U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-04-2014, 06:47 AM
 
2,778 posts, read 1,429,898 times
Reputation: 2418

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieOlSkool View Post
LOL

Ok, the bad guys were NEVER "true" communists. And Craig Ferguson is Not a True Scotsman.
If you call yourself the king of America, and tell your friends to call you the King of America, does that mean you're the king of America?

No, it doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-04-2014, 07:02 AM
 
2,778 posts, read 1,429,898 times
Reputation: 2418
Here's how deluded right wingers think the political spectrum goes:



Note how the use of 'true' betrays their poor grasp on reality and desire to be taken seriously.

And here is something closer to reality:



But to me it's still not accurate, because it always seems to be the right that is opposed to consenting adults having sex, abortion, etc... and the left that wants to make it okay for people to do these things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 10:30 AM
 
9,119 posts, read 5,623,683 times
Reputation: 3853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odo View Post
No.

I have to say, on this thread there seems to be a total lack of understanding of how the right/left dynamic actually works.

I would call into question whether or not a left-wing government could even be authoritarian or repressive, given that socialists and communists regard equality, NOT military or state privilege, as being of the utmost importance.
Oh my ... you are actually suggesting that others have a poor understanding of the left-right dynamic? Good lord, you are drowning in that progressive kool-aide aren't ya?

The leftist ideology is full bore authoritarian by nature, and to question that in the manner you have is akin to question how trees could ever have leaves. One look at our leftwing in this country alone should put to rest any doubts about the authoritarian nature of it. But it's not just authoritarian, it is self destructive, contradictory, dogmatic in the extreme, and promoted by ideologues who insist that they know what's best for everyone else.

To list just the most readily identifiable examples of this mindset today would take volumes of pages, but no other example typifies this like the authoritarian Bloomberg, who wants to establish laws controlling every conceivable activity, right down to the number of ounces of soda pop you can receive with your cheeseburger.

The great contradiction in this anti freedom mindset of the left is how they expouse their dedication to freedom of choice by championing, for example, the rights of a very twisted and confused tiny minority of derranged male cross dressers who's right to wear a dress to work should be protected by law, while also sending home a highschool student for wearing a shirt with an American flag on it. The circular logic borders on pure insanity, and cannot be reconciled by a rational mind.

Quote:
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that serving yourself first and everyone else second is what being a right-winger is all about. They reason it to themselves as being 'God's will' or 'how it is' or 'their reward for all their hard work'.
Spoken like a true collectivist progressive authoritarian ... and an apparent God hater.

Of course, you believe yourself to be the enlightened one (the most prominent aspect of the authoritarian), as you tout the higher aspects of putting the interests of others first, and that too is the core belief system necessary to instill, in order to convince everyone to embrace the collectivist mentality. To think otherwise is just pure selfishness, according to the collectivist.

But the truth is, this collectivist model is the abandonment of personal responsibility, which is clearly exhibited in virtually every aspect of leftist ideology. Of course, that dreaded concet of personal responsibility begins with the most basic first step, which is to take care of yourself first, rather than expect others to take care of you. This is not an issue of religion or politics, but one of basic common sense, which confounds the leftist mind.

To put it bluntly, it's downright stupidity to put yourself last, and everyone else first, because to follow that form of "logic" would leave everyone standing forever outside the gates of that liberal Utopia, waiting for the other guy to enter first.

By contrast, when one chooses to take care of himself first, he will be in a much better position to then help others. This is why flight attendents instruct adults who are traveling with children to put on their oxygen mask first in the case of decompression, and then assist the children with theirs. Oh the selfishness? No, just common sense .... to first fumble around trying to attend to your two kids, and then yourself last, puts you at risk of losing consciousness, rendering you incapable of assisting your children, resulting in all three of you dying.

The bottom line in all of this is quite simple, and quite rational. Your primary responsibility is to yourself. You are responsible for your own well being ... your happiness ... your success ... your necessities of life ... nobody else owes these things to you, and they sure don't have any moral or rational responsibility to make sure that all your wants, desires and needs are satisfied before attending to their own.

This is why leftist collectivism is by nature, self-destructive. It demands self sacrifice for the good of the "collective" .... yet, if everyone within that collective practices self sacrifice, who is the beneficiary of all that sacrificing?

That's the secret hiding in plain sight ...the benefits go to the authoritarian overlords who sold that bill of goods to the collective group of nitwits in the beginning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 11:11 AM
 
Location: *
8,117 posts, read 2,428,166 times
Reputation: 2223
Sounds like someone's been channeling Ayn Rand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 04:18 PM
 
9,119 posts, read 5,623,683 times
Reputation: 3853
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Sounds like someone's been channeling Ayn Rand.
Nope ... while I agree with Rand on many points, she was not the influencing factor. My philosophical point of view was formed prior to becoming familiar with Rand's writings.

My position is based on numerous influences, none the least of which include the founders of our country, as well as basic common sense. That common sense factor is perhaps the most important, because that is the tool one uses to test the value and legitimacy of these opinions and positions. This your own personal BS detector, and once fine tuned, operates automatically, preventing oneself from being suckered my clever arguments.

As for the collectivist mindset, that's an easy one. The moment one speaks of "collective rights", or "the greater good", the BS detector goes off immediately, because there is no such thing as collective rights that are beyond or in addition to the sum of the rights of the individuals making up that collective. Simply replace "rights" with "money" to test this contention. Gather 100 people, each of whom have $10. The collective know has $1000. But if you gathered 100 hobos, none of which had one penny in their pockets, how much money does that collective have? $0. The same is true of rights. The only rights a collective could possibly enjoy are the rights each member of that collective bring to the group.

So when people talk about giving up individual rights for the greater good of the collective, it is just a fraud at face value, unless you believe that suffering a net loss of rights is somehow good. It's just a trick, and it only works on people who lack common sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 04:23 PM
 
1,259 posts, read 695,868 times
Reputation: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieOlSkool View Post
Depending on who you ask, one extreme side would be the worst. If the extreme leftists had their way, would society be better off? The same applies to the extreme right.
Any extreme is bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 06:02 PM
 
Location: *
8,117 posts, read 2,428,166 times
Reputation: 2223
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
Nope ... while I agree with Rand on many points, she was not the influencing factor. My philosophical point of view was formed prior to becoming familiar with Rand's writings.

My position is based on numerous influences, none the least of which include the founders of our country, as well as basic common sense. That common sense factor is perhaps the most important, because that is the tool one uses to test the value and legitimacy of these opinions and positions. This your own personal BS detector, and once fine tuned, operates automatically, preventing oneself from being suckered my clever arguments.

As for the collectivist mindset, that's an easy one. The moment one speaks of "collective rights", or "the greater good", the BS detector goes off immediately, because there is no such thing as collective rights that are beyond or in addition to the sum of the rights of the individuals making up that collective. Simply replace "rights" with "money" to test this contention. Gather 100 people, each of whom have $10. The collective know has $1000. But if you gathered 100 hobos, none of which had one penny in their pockets, how much money does that collective have? $0. The same is true of rights. The only rights a collective could possibly enjoy are the rights each member of that collective bring to the group.

So when people talk about giving up individual rights for the greater good of the collective, it is just a fraud at face value, unless you believe that suffering a net loss of rights is somehow good. It's just a trick, and it only works on people who lack common sense.
I guess that was a Freudian slip? Warning others not to be suckered into your clever sophisms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,751 posts, read 9,864,468 times
Reputation: 9880
"Wingism" is a smoke screen.

I'd rather ask if one supports or prefers:
[] endowed rights to life, liberty, and absolute ownership,
[] sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and
[] a government that only governs those who consent

Neither wing supports these attributes of the republican form of government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 06:09 PM
 
Location: LA, CA/ In This Time and Place
5,433 posts, read 3,512,171 times
Reputation: 5063
I like moderation, but the extreme right are just scary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2014, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
4,825 posts, read 1,637,315 times
Reputation: 1060
1. Moderate and extreme describe popularity, not correctness. Just because something is extreme doesn't make it incorrect.

2. I agree that authoritarianism is the real issue here. Subjugation of the individual's rights for the "common good" is tyrannical. That's what the most oppressive governments have in common. They claim the right to silence, suppress, imprison, or kill any person deemed to be a threat to the "social order"...they see criticism as a threat to their control over the population and, from that perspective, it makes sense to crush dissent because their job is easier when nobody is questioning their actions. To authoritarians, peace and order = obedience and unquestioned loyalty to whoever is in charge. Citizens aren't much different than livestock in this situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top