[Mega] MAGA Super Trump Mega Thread

samUwell said:
No! No they are not. They are not liberal and nowhere close to being a libertarian, as the progressives are some of the most regressive and authoritarian people on the face of the planet, except for maybe Muslims. I am a liberal in the original sense of the word: i want the people to have the ultimate liberty in every aspect of their lives, as long as it does not infringe on other peoples rights to life, liberty and property. Progressives are the furthest thing from being a liberal.
...
Nazi Germany and Soviet Socialist Republic - 2 extreme leftist ideologies (in modern political vernacular) differing only in the economic freedoms granted to the people through their overbearing, authoritarian government.
Click to expand...

You're using US-centric viewpoints that equate left and right with Democrat and Republican. You're confusing fundamental concepts with implementations of political parties, and the fact that you're calling Nazi Germany an extreme leftist ideology is frankly disturbing.

While I'll freely admit that the terms are pretty confused in this day and age (part of the reason why I dislike people throwing them around - mostly it's just used as "people I disagree with"), the fundamental concepts are what they are, and those pretty much come down to marxist socialism at one end and the fascism of the likes of Mussolini at the other. Redistribution of wealth to elevate the masses, or to aid the elite. Bottom-up or top-down, at its most basic. The things that bind them in common is the focus on the proles or the elite... The social aspects are secondary to that, and perhaps one of the reasons for the confusion people used to the 'modern' usage have, when you see the similar stance on religion from both Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany and equate that stance against traditional religion with an overall political ideology.

I'm sure some Political Science graduate could break it all down and correct me all over the place. IMO though, the terms as used today are basically little more than labels to represent the stereotypical viewpoint of either major party in a political system. As such, when viewed in a global sense (with the varying 'centres' around the world) they're corrupted to the point of being meaningless. What's right-wing to a Swede is probably still pretty leftist to a Texan. Considering the terms are relative though, you can't really say that either is wrong.
 
havax said:
probably because they'd been casing the guy for years on anonymous sexual assault accusations?
Click to expand...

if I had this many friends that turned out to be sexual predators I would really want to change who I hang out with

#LockHerUp
 
hillary just said i had no idea he was such a pervert

LMAO

be it bill (her rapist husband), podesta (her campaign manager), or huma abedin (wife of anthony preteen sexting weiner)

this woman is about as good at taking accountability for her actions, her loses, as she is surrounding herself with good and ethical minded people

what an amazing president she should have been if only it weren't for that glass ceiling
 
MC Hamster said:
You're using US-centric viewpoints that equate left and right with Democrat and Republican. You're confusing fundamental concepts with implementations of political parties, and the fact that you're calling Nazi Germany an extreme leftist ideology is frankly disturbing.

While I'll freely admit that the terms are pretty confused in this day and age (part of the reason why I dislike people throwing them around - mostly it's just used as "people I disagree with"), the fundamental concepts are what they are, and those pretty much come down to marxist socialism at one end and the fascism of the likes of Mussolini at the other. Redistribution of wealth to elevate the masses, or to aid the elite. Bottom-up or top-down, at its most basic. The things that bind them in common is the focus on the proles or the elite... The social aspects are secondary to that, and perhaps one of the reasons for the confusion people used to the 'modern' usage have, when you see the similar stance on religion from both Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany and equate that stance against traditional religion with an overall political ideology.

I'm sure some Political Science graduate could break it all down and correct me all over the place. IMO though, the terms as used today are basically little more than labels to represent the stereotypical viewpoint of either major party in a political system. As such, when viewed in a global sense (with the varying 'centres' around the world) they're corrupted to the point of being meaningless. What's right-wing to a Swede is probably still pretty leftist to a Texan. Considering the terms are relative though, you can't really say that either is wrong.
Click to expand...

i wonder how many of his own farts this guy huffed to make this post

at-least-im-not-a-fascist-fascism-is-a-right-wing-8046025.png


my guess is many

DHPBvYyUwAURajD.jpg


about this many
 
Last edited:
Mr Jimmy Pop said:
Val, you call everyone leftist. Honestly, I think anyone who buys all in into the Left or Right is part of the problem. Our political system is pretty fucking broken right now. Whole thing needs to be overhauled.
Click to expand...
You're a fucking retard. Learn to read.
 
absent said:
Trump offers to 'compare IQ tests' with Tillerson after 'moron' report

:rofl: It truly never ends with this fucking moron. And you know Rex called him just that. :lol:
Click to expand...
Link to the video or audio recording of him saying this.

I searched and couldn't find it.
 
Is there a video or audio recording of the entire question and sentence or not?

I have a brain, therefore I don't care what someone writes down in quotation marks.

Edit: I'll probably have to spell it out for the leftist retards here: If he got enraged and screamed while he was saying that and saliva ran down his chin, then paused afterwards, recomposed himself, and then wiped the drool off, it would have a different context then for example if he was giggling, laughing, or rolling his eyes.

You know. Context.
 
Last edited:
Trump said:
Originally Posted by The Trump
Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest -and you all know it! Please don't feel so stupid or insecure, it's not your fault.
Click to expand...

Every time I think the absurdity of this man has peaked, he lowers the bar again and again. It's just amazing.

:lol:
 
MC Hamster said:
You're using US-centric viewpoints that equate left and right with Democrat and Republican. You're confusing fundamental concepts with implementations of political parties, and the fact that you're calling Nazi Germany an extreme leftist ideology is frankly disturbing.
Click to expand...
No... i am not confusing or conflating the left/right paradigm. Its a spectrum - on one end we have the complete and total control over every segment of society - totalitarianism - on the left, and the complete opposite end of it is the complete elimination of government - anarchism. Everything else fits between those 2 ends we are using to measure political ideologies. Is fascism to the right of totalitarianism? Yes, it is because the people enjoy somewhat of a very limited choice in economic choices compared to complete control over everything.

MC Hamster said:
While I'll freely admit that the terms are pretty confused in this day and age (part of the reason why I dislike people throwing them around - mostly it's just used as "people I disagree with"), the fundamental concepts are what they are, and those pretty much come down to marxist socialism at one end and the fascism of the likes of Mussolini at the other.
Click to expand...
Ok so, lets go along with what you are proposing, that totalitarianism is on one extreme end and fascism is on the complete opposite. Where does anarchism fit in? In the middle? So when i hear some talking head on TV say he is a moderate middle of the road kind of guy, i know that he is an anarchist that is rooting for his nations government to collapse?

MC Hamster said:
I'm sure some Political Science graduate could break it all down and correct me all over the place. IMO though, the terms as used today are basically little more than labels to represent the stereotypical viewpoint of either major party in a political system.
Click to expand...
And i would agree with you here. I still cringe when i hear talking heads drone on about "liberal this" or, "liberal that" when discussing the current modern day progressives that stole the term liberal when NONE of them are liberal at all.

MC Hamster said:
As such, when viewed in a global sense (with the varying 'centres' around the world) they're corrupted to the point of being meaningless. What's right-wing to a Swede is probably still pretty leftist to a Texan. Considering the terms are relative though, you can't really say that either is wrong.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sure, because the scale is: left wing - totalitarianism - | - anarchism - right wing with everything else between the two. So yeah, fascism is to the right of totalitarianism just like a right leaning Swede is still very left leaning to someone from the States because the right leaning Swede still believes in using the government to force a certain segment of society to do what he wants them to do.
 
samUwell said:
No... i am not confusing or conflating the left/right paradigm. Its a spectrum - on one end we have the complete and total control over every segment of society - totalitarianism - on the left, and the complete opposite end of it is the complete elimination of government - anarchism.
Click to expand...

Aaaah, now I get it.

No.

What you're talking about here is why the "political compass" style two-dimensional array exists, with authoritarianism on one axis and economics on the other. You're confusing yourself by trying to put every possible position on the one axis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top