Right wingers/Conservatives: would opposition to Israel change your view of the Democratic Party?

I'm starting to believe you're just a troll.

Setting aside the (obviously erroneous and historically counter-factual) statement on constitutional rights on the assumption that firearm ownership is the foremost consideration, there is no possible way you could review the past 40 years, but especially the past 9 years, of Republican/Democrat rhetoric/action and say that the Democrats are the more corrupt and dishonest party.

I mean....wtf? Deficit hawking? ACA versus AHCA vote process? Breaking down public oversight of official duties? Buehler?

In the last 2 years the Democratic party has proven to select their candidates before the primaries. Can you tell me what is more corrupt that fixing your candidate before the people have a vote?
 
In the last 2 years the Democratic party has proven to select their candidates before the primaries. Can you tell me what is more corrupt that fixing your candidate before the people have a vote?

(A) Sanders supporter here, and they didn't do that. They contracted with the Clinton campaign regarding their debt. As a longstanding member, she was always going to get institutional support. But they didn't "rig" the process.

(B) The Republican Party was WAY, way more biased against Trump than the DNC was against Sanders. For fuck's sake, they had Cruz and Kasich openly saying that they were only staying in the race to prevent Trump from getting the default nomination so that they could have a challenged primary where the party would elect someone else.


Regardless, neither of those reflect on the corruption of the parties re lawmaking. That's regarding their own electoral administration and is distinct from their functions as lawmakers. In terms of law making, in terms of observing political norms, in terms of preserving democracy, and in terms of policy consistency, the GOP is exponentially more corrupt and dishonest.
 
A reduced support of Israel in favor of Palestine would not have a major impact on how I view the Democratic Party. I think that the Israelis aren't a great ally, but I am a bit sympathetic to some of their positions: Israel is a bit like a cornered dog in a lot of ways. Yes, that cornered dog is overly aggressive and tends to bite at people when it shouldn't, but it's not doing that because it's a bad dog. It's just cornered and scared. I tend to view a two-state solution as a pretty good way to reduce violence and tensions, but I also want to be very wary of literally making the Israelis a nation surrounded by enemies who don't recognize its right to exist. I think the GOP is too lock-step behind its unconditional support for Israel, but if the Democrats want to win me over on this issue, it's going to have to be in the position that they take, not the position that they don't take.
 
Actually, that's called Keynesian capitalism. It redirects economic productivity downward to those who produce it so that they can produce more. Your "here, donate some more taxes" suggestion is a deflection and a non sequitur. You said that the Democrats were anti-working class. I have proven otherwise. You can look at any qualitative metric (like lawmaking, such as that I provided earlier), or you can refer to one of any quantitative metrics showing that working and middle class persons fare better under Democrats, or perhaps more accurately, fair much, much, much worse under Republicans.

And, when proven otherwise, you changed your claim to "regulation and taxation are bad for the working class," which I then rebutted.

And now you're radically changing your claim to "well, that sounds like communism, and communism is bad for the working class," which I will tiredly now address below.




Regardless of semantics of "communism" or whether it is normatively desirable, what you are referring to as communism was GREAT for the working class relative to the capitalism before it and after it.

r-shares.jpg

r-top1.jpg

novokmentfig5.png
Tell me this is just a coincidence with your name. You seem to be promoting some of his ideology.

Leon Trotsky -Trotsky was not only a leader of the October revolution of 1917, commissar of foreign affairs in the first Soviet government, founder of the Red Army and commissar of war from 1918 to 1925, cofounder of the Communist International, member of the Politburo of the Soviet Communist party from 1918 to 1927, he was also an original theorist of Marxism, whose ideas strongly influenced socialism and communism in the first four decades of this century.
 
Tell me this is just a coincidence with your name. You seem to be promoting some of his ideology.

I am not myself a Leninist or Soviet-style communist. I am a libertarian, or left communist, or libertarian socialist.

But, to be clear, I am quite explicitly "promoting" New Deal-era Keynesian capitalism. I don't expect to radicalize right-side partisans, but I would like to at least bring them to the point of common sense.
 
I am not myself a Leninist or Soviet-style communist. I am a libertarian, or left communist, or libertarian socialist.

But, to be clear, I am quite explicitly "promoting" New Deal-era Keynesian capitalism. I don't expect to radicalize right-side partisans, but I would like to at least bring them to the point of common sense.
If John Maynard Keynes was alive today, he wouldn't even agree with Keynesian economics as it is known today.
 
If John Maynard Keynes was alive today, he wouldn't even agree with Keynesian economics as it is known today.

You're right. John Keynes was much, much further left economically than proponents of Keynesian economics today in the dying days of the neoliberal era. Today's Keynesians are much more conservative and capitalistic than Keynes was.

But I'm not sure why you're trying to shift the goalposts again. I'm starting to think you're trolling me as well, since you just pose a new claim instead of owning the ones you previously made.
 
As a Libertarian, I don't support Israel. But mostly because I hate the amount of intervention we do on their behalf. Plus we give them an awful lot of free shit and money for their military. We already spend too much on our military, we sure as fuck don't need to keep them afloat.
 
It improves it. I personally think Israel is a bad influence on the world that somehow has combined might makes right and feigned victimhood to drag us into conflict after conflict and to keep the middle east unstable.
 
Actually, that's called Keynesian capitalism. It redirects economic productivity downward to those who produce it so that they can produce more. Your "here, donate some more taxes" suggestion is a deflection and a non sequitur. You said that the Democrats were anti-working class. I have proven otherwise. You can look at any qualitative metric (like lawmaking, such as that I provided earlier), or you can refer to one of any quantitative metrics showing that working and middle class persons fare better under Democrats, or perhaps more accurately, fair much, much, much worse under Republicans.

And, when proven otherwise, you changed your claim to "regulation and taxation are bad for the working class," which I then rebutted.

And now you're radically changing your claim to "well, that sounds like communism, and communism is bad for the working class," which I will tiredly now address below.




Regardless of semantics of "communism" or whether it is normatively desirable, what you are referring to as communism was GREAT for the working class relative to the capitalism before it and after it.

r-shares.jpg

r-top1.jpg

novokmentfig5.png
You didn't provide a reference. Who is the source of this data? ......The Former Soviet Union? LMAO
 
Back
Top