuff, and sleep here. Because the answer is: All of them." Racial tensions had nothing to do with the majority who voted for him. 62M Americans who voted for Trump ARE NOT RACIST but the left wants to imply that they all are. Also- I've followed the alt. right since it became a thing. At no point was it based on racism, yet because some small group decided to be associated with it (the guy who says he "started it"? I've never heard of him. Took a liberal to show me who he even is. He had no impact on my thinking in this election. If you want to see the real "mouthpiece" of the alt. right, look at Milo. An articulate, intelligent, "dangerous faggot" (his words about himself, not mine) who's also Jewish and not even an American citizen. Because that's who I was listening to. And that's who a ton of the folks who voted for Trump were listening to as well. Not some white supremacist. Just someone who calls a spade a spade and has no problem chastising "protected" groups for behaving like a bunch of cunts. I don't even come CLOSE to believing that. Look above and you'll see I said "I'm sure he's a minority of a minority". I also can't tell about the credibility of sites because every single one seems to be biased towards the right or left, so if I find one saying one thing and another saying something similar, I may post it, and it may not be the 100% truth. I doubt more than 1% MAX of Trump voters is a TRUE racist, and when I say that, I mean to the extent that they'd use it to negatively effect others or be violent or spawn hate speech, cause of course it's everyone's right to be racist if they want so long as they don't fuck with people. I'm actually not at all "P.C." really either, and find it funny I'll listen to metal bands I KNOW are racist and who'd SERIOUSLY piss me off if I knew them, but I don't want to let their opinions stop me from listening to some heavy shit they wrote LOL. The whole super P.C. movement DOES SERIOUSLY need to tone it down and it's gone WAY WAY too far. Nevertheless it IS a bit shocking to see a president being "hailed" as if he were Hitler. There are still people alive who were in the WW2 camps, so it's not a joke, and there is something that makes you scratch your head about why there was NEVER before Trump a president who had the approval (disavowed or not) of a KKK grand wizard, who is supposedly inciting a KKK march or who was "Sieg Heiled". Why did neither Bush or Reagan get that effect? Be that as it may, I'm sure they are nothing more then idiots who Trump already said he disavowed who he has little if anything at all in common with. Others have rightly pointed out that some BLM's activists have killed innocent white people, and that shit is absolutely uncalled for as well. But I mentioned it because it has to do with the general theme of the thread, whether it's Bannon or not, people SUPPOSEDLY racist, who are Trump supporters, and what it might or might not be indicative of. If Trump continues to tell people to ignore them, it shouldn't be an issue worth thinking about. One question: Did you miss all the militant shit that went down when Obama got elected?
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Nov 28, 2016 19:41:56 GMT -5
While we're arguing whether Bannon is racist, the left(not even the far liberal cucks) are praising Fidel Castro. Is this a good time to snicker at the clueless f*cktards running around their college campuses wearing T-shirts bearing Che Guevara's revolutionary image -- on their way to a gay-rights parade?
He was reputedly in charge of EXECUTING known homosexuals under the cigar-smoking one. But these entitled infants, who have apparently never had a civics class, aren't too hip on history either. LOL.
Sad really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 1:49:19 GMT -5
I don't even come CLOSE to believing that. Look above and you'll see I said "I'm sure he's a minority of a minority". I also can't tell about the credibility of sites because every single one seems to be biased towards the right or left, so if I find one saying one thing and another saying something similar, I may post it, and it may not be the 100% truth. I doubt more than 1% MAX of Trump voters is a TRUE racist, and when I say that, I mean to the extent that they'd use it to negatively effect others or be violent or spawn hate speech, cause of course it's everyone's right to be racist if they want so long as they don't fuck with people. I'm actually not at all "P.C." really either, and find it funny I'll listen to metal bands I KNOW are racist and who'd SERIOUSLY piss me off if I knew them, but I don't want to let their opinions stop me from listening to some heavy shit they wrote LOL. The whole super P.C. movement DOES SERIOUSLY need to tone it down and it's gone WAY WAY too far. Nevertheless it IS a bit shocking to see a president being "hailed" as if he were Hitler. There are still people alive who were in the WW2 camps, so it's not a joke, and there is something that makes you scratch your head about why there was NEVER before Trump a president who had the approval (disavowed or not) of a KKK grand wizard, who is supposedly inciting a KKK march or who was "Sieg Heiled". Why did neither Bush or Reagan get that effect? Be that as it may, I'm sure they are nothing more then idiots who Trump already said he disavowed who he has little if anything at all in common with. Others have rightly pointed out that some BLM's activists have killed innocent white people, and that shit is absolutely uncalled for as well. But I mentioned it because it has to do with the general theme of the thread, whether it's Bannon or not, people SUPPOSEDLY racist, who are Trump supporters, and what it might or might not be indicative of. If Trump continues to tell people to ignore them, it shouldn't be an issue worth thinking about. One question: Did you miss all the militant shit that went down when Obama got elected? No I didn't miss it. I'm not up on everything that happened, but i DO know plenty of really fucked up shit happened, and was more brushed under the rug cause mainly black people did it. And that's very fucked up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 1:59:19 GMT -5
So I had the misfortune of actually reading a Garth quote (hopefully won't happen again...at least I won't have to read 90% of his shit, he used to be entertaining with the Fedor bashing though...) about me not being able to name a "right wing dictator.
How could Hitler or Mussolini be considered anything OTHER than right wing dictators??
SURELY they were not "left wing"...so that leaves few other options.
As for other quotes slipping through from idiots like Cybergod, wising to associate me with millenials who are like 15 years younger than me, and probably stupider than me IMO lol...the irony isn't lost on me in terms of people wearing Che Guevera t shirts.
I don't know much about him, but a dictator/political radical who leads to death or suffering is the same all around, whether they are right wing, left wing, communist, Nazi, anarchist, whatever.
If you are doing anything to control or dominate your people forcefully which leads to death and suffering I would assume it doesn't much matter what way they lean politically, as I don't give a shit if Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy are of opposite political views either.
The only two people I have on ignore, and maybe a few others who just simply hate anyone who has anything to do with anything the least bit "liberal" will dislike me, and I could give 2 shits, but all I'll say for myself is being uninformed and stupid are two different things.
Anyone can draw whatever conclusion they want from that, I don't care.
I'm going to try to go forward assuming as much of a "blank slate" attitude regarding all this shit as I can.
Truth is, I don't really know what I believe yet, and who knows, I am willing to accept the POSSIBILITY, as unlikely as it seems to me, that I could end up a conservative or republican or *GASP*, even Trump supporter someday.
I VERY much doubt the latter....but I'll leave the door open...like a millimeter lol.
I'm SURE I'll end up with right wing opinions on some issues (more likely fiscally related than socially), and I already differ from many liberals I know in believing that assault rifles should be fully legal and that all states should have conceal carry legally and open carry.
I've decided there's FAR too many issues out there to narrow yourself into one neat little box saying your a "this" or "that".
Fuck it...from here on I'm gonna try and say I don't know jack shit, and read or watch the news to fill in the blanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:00:01 GMT -5
Why didn't Bush or Reagan get that effect? They did. You just don't remember it. ”Those of us in public life can only resent the use of our names by those who seek political recognition for the repugnant doctrines of hate they espouse,” the president wrote. ”The politics of racial hatred and religious bigotry practiced by the Klan and others have no place in this country, and are destructive of the values for which America has always stood.” <----------------------Reagan's response to the KKK endorsing him. And hey, the KKK also endorsed BEN CARSON (and Trump, and Hillary) this year so things have changed a bit. (lol) Point being: Much ado about nothing. Ok then, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:01:27 GMT -5
I bet this buffoon can't name a single "right wing dictator." Because it is any oxymoron. How so? How is it not possible for there to be a right wing dictator? Because right wing is supposed to = less government? I could see that argument. But seriously, hasn't it always been suggested that Hitler and Mussolini were extreme right wing? Also, we all know that the right wing doesn't ALWAYS want less government in EVERY area. For example, its considered an extreme right wing stance to want to outlaw abortion..that's government control. And from what I've heard, more often more right wingers are in favor of the death penalty than left wingers, also government control. They just seem to differ in what issues they do or don't want government control on.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 2:07:46 GMT -5
So I had the misfortune of actually reading a Garth quote (hopefully won't happen again...at least I won't have to read 90% of his shit, he used to be entertaining with the Fedor bashing though...) about me not being able to name a "right wing dictator. How could Hitler or Mussolini be considered anything OTHER than right wing dictators?? SURELY the were not "left wing"...so that leaves few other options. As for other quotes slipping through from idiots like Cybergod, wising to associate me with millenials who are like 15 years younger than me, and probably stupider than me IMO lol...the irony isn't lost on me in terms of people wearing Che Guevera t shirts. I don't know much about him, but a dictator/political radical who leads to death or suffering is the same all around, whether they are right wing, left wing, communist, Nazi, anarchist, whatever. If you are doing anything to control or dominate your people forcefully which leads to death and suffering I would assume it doesn't much matter what way they lean politically, as I don't give a shit if Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy are of opposite political views either. The two only people I have on ignore, and maybe a few others who just simply hate anyone who has anything to do with anything the least bit "liberal" will dislike me, and I could give 2 shits, but all I'll say for myself is being uninformed and stupid are two different things. Anyone can draw whatever conclusion they want from that, I don't care. I'm going to try to go forward assuming as much of a "blank slate" attitude regarding all this shit as I can. Truth is, I don't really know what I believe yet, and who knows, I am willing to accept the POSSIBILITY, as unlikely as it seems to me, that I could end up a conservative or republican or *GASP*, even Trump supporter someday. I doubt the latter....but I'll leave the door open. I'm SURE I'll end up with right wing opinions on some issues (more likely fiscally related than socially), and I already differ from many liberals I know in believing that assault rifles should be fully legal and that all states should have conceal carry legally and open carry. I've decided there's FAR too many issues out there to narrow yourself into one neat little box saying your a "this" or "that". Fuck it...from here on I'm gonna try and say I don't know jack shit, and read or watch the news to fill in the blanks. Actually Hitler and Mussolini were leaders of extreme left-wing governments. The scale goes like this Left Wing / Liberal --------------------------------[]--------------------------- Right Wing / Conservative Dictatorship ----------- Democrat -Republican -----------------------------Anarchy Nazi/Fascist are between Dictatorship and our two political parties. The reason why you see them referred to as Right Wing is because the mainstream pseudo-conservative parties (and yes that includes some of the Republicans, Nation Front (of France), etc...) tend to be the ones that nowadays spout populist sounding/related things which is exactly how those form of governments come about (as well as Communism and Socialism, also left-wing governments, though funny enough Socialism is more right wing than Nazi/Facist) People are flipping out over globalism yet if they succeed in pushing it, it'll be the death of mainstream parties, the death of liberalism, because the only way to have true globalism is with a conservative foundation.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 2:10:57 GMT -5
The moment you have laws that restrict individual freedoms for anything other than things for public safety, you are a left-wing government.
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Nov 29, 2016 2:14:01 GMT -5
So I had the misfortune of actually reading a Garth quote (hopefully won't happen again...at least I won't have to read 90% of his shit, he used to be entertaining with the Fedor bashing though...) about me not being able to name a "right wing dictator. How could Hitler or Mussolini be considered anything OTHER than right wing dictators?? SURELY the were not "left wing"...so that leaves few other options. As for other quotes slipping through from idiots like Cybergod, wising to associate me with millenials who are like 15 years younger than me, and probably stupider than me IMO lol...the irony isn't lost on me in terms of people wearing Che Guevera t shirts. I don't know much about him, but a dictator/political radical who leads to death or suffering is the same all around, whether they are right wing, left wing, communist, Nazi, anarchist, whatever. If you are doing anything to control or dominate your people forcefully which leads to death and suffering I would assume it doesn't much matter what way they lean politically, as I don't give a shit if Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy are of opposite political views either. The two only people I have on ignore, and maybe a few others who just simply hate anyone who has anything to do with anything the least bit "liberal" will dislike me, and I could give 2 shits, but all I'll say for myself is being uninformed and stupid are two different things. Anyone can draw whatever conclusion they want from that, I don't care. I'm going to try to go forward assuming as much of a "blank slate" attitude regarding all this shit as I can. Truth is, I don't really know what I believe yet, and who knows, I am willing to accept the POSSIBILITY, as unlikely as it seems to me, that I could end up a conservative or republican or *GASP*, even Trump supporter someday. I doubt the latter....but I'll leave the door open. I'm SURE I'll end up with right wing opinions on some issues (more likely fiscally related than socially), and I already differ from many liberals I know in believing that assault rifles should be fully legal and that all states should have conceal carry legally and open carry. I've decided there's FAR too many issues out there to narrow yourself into one neat little box saying your a "this" or "that". Fuck it...from here on I'm gonna try and say I don't know jack shit, and read or watch the news to fill in the blanks. Actually Hitler and Mussolini were leaders of extreme left-wing governments. The scale goes like this Left Wing / Liberal --------------------------------[]--------------------------- Right Wing / Conservative Dictatorship ----------- Democrat -Republican -----------------------------Anarchy Nazi/Fascist are between Dictatorship and our two political parties. The reason why you see them referred to as Right Wing is because the mainstream pseudo-conservative parties (and yes that includes some of the Republicans, Nation Front (of France), etc...) tend to be the ones that nowadays spout populist sounding/related things which is exactly how those form of governments come about (as well as Communism and Socialism, also left-wing governments, though funny enough Socialism is more right wing than Nazi/Facist) People are flipping out over globalism yet if they succeed in pushing it, it'll be the death of mainstream parties, the death of liberalism, because the only way to have true globalism is with a conservative foundation. Toehold is getting confused by all this disinformation, imo. How can you be right-wing when the party's name(Nazi) is short for "National Socialist".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:16:00 GMT -5
^^^^
Ok, interesting info.
See, just because I'm not informed on every fucking political area doesn't mean assholes need to go off on me.
Regardless, wouldn't you agree it is quite possible for republican leaders (and leaders from ANY party) to do to a lot of damage to their people??
I'm sure you would.
So whether or not the term "dictator" applies, I think we could agree that a ring wing leader who in any real way dominates his people in an unjust way, or leads to the deaths of innocents if we take this to the extreme, could be considered an extremely dangerous or harmful "right wing leader".
How much importance is there really to whether or not the term "dictator" applies if wrong decisions lead to really bad outcomes??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:18:35 GMT -5
The moment you have laws that restrict individual freedoms for anything other than things for public safety, you are a left-wing government. Right, except for telling people they can't have abortions (right wing stance right?) or being against drug use (maybe not totally right wing, but supported by many conservatives) etc... I'm sure there are other stances supported by right wingers that restrict freedoms without public safety being the main thing in mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:20:42 GMT -5
Actually Hitler and Mussolini were leaders of extreme left-wing governments. The scale goes like this Left Wing / Liberal --------------------------------[]--------------------------- Right Wing / Conservative Dictatorship ----------- Democrat -Republican -----------------------------Anarchy Nazi/Fascist are between Dictatorship and our two political parties. The reason why you see them referred to as Right Wing is because the mainstream pseudo-conservative parties (and yes that includes some of the Republicans, Nation Front (of France), etc...) tend to be the ones that nowadays spout populist sounding/related things which is exactly how those form of governments come about (as well as Communism and Socialism, also left-wing governments, though funny enough Socialism is more right wing than Nazi/Facist) People are flipping out over globalism yet if they succeed in pushing it, it'll be the death of mainstream parties, the death of liberalism, because the only way to have true globalism is with a conservative foundation. Toehold is getting confused by all this disinformation, imo. How can you be right-wing when the party's name(Nazi) is short for "National Socialist". I'd been wondering that the other day. Ok...you guys are informing me lol. I'll listen when good points are made, as long as people don't rant and rave about "libtards" and "dunderdildos"...at which point I'm not reading what you are writing. Still, weren't Hitler and Mussolini very different kinds of dictators from Stalin and Gueverra,and if so, how??
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 2:24:53 GMT -5
^^^^ Ok, interesting info. See, just because I'm not informed on every fucking political area doesn't mean assholes need to go off on me. Regardless, wouldn't you agree it is quite possible for republican leaders (and leaders from ANY party) do to a lot of damage to their people?? I'm sure you would. So whether or not the term "dictator" applies, I think we could agree that a ring wing leader who in any real way dominates his people in an unjust way, or leads to the deaths of innocents if we take this to the extreme, could be considered an extremely dangerous or harmful "right wing leader". How much importance is there really to whether or not the term "dictator" applies if wrong decisions lead to really bad outcomes?? It is possible and likely that any political leader will do damage to their constituents, it just a matter of what the damage is. Nobody is a Republican or a Democrat, even if they call themselves that. Nobody takes the platform 100%, nor should they. One of the things though that I prefer about Republicans though (at least in general) is that there are more of them willing to say fuck no to the party line on various issues whereas Democrats do so less often (and also, as with Tom Daschle and other even big-named Democrats, they aren't allowed to speak and some national events because they have a few views different than party line). But Toehold, now here is the very very important thing you need to learn. There is no fundamental difference between the Democrat and Republican party. They both pass the same policies, just "angled" differently. They both collect the same taxes, just spent differently. They both have the same end goal, and it isn't the betterment of their constituents. Go work for one party at state/national level for 4-5 years, same for the other party, you'll see pretty quick. Their party affiliation isn't determined by their beliefs but rather where the money comes from, and what side they have more bartering power with.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 2:30:17 GMT -5
The moment you have laws that restrict individual freedoms for anything other than things for public safety, you are a left-wing government. Right, except for telling people they can't have abortions (right wing stance right?) or being against drug use (maybe not totally right wing, but supported by many conservatives) etc... I'm sure there are other stances supported by right wingers that restrict freedoms without public safety being the main thing in mind. You can't be conservative/Right wing while being against any drug use on private property. Stop confusing conservative/Right with Republican. Republicans are technically Liberal/Left. As for Abortion, that's a tricky one. I mean yeah in extreme right wing (Anarchy) abortion up to the person. You start going to the left and getting into Minarchism (which is basically what would have to be the foundation of true Globalism for it to survive), then it does becomes a question of when it is a life and yeah, that is a hard one. Given our current state of fetal and even neonatal medical knowledge/technology, the inherent risk of childbirth alone that we cannot remove means that we should have the right to an abortion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:43:57 GMT -5
^^^^ Ok, interesting info. See, just because I'm not informed on every fucking political area doesn't mean assholes need to go off on me. Regardless, wouldn't you agree it is quite possible for republican leaders (and leaders from ANY party) do to a lot of damage to their people?? I'm sure you would. So whether or not the term "dictator" applies, I think we could agree that a ring wing leader who in any real way dominates his people in an unjust way, or leads to the deaths of innocents if we take this to the extreme, could be considered an extremely dangerous or harmful "right wing leader". How much importance is there really to whether or not the term "dictator" applies if wrong decisions lead to really bad outcomes?? It is possible and likely that any political leader will do damage to their constituents, it just a matter of what the damage is. Nobody is a Republican or a Democrat, even if they call themselves that. Nobody takes the platform 100%, nor should they. One of the things though that I prefer about Republicans though (at least in general) is that there are more of them willing to say fuck no to the party line on various issues whereas Democrats do so less often (and also, as with Tom Daschle and other even big-named Democrats, they aren't allowed to speak and some national events because they have a few views different than party line). But Toehold, now here is the very very important thing you need to learn. There is no fundamental difference between the Democrat and Republican party. They both pass the same policies, just "angled" differently. They both collect the same taxes, just spent differently. They both have the same end goal, and it isn't the betterment of their constituents. Go work for one party at state/national level for 4-5 years, same for the other party, you'll see pretty quick. Their party affiliation isn't determined by their beliefs but rather where the money comes from, and what side they have more bartering power with. I'm not sure I understand 100% what you mean. I get what you are saying about "angled" differently, taxes spent differently, but the views held by the different parties often seem to be polar opposites. Like, pretty much isn't it the case that almost no one who is fiscally conservative would be for welfare? And most fiscally liberal people are for it. That's a big difference. I also don't know if there are ZERO politicians that care AT ALL about their constituents. But yeah, I'm sure most politicians are corrupt in many ways, and there's no one who is 100% right or left wing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 2:48:05 GMT -5
Right, except for telling people they can't have abortions (right wing stance right?) or being against drug use (maybe not totally right wing, but supported by many conservatives) etc... I'm sure there are other stances supported by right wingers that restrict freedoms without public safety being the main thing in mind. You can't be conservative/Right wing while being against any drug use on private property. Stop confusing conservative/Right with Republican. Republicans are technically Liberal/Left. As for Abortion, that's a tricky one. I mean yeah in extreme right wing (Anarchy) abortion up to the person. You start going to the left and getting into Minarchism (which is basically what would have to be the foundation of true Globalism for it to survive), then it does becomes a question of when it is a life and yeah, that is a hard one. Given our current state of fetal and even neonatal medical knowledge/technology, the inherent risk of childbirth alone that we cannot remove means that we should have the right to an abortion. How are republicans "liberal" or "left" if people are constantly being separated by the terms "liberal" or "republican"? I mean yeah, I have noticed that usually when people are comparing too sides they either compare democrats with republicans, or liberals with conservatives or left wing with right wing, and not democrats and conservatives or liberals and republicans, but I always figured that was because conservatives were further right wing than typical republicans and liberals were further left wing than democrats? That's not the difference?
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 2:58:38 GMT -5
I'm not sure I understand 100% what you mean. I get what you are saying about "angled" differently, taxes spent differently, but the views held by the different parties often seem to be polar opposites. Like, pretty much isn't it the case that almost no one who is fiscally conservative would be for welfare? And most fiscally liberal people are for it. That's a big difference. I also don't know if there are ZERO politicians that care AT ALL about their constituents. But yeah, I'm sure most politicians are corrupt in many ways, and there's no one who is 100% right or left wing. But their views aren't. They are phrased differently, but they have the same outcome. They both aim to single out specific parts of the population to restrict rights to, and just phrase their "position" to better suit who they want to vote for them for fund them. Neither side wants equality, that is a threat to power. The only "difference" is which people they want to be less equal. How are republicans "liberal" or "left" if people are constantly being separated by the terms "liberal" or "republican"? I mean yeah, I have noticed that usually when people are comparing too sides they either compare democrats with republicans, or liberals with conservatives or left wing with right wing, and not democrats and conservatives or liberals and republicans, but I always figured that was because conservatives were further right wing than typical republicans and liberals were further left wing than democrats? That's not the difference? Because people like to change words up to make rallying cries. I cant start to call you Jamal, and get everyone else to start calling you Jamal, it doesn't make your name Jamal does it? But under your belief if everyone starts referring to you as Jamal, that makes you Jamal? In my experience, if you want to put on the Left-Right scale people who call themselves Dem/Repub/Lib/Conserv in order it would be from Left to right (and this is real Conservatives, not Republicans and E vangelistswho call themselves conservatives) Democrats - Republicans - Liberals - Conservatives. And that is because most people who call themselves Liberal seem to have mostly conservative beliefs, but their sticking points are the ones Democrats are loudest with (though don't actually follow through on).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 3:04:21 GMT -5
^^^^^^
Ok, you've got me pretty confused saying republicans are leftist, still not sure what you mean...
You are actually saying you think Democrats are further left than republicans, but republicans are further left than liberals?
That doesn't make much sense to me.
You can explain yourself and I'll read it later but I have to pass out.
Good convo though.
Later
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 3:26:52 GMT -5
^^^^^^ Ok, you've got me pretty confused saying republicans are leftist, still not sure what you mean... You are actually saying you think Democrats are further left than republicans, but republicans are further left than liberals? That doesn't make much sense to me. You can explain yourself and I'll read it later but I have to pass out. Good convo though. Later In terms of traditional party line stances... The tax/spending policies of both Republicans and Democrats are Left. The Drug policies of both are left (the democrats had their chance to legalize a ton and avoided it and responsible for more restrictions actually). The war policies of both are left. Most self-labeled "Liberals" key issues are open borders, legalized drugs, isolationist style use of military, government out of personal life... those are all actually Conservative viewpoints, not Liberal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 7:23:26 GMT -5
^^^^ Ok, interesting info. See, just because I'm not informed on every fucking political area doesn't mean assholes need to go off on me. Regardless, wouldn't you agree it is quite possible for republican leaders (and leaders from ANY party) to do to a lot of damage to their people?? I'm sure you would. So whether or not the term "dictator" applies, I think we could agree that a ring wing leader who in any real way dominates his people in an unjust way, or leads to the deaths of innocents if we take this to the extreme, could be considered an extremely dangerous or harmful "right wing leader". How much importance is there really to whether or not the term "dictator" applies if wrong decisions lead to really bad outcomes?? It isn't because they think you are misinformed, it is because you aren't a staunch conservative. I identify as Libertarian but I don't like the people who take it all the way to anarchy. I am conservative in many areas but you wouldn't know that with some of the arguments I get into. That is because I know the world is much more nuisanced than a lot of people who think only their side has right answers or hold the moral high ground.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Nov 29, 2016 7:29:06 GMT -5
^^^^ Ok, interesting info. See, just because I'm not informed on every fucking political area doesn't mean assholes need to go off on me. Regardless, wouldn't you agree it is quite possible for republican leaders (and leaders from ANY party) to do to a lot of damage to their people?? I'm sure you would. So whether or not the term "dictator" applies, I think we could agree that a ring wing leader who in any real way dominates his people in an unjust way, or leads to the deaths of innocents if we take this to the extreme, could be considered an extremely dangerous or harmful "right wing leader". How much importance is there really to whether or not the term "dictator" applies if wrong decisions lead to really bad outcomes?? It isn't because they think you are misinformed, it is because you aren't a staunch conservative. I identify as Libertarian but I don't like the people who take it all the way to anarchy. I am conservative in many areas but you wouldn't know that with some of the arguments I get into. That is because I know the world is much more nuisanced than a lot of people who think only their side has right answers or hold the moral high ground.BINGO, and this is the underlying issue with official political parties. Makes more sense to have organizations on each issue individually, there is too much cross-over and middle ground and even outside-the-box answers that are possible for damn near each issue. That combined with this extreme focus on short-term solutions/goals that we've recently started getting back into (and not just in the US), is what has me nervous for the future in my lifetime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2016 10:44:40 GMT -5
One question: Did you miss all the militant shit that went down when Obama got elected? No I didn't miss it. I'm not up on everything that happened, but i DO know plenty of really fucked up shit happened, and was more brushed under the rug cause mainly black people did it. And that's very fucked up. Then why is this surprising or even newsworthy? Yes, we have little brain thinking in this country. From all creeds, colors, religions, etc. It's nothing new. I choose to focus on the big boy style of thought.
|
|