Because bad things tend to happen on the fringes. Especially when one side controls the narrative and has the potential power to silence their critics.Why?
Because bad things tend to happen on the fringes. Especially when one side controls the narrative and has the potential power to silence their critics.Why?
Because bad things tend to happen on the fringes. Especially when one side controls the narrative and has the potential power to silence their critics.
This isn't just a left threat though.
Publicly funded healthcare isn't an ultra progressive idea. Purple haired men who pretend to be women and go into girls bathrooms or compete in girls sports, for example, is an ultra progressive idea.
And this is a US based forum and a US based political discussion...if we're gonna set a frame of reference.
Correct. I qualified already why I think the far left threat is of higher consequence. They have the platform and the political clout.
I'm curious as to why this wasn't a higher consequence for the past four years? Why is "the left" a higher consequence than when conservatives have the platform and political clout? It's awfully partisan. Extremism on either side should be suppressed as strongly as possible.
So in general you see any progressive policy as a threat?
Just ultra-progressive social policy. Also anti-capitalist sentiment. Yes.
so
A CANADIAN WALKS INTO A BAR AND SITS DOWN WITH 2 AUSTRALIANS
So something as simple as raising taxes would be considered anti-capitalist or ultra-progressive?
Wat? No. Neither. Now you're talking about fiscal policy.