you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]bobbobbybob 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

effectively drown out more moderate and left leaning people

Why not stay on reddit, which is a left-leaning cess pool?

I'm here personally because I'm a huge 1st emendment advocate

Ah, so you want the appearance of free speech, without actually having to deal with dissenting voices.

even distribution of right and left leaning views

Who defines the 'centre' about which you can conveniently place your 'left and right' in equal harmony? The very idea of a linear spectrum is assinine. I'm a hard left conservative socialist, if you want to play with words, but do any of them mean anything?

The label reduction stifles the cncepts being discussed, as people retreat to their paltry concepts, built from a bombardment of mainstream 'talking points'.

Break free, my friend, and be prepared to discuss ideas and thoughts without having to take a partisan position. The truth doesn't care how we label it, indeed, they just get in the way of us seeing it clearly.

There is a great rule in place - the discussion pyramid. Try and stick to it and you'll help build the forum you want to use.

[–]JasonCarswell 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

True left is not Corporate Democrat SJW Manufactured Left.

Just like alt-right is not Trump and the war monger NeoCons.

I listen to everyone and lean left but lean way more towards voluntarism.

[–]bobbobbybob 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

what part of : '"left / right " is an artificial and unhelpful concept ' is everyone missing?

Your words are entirely redundant and miss my point completely.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The Corporate Democrats and the Republican NeoCons are the engineered constructs pushed on everyone, both insane and artificially divided distractions from real issues with real left right folks whether you want to admit they exist or not.

These authentic left-right folks are progressives and alt-right - both terms that MSM tries to distort.

I don't buy most of it. But many people do. They are real people with real identity politics and tribes, manufactured or not.

By classic definitions I lean to the left more often than right but above all I lean towards voluntarism.

You labelled just as I did. There's nothing wrong with left-leaning or right leaning. Being in the cess pool or swamp is another story.

What part of that do you not understand?

[–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

ok, was hitler left, or right?

what even IS left? right?

[–]JasonCarswell 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Depends on the contexts.

I have a new 3D political map I will incorporate in my Trutherism 101 animated series.

It's a sphere rather than a 2D square or diamond chart, and we all fit in it. There are no corners, and there really are few absolutes at the XYZ axis poles.

Up = authoritarianism, totalitarianism, hierarchical (full spectrum dominance, corporatocracy, technocracy, Zionism, Wahhabism, banksters, gangsters, monopoly on violence, establishmet matrix of rigged systems, slavery, prisons, executions, etc.)

Down = anarchism, voluntarism, non-hierarchical (freedom, Natural Law, without rulers, wilderness, etc.)

Front = certainty, truth, facts (proof, open-science, transparency, fairness, etc.)

Back = dogmas, lies, deceptions (religions, patriotism, scientism, manipulative propaganda, etc.)

Left = communal-interests (socialism, contributing, sharing, supporting, etc.)

Right = self-interests (tribalism, capitalism, accumulating, investing, etc.)

Note: The left and right are NOT meant to represent the corporate-manufactured or authentic-conventional left-right paradigm.

While abstract ideal forms, none are achievable. Some are not mutually exclusive. If there were better words or concepts I'd use them. Communism, anarchy, free markets, or equality are wonderful ideas but are practically impossible. Still we must wage peace, fight for fairness, and battle for balance.

Further, a person, or even identity, does not exist in one point within this sphere. They are a cloud of points, on a case by case basis, sometime inhabiting two or more contradictions simultaneously, evolving.

There are limits to this chart. It doesn't have wisdom, free will, logic, etc. Or lack thereof.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Can we have 'constitutionalists' here too? I feel like the built in decentralization of state's rights gets glossed over, and constitutionalism gets lost in all of the various forms of libertarianism. This OG political philosophy is still valid and deserving of recognition.

I'd say it belongs in Down, although not as far down as the others you mentioned.

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Constitutionalism could be a dogma, like Libertarianism, generally more free (down) than lots of "-isms".

(Interestingly enough progressivism (perpetually redefined by many interests) is pretty nebulous depending what it's about, and who's talking about it in what way.)

Check out: /s/USAmerica/comments/kqa/powers_principalities_episode_98_the_constitution/

( See also: /s/Democrat/comments/k4q/we_need_a_new_name_for_progressives_kim_iversen/ )

They're biased conservative truthers but I've known about Constitutional-Skepticism since ~2004 listening to liberal-biased Noam Chomsky break down how the Founding Fathers were clever in seeming like they were for freedom, while owning slaves, exploiting the poor, in secret societies, and trapping/centralizing power.

There is still tricky word craft in there with layers of meanings, and despite its intentional or accidental flaws, I like Constitutionalism because it's fundamentally MUCH MUCH MUCH simpler.

Ironically, I'm a Canadian and know much less about my own situation and so-called rights.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

HHahaha good points man, and thanks for the videos. I'll watch at least this first one. Yes, wordcraft, very interesting.

I'll give it to Noam that the founders were hypocritical about slavery and 15% or 20% of them were in secret societies. I don't think these are very fair tho: exploiting the poor, trapping/centralizing power.

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You think there was a giant leap from slavery to middle class? No man, it was the same old shit first, then they get more complicated for this same new shit we've got now. And between 1776 and now was the Civil War of Northern Aggression to keep them all centralized and under their thumb, and most of those guys fighting didn't own slaves but they died anyway. The Spanish American War, more of the same. And on and on and on... That's all "they" have ever done.

They moved mountains to unify those first 13 states, and then it was all downhill from there.

[–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Perhaps we could just discuss ideals, mechanisms and ideologies without whacking labels on them at the start? sit on our hands and resist the urge to pop people into pre-defined boxes until a few days of discussion has passed?

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sounds good.