[Mega] MAGA Super Trump Mega Thread
- Thread starter -SS-
- Start date
I didn't say he was radical left. In fact, i was suggesting he wasn't when I said it's obviously a spectrum.welcome to the radical left belial, u'll like it over here
But at least from the arguments he makes, he's a naive lefty.
Why sure, coombz.
Although I wouldn't really make it exactly like I did if I was doing it from scratch. I just took the terminology from whoever posted that idiotic triangle.
There is no right-wing. It's all bullshit. Left just means more government. Really, left and right are idiotic terms, but it's easier and more reasonable to say "leftist" for someone who wants more government for whatever idiotic emotional reason they come up with, instead of "person who wants oppressive, big government."
It's all really about the size of the government. That's it. The reasoning behind it doesn't matter. That goes for religion-based governments as well. Same shit.
You backed out like a coward last time, so I'll try again.
If it has anything to do with economics, then why was Hitler right-wing when he had control the German economy? Communists do the same, just more. Are commies right-wing now? Or are you admitting Hilter was left-wing?
As for morals, leftists pretend to care about the outcome of equality (note how I said outcome, not actual equality), but aren't right-wingers religious and morals are even more important? Isn't moral superiority a big thing on both of your alleged sides?
Again, what is your exact definition and explanation of the differences and similarities?
it's politics. left and right mean things because people think they mean things. the terms "left" and "right" have their origin as the sides of the room people with certain views sat on. but now they mean a lot more than that. left and right in the US are loaded terms that have a very specific social and political context. it's kinda retarded to argue otherwise. it's like going outside and saying the sky isn't actually blue or not being able to find your way off a hill.
but I hear what you're saying.
left and right issues are issues that are designed to be political cleavages. they're designed to divide people as much as possible; no one in power wants bi-partisanship and no one wants to have wish-washy voters. that makes them work hard. they want shit decided before you show up to vote and they want to control that with simple geographic boundaries. that's much easier than actually working.
but I hear what you're saying.
left and right issues are issues that are designed to be political cleavages. they're designed to divide people as much as possible; no one in power wants bi-partisanship and no one wants to have wish-washy voters. that makes them work hard. they want shit decided before you show up to vote and they want to control that with simple geographic boundaries. that's much easier than actually working.
Fascists are leftists, so your statement is confusing.
Who is suppressing freedom of speech and anyone who goes against their current self-righteous group-think? Who is using violence? Who are the hypocrites? Oh yea, leftists. What do we call that? Fascism.
Yet again, I'd like to hear your non-Jew-edited google definition of what fascism is, because it doesn't make sense.
Who is suppressing freedom of speech and anyone who goes against their current self-righteous group-think? Who is using violence? Who are the hypocrites? Oh yea, leftists. What do we call that? Fascism.
Yet again, I'd like to hear your non-Jew-edited google definition of what fascism is, because it doesn't make sense.
fascists are not leftists. peronism was a movement that was fascism from the left, but that was very non-typical.
the most important difference between fascism and socialism is where power is concentrated and how property rights are treated.
under socialism the state OWNS the means of production and CONTROLS the means of production and the focus is on the benefit of the worker. whether or not that actually happens really isn't that relevant to the current discussion.
under fascism property rights do not change. the state DOES NOT own the means of production. they may exert some control over the means of production but that's not really that interesting or relevant. the more relevant factor is that under fascism the power of the state and the power of corporate interests merge and the state becomes an instrument of corporate power.
tbh putting fascism on a political spectrum as a type of government doesn't really work. it's more accurate and useful to look at fascism as a type of social movement.
the most important difference between fascism and socialism is where power is concentrated and how property rights are treated.
under socialism the state OWNS the means of production and CONTROLS the means of production and the focus is on the benefit of the worker. whether or not that actually happens really isn't that relevant to the current discussion.
under fascism property rights do not change. the state DOES NOT own the means of production. they may exert some control over the means of production but that's not really that interesting or relevant. the more relevant factor is that under fascism the power of the state and the power of corporate interests merge and the state becomes an instrument of corporate power.
tbh putting fascism on a political spectrum as a type of government doesn't really work. it's more accurate and useful to look at fascism as a type of social movement.
(err.. re Val's ramblings...)
No, it comes down to what the aims of that government are. "Big" or "Small" is entirely irrelevant to that, no matter how loudly you bleat it out.
If you're talking about left v right in a modern society, you need to break it down into social and economic aspects. Socially, the left is progressive and ultimately quite liberal(/libertarian!) in advocating as much personal freedom as possible while not impacting others (hence drug laws, abortion, etc), while the right is driven more by conservative/religious values. There are obviously blurrings in there where issues overlap and cross over for various factors, but broadly speaking that's the gist of it.
Economically, leftists seek an 'equality', aiming to support the disadvantaged at the expense of the elite, while the right does basically the opposite, redistributing towards the top.
No, it's not about more or less government. That's a side-effect.
Right-wing politics supports the wealthy & powerful. Many of those wealthy and powerful are hampered in their pursuit of further wealth and power by pesky government regulations designed to stop them raping the rest of the populace, so they are naturally opposed to that. On the left, it is that government influence which protects the vulnerable from those that would exploit them.
However - the right can also benefit from 'big government'.. The likes of Lockheed, Boeing, GD.. they make vast amounts of money thanks to what can only be described as right-wing politics, and they are absolutely reliant on big government... kinda like Porsche, Krupp, Henschel and others were in Nazi Germany, and there you have your tie-in to left v right. The rise of the elite in the communist USSR was not a systemic aim of the politics, but a corruption of it. Conversely, Nazi Germany was openly and proudly focused on further elevating and rewarding the elite in the belief that that would flow on to the rest of the people.
No, it comes down to what the aims of that government are. "Big" or "Small" is entirely irrelevant to that, no matter how loudly you bleat it out.
If you're talking about left v right in a modern society, you need to break it down into social and economic aspects. Socially, the left is progressive and ultimately quite liberal(/libertarian!) in advocating as much personal freedom as possible while not impacting others (hence drug laws, abortion, etc), while the right is driven more by conservative/religious values. There are obviously blurrings in there where issues overlap and cross over for various factors, but broadly speaking that's the gist of it.
Economically, leftists seek an 'equality', aiming to support the disadvantaged at the expense of the elite, while the right does basically the opposite, redistributing towards the top.
No, it's not about more or less government. That's a side-effect.
Right-wing politics supports the wealthy & powerful. Many of those wealthy and powerful are hampered in their pursuit of further wealth and power by pesky government regulations designed to stop them raping the rest of the populace, so they are naturally opposed to that. On the left, it is that government influence which protects the vulnerable from those that would exploit them.
However - the right can also benefit from 'big government'.. The likes of Lockheed, Boeing, GD.. they make vast amounts of money thanks to what can only be described as right-wing politics, and they are absolutely reliant on big government... kinda like Porsche, Krupp, Henschel and others were in Nazi Germany, and there you have your tie-in to left v right. The rise of the elite in the communist USSR was not a systemic aim of the politics, but a corruption of it. Conversely, Nazi Germany was openly and proudly focused on further elevating and rewarding the elite in the belief that that would flow on to the rest of the people.
-SS- isnt dumb in fact hes very intelligent. But anger throttles reason. He got sucked down an ideaological shit hole and cant red pill his way out of it.
Lets all have patience and pray that he finds his way out of it as no argument, nor reason
or appeal to common sense will release him from his dogmatic trap. Sad!
Let us learn from the example of -SS- and never allow emo to blind us to reason and the pursuit of our own class interests
Also:
Yess!
Trump offers to 'compare IQ tests' with Tillerson after 'moron' report
It truly never ends with this fucking moron. And you know Rex called him just that.
I thought you were kidding absent.
And of course Tillerson called him a moron.