Opinion What are 'Radical Left' Beliefs

[Possum Jenkins]

No you aren't reading me right dude and are over simplifying my position.

I even said exactly what policy I vote on. That's not a vibe. That's a very real policy.


You are trying to have a conversation about voting. I thought we were talking about what makes someone seem radical. I even asked you a question about that.

Yeah, you brought up policy after I pointed out that you were all feels and vibes.

And yeah, I bring up voting and policy because we're in the WR and that's more relevant. Talking about what makes a person's individual attributes "radical" doesn't seem very relevant here. Leave that for the Mayberry or something.

 

[Loiosh]

It's completely against our constitution, our traditions and our way of life so it seems extreme to me.

I don't think discussing the modification of a modification whose meaning is somehow unclear is what you're describing.

Wouldn't gun control fit neatly into "well regulated"?

 

[RoastBeast]

Anyone who disagrees with me on anything is a radical lefty.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Women voting. Desegregation. Civil rights movement were all radical left ideas at one point.

 

[lowlife]

Those aren't the policies that made conservatives go full retard. The only one I don't agree with is taxing unhealthy foods at a higher rate. For poor people a lot of times they don't have much of a choice, another solution would be preferable there imo.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

How about reparations for the millions in the Congo slaughtered by King Leopold, Native Americans, African Americans (who were brought over as slaves, their generational labor accumulating millions of dead capital for helping build this country), Assyrians in Turkey/Iraq, Uyghurs in China, etc. ?

yes, i'd like to see all of that.

 

[avenue94]

I think most conservatives agree with legal immigration having a more streamline, but safe process. Might help curtail the need for mass illegal immigration.

If they did, they wouldn't be going after green card holders and permanent residents, let alone reducing immigration and refugee quotas.

Immigration is fundamentally inseparable from race for the conservative base.

 

[Spounman]

When I went to the county office yesterday and I had to use the restroom, they had 2 "All Gender" and 1 "All Inclusive" restrooms. That's a radical left belief. Dumb ass people are confused between a Men's restroom and a Woman's restroom.

 

[djacobox372]

hate speech's intention is inevitable violence. if you are attempting to categorize a race of people or some other minority as inferior scum or vermin, that exists only to justify violence, which will inevitably occur. it's pretty stupid to pretend it's "just words" with no ulterior consequences.

Thank you for illustrating my point.

It's JUST FUCKING WORDS! You can combat them with your own FUCKING WORDS!

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

Thank you for illustrating my point.

It's JUST FUCKING WORDS! You can combat them with your own FUCKING WORDS!

words that promote and incentivize violence. if that was your point, it doesn't make much sense. what is someone supposed to say in response to messaging that echoes "my friends and i all hold public office, and have tons of wealth, and we believe you're inferior to us racially and culturally. you are essentially subhuman"

 

[filthybliss]

Thank you for illustrating my point.

It's JUST FUCKING WORDS! You can combat them with your own FUCKING WORDS!

He is a Titoist so he does have authoritarian tendencies.

 

[fedoriswar37]

Go listen to Zorhan talk .

 

[jeremyemilio]

I'm often called a 'radical leftie'. I'm curious to find out what other people think that means. These are 10 of my strongest political beliefs. Which are radical left?

Based on these alone, you're not a radical.

But you didn't put the most radical left things up there. Maybe that's because you aren't radical and so don't believe them? Here are ten:

* Violence is a white European invention.
* Men contribute nothing good to the world.
* Men are responsible for everything that is bad in the world.
* Private property should not exist.
* Accusations of sexual assault should always result in convictions regardless of evidence.
* Law enforcement is harmful and should be abolished.
* Everything necessary for a good and comfortable life should be free and work should be optional.
* Conservative minorities are either brainwashed or grifters or stupid or evil and their minority experience doesn't count.
* Speech they disagree with is violence.
* Physical violence against conservatives is justified.

These are off of the top of my head. There are more.

If you have a pet issue or two here that kind of resonates with you in a "hear me out" sort of way, I wouldn't likely classify you as radical left, but if you're getting up into the three or four (or more) range, you're probably getting into radical territory.

 

[fedorthegoat777]

Letting men compete against women and go in their bathrooms is the first radical left concept that comes to mind.

10 years ago I would have never guessed that a women's dick would be a thing.

 

[Hog-train]

The Charlie Kirk thread is a perfect example of it. A bunch of scumbags are celebrating on social media and the right is allowed to frame it as if the entire left is like that, despite the fact that the entirety of the mainstream left have denounced the violence. There is plenty of criticism to have about him/his beliefs that is perfec, but some of the people take it way too far.

And the left doesn't do the EXACT SAME SHIT?

Both sides do that shit literally daily. They take 8 second out of context clips and mischaracterize what they're saying, etc.

Bro wake up and look in the mirror.

 

[Sinister]

Well it was what? 20 yrs ago or so this climate crisis was pushed of "you guys are having too many kids. Overpopulation is a serious problem." Along with kids are too much responsibility angle and YOLO and other think-tank propaganda to encourage people not to have children. And now it's "You guys didn't have enough kids! We need to import people.". Makes it seems planned from the start.

I understand the slavery angle and how awful it is. But sad to say, these slaves weren't viewed as people as much as they were viewed as property. So no consideration was given their way. I'm sure you know this. Aristocracy always has and continues to hold a view of the working class as peons and disposable humans.

Anyway, I'm not saying it was utopia, but I do believe they intended to keep it a majority white nation while understanding some slaves would buy their freedom and stay as workers and citizens. But some people suggesting an open door policy for any and all immigrants upon foundation is completely false.

The climate argument is a red herring. A Country can be experiencing a birthrate crises and be overpopulated at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive. The capitalists are the most alarmed about there not being enough births, they're worried they're going to lose their workforces. Hence the conservative ones pushing for abortion bans and the rolling back of child labor laws. Turns out the robots arent efficient enough yet and they still NEED human labor to survive until they are

I agree with the second paragraph, but what aim saying is this Country was never PURELY white. Hell the white populations didnt even all get along, they never do. The law you cited was just about maintenance of heirarchy.

Your assessment is more accurate about the Confederacy, that's what THEY wanted. I always tell people if they want to understand what they're seeing now, what Project 2025 is, they need to look up what the Confederacy wanted to do to the Americas had they won the Civil War. Theres a reason this also isnt taught in schools, we are meant to think they were just declaring War emotionally because they didnt want to give up slavery and if they won, well they would have just continued slavery and all would have been as it was before the Civil War. That's not the case, they fully intended to seize Governmental power and essentially turn the US into a "Christian" caliphate with an emphasis on their perception of heirarchy. White Christian men who owned land could vote, no one else. Black people arent full humans and thus, dont deserve rights. No minorities have the same rights as white Christian males, and women certainly do not. As for Central America their intent was for them to be ruled by wealthy European-descended plantation owners, whose crop rights were Governed by our Federal Government. They intended to re-gather our Military might and essentially take over. Or at the very least install friendly dictators.

All this in a distinct effort to be an Empirical competitor to England.

Now compare that to what you're seeing now. Distinct removal of indigenous people to South of the border. Open oppression of specifically black voting districts (I've seen these people in their own "educational" videos) make cases that black people and women should have never been given the right to vote and the relevant amendments should be repealed. Curtis Yarvin (Theil, Musk, and others are in his cult) pushes people currently in power to turn the US into corporate fiefdoms. And the tech Broligarchs' chosen guy, JD Vance, currently holds the 2nd highest office in the Country. These men openly dislike democracy, you can find videos of Thiel and Yarvin saying so openly. And theyve allied with the Christian Nationalists because they all agree on what KINDS of people should be in charge, unquestionably.

 

[Zazen]

It's crazy that immigration which made America what it is today is the one that people seem to be having the most issues with on here. It's our single greatest strength against our adversary China which has a demographic crisis. How scary is it that young families want to come here and contribute to our economy?

 

[Sinister]

Women voting. Desegregation. Civil rights movement were all radical left ideas at one point.

What do you mean at one point? Charlie Kirk said two of those were mistakes, and the third resulted in an attempt to "replace" people who look like him.

 

[Blayt7hh]

From my understanding the 2A initially was meant specifically FOR registered Militiamen, that's why that part is first. Plenty of early townships and settlements had laws against gun carrying, and gun use. I can show you 2 former conservative SCOTUS justices who both said the same thing before they died, on video. Gun carrying had a specific utility, if it wasn't occupational, it wasnt necessarily lawful. The idea that there would be a general widespread armed citizenry would have horrified the Framers as they had to quash rebellions already. This notion of arming the population to fight against it's own Government was absurd. Shay's Rebellion and the other ones that sprung up at the time had to raid armories.

The problem with your 2 big things is not the politicians, it's the culture. You have bootstraps ideology mixed with "solve all your problems with a gun" ideology. There are heavily armed Nations with universal healthcare, they dont think like we do. And what's worse is that if you bring up those Countries here, people will say they can have both because they have less immigration, less minorities.

It’s actually just ambiguous in the constitution. It was done that way on purpose because the founding fathers themselves were split on the issue.

 

[Darkballs]

And the left doesn't do the EXACT SAME SHIT?

The federal government threated to pull the broadcasting license of a media outlet unless the removed a comedian whose opening monologue offended the current administration.

No, the left does nothing of the sort.