Opinion Why are we talking about left vs right in the XXI century?

[rob mafia]

He's using it facetiously.

But if you want a literal example of someone calling Obama literally Hitler then here you go. That's a full four years before Trump even got elected.

How was I twisting what you said? I just quoted you in your own words.

whoa, an anonymous satirical account?! yes, this singular example changes everything!

as for twisting, you claimed "literally stalin" was in the aforementioned post. it wasn't.

 

[Trotsky]

Really? explain the nordic states then.

Well, I won't, because they clearly don't fit that bill. The Nordic countries have strong national governments and (very) strong constitutional guarantees that, in a purely liberal federalist system, would be as unsustainable. In that regard, to the extent that those constitutions and federal programs undermine the democratic autonomy of member provinces, the countries are not as "liberal" as the pre-New Deal United States was. So, by resolving to preempt the federal government from regulating things like child labor, environmental protections, sweat shops, racial/sexual discrimination, etc., the early US was more liberal in terms of its political organization than today's Nordic model, and that preemption effectively prevented the member states from individually passing those policies because they'd get outperformed by neighboring states who didn't because, after all, their externalized costs were a fraction of their internalized benefits.

 

[Islam Imamate]

whoa, an anonymous satirical account?! yes, this singular example changes everything!

as for twisting, you claimed he said "literally stalin." he literally didn't.

I produced as many examples as you did. And its not a satirical account, nice try but its dead serious.

Also I never claimed that anyone call leftists politicians "literally Stalin", what's been claimed is that leftist politicians get identified with radical socialists and communists like the USSR and Maoist China and that's absolutely true. I know you'll pretend otherwise but any honest observer of US politics knows that leftists politicians get tarred with the communist boogeyman all the time. For instance, here's Jorge Masvidal's take on Hillary Clinton.

"Literally" calls her a commie whore. But I guess he's just a secret Hillary supporter making a satirical posts at the expense of Trump supporters...

 

[TheOldMan]

He's using it facetiously.

But if you want a literal example of someone calling Obama literally Hitler then here you go. That's a full four years before Trump even got elected.

How was I twisting what you said? I just quoted you in your own words.

Context.

except that there aren't masses of retards accusing ___ of being "literally stalin," which is the pre-req for your incredibly stupid argument.

It's not so much about right vs. left anymore.

It's more about radical socialism vs. the United States Constitution.

Literally right under your post

You quoted @rob mafia stating there aren't masses of tards accusing ______ of being literally Stalin by attempting to use my post as a rebuttal to prove him wrong.
Nowhere in my post did I even use the word Stalin. I said "radical leftists" and then later even clarified I feel there's a difference between that and Stalin.

So, you using my words out of context to try to cover the fact that you're losing an argument is twisting, and in doing so all you accomplished is making yourself look more ignorant here.

 

[rob mafia]

Trump is an authoritarian at his core, his best pals in the international community is Putin, Deuterte, Kim Jong-Un and Erdogan. He has praised all of them as strong leaders (even writing love letters to the North Korean dictator, who is arguably the worst despot in the world today). He even called Kim Jong-Un an extremely talentent leader (only one in ten thousand could oppress their poeple as well as he has according to Trump). Medicare for all is not a Stalinist or Maoist proposition, every developed country on earth, except the US, has a univeral healthcare system.

...define "developed." i'm curious how it excludes countries that don't have universal healthcare. like india, for instance.

 

[rob mafia]

I produced as many examples as you did. And its not a satirical account, nice try but its dead serious.

Also I never claimed that anyone call leftists politicians "literally Stalin", what's been claimed is that leftist politicians get identified with radical socialists and communists like the USSR and Maoist China and that's absolutely true. I know you'll pretend otherwise but any honest observer of US politics knows that leftists politicians get tarred with the communist boogeyman all the time. For instance, here's Jorge Masvidal's take on Hillary Clinton.

"Literally" calls her a commie whore. But I guess he's just a secret Hillary supporter making a satirical posts at the expense of Trump supporters...

are you SERIOUSLY this stupid, where you can't follow that these are different claims?

and that a blue checked media person =/= anonymous account?

'i can't find anything to support the actual argument, let's just copypasta irrelevant posts and pretend they're the same!'

"#hillaryisacommiewhore" is totally the same as "literally stalin," amirite? no.

 

[gilbert_mma]

...define "developed." i'm curious how it excludes countries that don't have universal healthcare. like india, for instance.

India is very far from a developed counrty. They still run their caste system and have blocked off all of Kashmir from communication. Not very hard to exclude them from the list.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Context.







You quoted @rob mafia stating there aren't masses of tards accusing ______ of being literally Stalin by attempting to use my post as a rebuttal to prove him wrong.
Nowhere in my post did I even use the word Stalin. I said "radical leftists" and then later even clarified I feel there's a difference between that and Stalin.

So, you using my words out of context to try to cover the fact that you're losing an argument is twisting, and in doing so all you accomplished is making yourself look more ignorant here.

You compared the Americana left to radical socialists, that was my point. Sure you didn't say "literally Stalin" but not even OP was claiming anyone said that. OP's point is that right wing populists complain when leftists compare their leaders to fascists but they then go and compare moderate leftists politicians to far left elements such as communists and radical socialists. Your post did just that so I highlighted it but in hindsight I should've been more clear since not doing so allows dishonest, bad faith posters like rob mafia to twist the argument and move the goalposts in their favor. Lesson learned.

 

[Islam Imamate]

are you SERIOUSLY this stupid, where you can't follow that these are different claims?

and that a blue checked media person =/= anonymous account?

'i can't find anything to support the actual argument, let's just copypasta irrelevant posts and pretend they're the same!'

"#hillaryisacommiewhore" is totally the same as "literally stalin," amirite? no.

So calling Hillary Clinton a communist is somehow in your peabrain qualitatively different from comparing her to a communist?

 

[rob mafia]

India is very far from a developed counrty. They still run their caste system and have blocked off all of Kashmir from communication. Not very hard to exclude them from the list.

lolz @ trying to claim the country with the third highest gdp isn't developed because it doesn't fit your narrative and refutes your ignorant claim.

leftists, it's like they trying to prove my point.

So calling Hillary Clinton a communist is somehow in your peabrain qualitatively different from comparing her to a communist?

FACT: "literally stalin" =/= the above.

perhaps you shouldn't have jumped on such a stupid argument to champion?

 

[gilbert_mma]

...define "developed." i'm curious how it excludes countries that don't have universal healthcare. like india, for instance.

lolz @ trying to claim the country with the third highest gdp isn't developed because it doesn't fit your narrative and refutes your ignorant claim.

leftists, it's like they trying to prove my point.

India is not a developed country by any metric. It's a very poor country with enormous problems. No one considers India a developed country. 60% lives on less than 3.2$ a day. Where have you gotten the impression that India is a developed country?

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

Are you autistic or some shit? nobody is saying to use "literally stalin" it was merely an example of hyperbolic mocking of hyperbolic accusations.

He’s extremely autistic. He will screech at you to no end if you keep engaging him

 

[Islam Imamate]

FACT: "literally stalin" =/= the above.

perhaps you shouldn't have jumped on such a stupid argument to champion?

Neither I nor OP claimed that there were people calling leftist politicians "literally Stalin" numb nuts

Here's what OP said

So where is the "literally Stalin" ridiculization when it comes to defending Sanders or policies like medicare for all?

He's asking why don't leftists use the same facetious rhetoric that the right uses in defending their politicians since right wingers make erroneous and/or exaggerated comparisons of moderate left wing politicians to communists and other far left elements. And yet the whole time you've been going on about "B-But who said 'literally Stalin?'", missing the entire point. But again that's to be expected of you at this point.

India is not a developed country by any metric. It's a very poor country with enormous problems. No one considers India a developed counrty. 60% lives on less than 3.2$ a day. Where have you gotten the impression that India is developed country?

I don't think he really believes that, its just a bad faith argument. Btw they actually announced a universal healthcare plan in 2014 and that was the right wing nationalist party that did so. Haven't rolled it out yet but they did implement a national health insurance scheme to expand access.

 

[TheOldMan]

You compared the Americana left to radical socialists

No, I didn't. They're two separate things. I said in response to the OP that the real battle is radical socialists vs. the US Constitution.

OP's point is that right wing populists complain when leftists compare their leaders to fascists but they then go and compare moderate leftists politicians to far left elements such as communists and radical socialists. Your post did just that so I highlighted it

But my post didn't do that which is what I'm trying to get across to you.
An example of what my definition of a radical socialist is and a moderate leftist is:
AOC = Radical
Gabbard = Moderate leftist

Your post did just that so I highlighted it but in hindsight I should've been more clear since not doing so allows dishonest, bad faith posters like rob mafia to twist the argument and move the goalposts in their favor. Lesson learned.

In hindsight you shouldn't have used my post as a wrong example is my point. My gut is that you were in a heated exchange and just hastily used my words in an errant attempt to make a point.

Shit happens, I just don't want to be misunderstood on this one.

 

[Islam Imamate]

No, I didn't. They're two separate things. I said in response to the OP that the real battle is radical socialists vs. the US Constitution.



But my post didn't do that which is what I'm trying to get across to you.
An example of what my definition of a radical socialist is and a moderate leftist is:
AOC = Radical
Gabbard = Moderate leftist



In hindsight you shouldn't have used my post as a wrong example is my point. My gut is that you were in a heated exchange and just hastily used my words in an errant attempt to make a point.

Shit happens, I just don't want to be misunderstood on this one.

I think even calling AOC a radical is pushing it but that's at least more fair than calling Hillary a commie whore so far enough.

 

[rob mafia]

Neither I nor OP claimed that there were people calling leftist politicians "literally Stalin" numb nuts

HURR DURR

hence, why i said NO ONE'S REFUTING IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST. and why i referred to it as strawman.

OP is LITERALLY asking why lefties aren't mocking "literally stalin," which answers itself - there is no/never was any widespread "literally stalin" complaints to mock/refute. it's straw.

and yet, OP then argued this. and you championed it. and, unsurprisingly, neither of you could produce evidence of masses saying this. which is why you geniuses decided to post irrelevant bullshit (also strawman), instead - while pretending it's the same (false equivalency) - and hilariously - often changing the criteria/terms, themselves (moved goalposts).

if no one's saying "literally stalin," what the fuck are you even complaining about, "numb nuts?" DERP

 

[rob mafia]

India is not a developed country by any metric. It's a very poor country with enormous problems. No one considers India a developed country. 60% lives on less than 3.2$ a day. Where have you gotten the impression that India is a developed country?

...it has one of the highest GDPs. in other words,

 

[TheOldMan]

I think even calling AOC a radical is pushing it but that's at least more fair than calling Hillary a commie whore so far enough.

Not thinking AOC is radical is absurd to me but that's another argument.
And I agree calling Hillary a "Commie Whore" is incorrect as well.
She's MUCH worse.

 

[Rod1]

So, by resolving to preempt the federal government from regulating things like child labor, environmental protections, sweat shops, racial/sexual discrimination, etc., the early US was more liberal in terms of its political organization than today's Nordic model, and that preemption effectively prevented the member states from individually passing those policies because they'd get outperformed by neighboring states who didn't because, after all, their externalized costs were a fraction of their internalized benefits.

Trump is trying to revoke California's right to set emission standards, so yeah, its not always like you claim. Also nordic countries need to compete with the poor EU members and yet they remain viable.

The problem isnt liberalism, the problem is the voter.

 

[gilbert_mma]

HURR DURR

hence, why i said NO ONE'S REFUTING IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST. and why i referred to it as strawman.

OP is LITERALLY asking why lefties aren't mocking "literally stalin," which answers itself - there is no/never was any widespread "literally stalin" complaints to mock/refute. it's straw.

and yet, OP then argued this. and you championed it. and, unsurprisingly, neither of you could produce evidence of masses saying this. which is why you geniuses decided to post irrelevant bullshit (also strawman), instead - while pretending it's the same (false equivalency) - and hilariously - often changing the criteria/terms, themselves (moved goalposts).

if no one's saying "literally stalin," what the fuck are you even complaining about, "numb nuts?" DERP

The OP was asking why "Medicare for all" isn't mocked as a Stalinist proposition. Being in favor of universal healthcare isn't a radical Stalinist position. Being against "medicare for all" would be radical in most countries and you would be laughed out of office in any other wealthy country except the US.