'Liberals'/'Leftists' in America

[fruhmenschen]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

[Joe Hillshoist]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

A lefty isn't a liberal either, despite the title of this thread.

[Harvey]

True.

[Belligerent Savant]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

A lefty isn't a liberal either, despite the title of this thread.

Take another look at the title and the content herein.
'Lefty' is in quotes. There is a reason for that. Details matter.

Many proclaim to be 'leftists' but have been exposed -- particularly in the last ~couple years -- as frauds. That's part of the point of this thread.

As well, many conflate or intersperse 'leftist' and 'liberal' relatively freely.

Any true leftist, or even a true liberal (at least as historically or classicly understood) would have been unequivocally against broadly-applied, extended lockdowns and mandate policies.

This is a thread about hypocrisy and fraud, among other related themes.

[JackRiddler]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

A lefty isn't a liberal either, despite the title of this thread.

Absolutely.

Liberals claim to be the left whenever the left presents a challenge, and seek to characterize the left as right-wing (horseshoe theory, etc.). Ever since that one time when the left seemed very powerful (EDIT: not in 2016 but about 100-80 years earlier), occupying the left space is extremely important in preventing and minimizing the left.

Meanwhile, the right ALWAYS seeks to characterize everything to their left as "leftist" without distinction, or to paint liberals and anything new as the useful idiots facilitating communism, and generally to render liberal and left synonymous.

All this follows from a realistic (using that in IR terms) or game theory approach. Game theory thinking especially usually manifests what CW Mills called crackpot realism.

An example of this form of realism at work would be that Trump could shoot a guy on Fifth Avenue, or Herschel Walker could have beaten one of his own followers to a pulp yelling the n-word and humping the victim with his pants off on live TV, and he would have gotten pretty much the same vote shares, because to the right, winning power is everything.

To true liberals, as defined above, that's also true, but winning is not always defeating the conservatives or gaining office, but presenting the leftmost acceptable alternative and securing establishment interests, which may include losing some elections.

To an establishment in all this (who can be both genuinely L or C but driven by interest to be neither L nor C but opportunistic), culture war works really well. More on that maybe later.

These are all kind of elementary observations about how US politics works, but applicable to a lot of European politics (the kind I know) going back to the counter-enlightenment.

.

[Harvey]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

A lefty isn't a liberal either, despite the title of this thread.

Absolutely.

Liberals claim to be the left whenever the left presents a challenge, and seek to characterize the left as right-wing (horseshoe theory, etc.). Every since that one time when the left seemed very powerful, occupying the left space is extremely important in preventing and minimizing the left. Meanwhile, the right ALWAYS seeks to characterize everything to their left as "leftist" without distinction, or to paint liberals and anything new as the useful idiots facilitating communistm, and generally to render liberal and left synonymous.

All this follows from a realistic (using that in IR terms) or game theory approach. Game theory especially usually manifests what CW Mills called crackpot realism.

An example of this form of realism at work would be that Trump could shoot a guy on Fifth Avenue, or Herschel Walker could have beaten one of his own followers to a pulp yelling the n-word and humping the victim with his pants off on live TV, and he would have gotten pretty much the same vote shares, because to the right winning power is everything. To true liberals, as defined above, that's also true, but winning is not always defeating the conservatives or gaining office, but presenting the leftmost acceptable alternative.

To an establishment in all this (which can be both genuinely L or c but driven by interest to be neither L nor C but opportunistic), culture war works really well. More on that maybe later.

These are all kind of elementary observations about how US politics works, but applicable to a lot of European politics (the kind I know) going back to the counter-enlightenment.

.

I'd very much appreciate some clarification of what you think Liberal/Conservative and 'Left'/'Right' should mean to us in the context of Covid19?

Here is a polarising event which can now objectively be considered to be an oligarch created and driven event, itself in the context of the current 'culture wars' which themselves have perfectly served to obscure the nature and apparent design of the Covid19 event as if explicitly designed to do so, perhaps oportunistically. But we should note, the Culture Wars are themselves an oligarch-media driven event.. That is not to say the culture war does not exist, merely that it would not exist in its current form except for contemporary media, primarily MSM.

I ask this because, as was regularly observed on RI at the begining of the last three years, within Mainstream Media* it was mostly only the perceived 'Right' who dissented from the official view of the establishment on Covid19 in any significant way. These are the same people you are happy to characterise as "always seeking to characterise".

Your thoughts?


* Though arguably, not as not true of genuine Indi-Media.

[Joe Hillshoist]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

A lefty isn't a liberal either, despite the title of this thread.

Take another look at the title and the content herein.
'Lefty' is in quotes. There is a reason for that. Details matter.

Many proclaim to be 'leftists' but have been exposed -- particularly in the last ~couple years -- as frauds. That's part of the point of this thread.

As well, many conflate or intersperse 'leftist' and 'liberal' relatively freely.

Any true leftist, or even a true liberal (at least as historically or classicly understood) would have been unequivocally against broadly-applied, extended lockdowns and mandate policies.

This is a thread about hypocrisy and fraud, among other related themes.

Actually lefties are historically in favour of collective action and collective rights. That is why we had unions, demarcation wars, fights with scabs who wanted to work (usually for more money than striking workers) etc etc. There is an element of unionism that is very authoritarian. Especially in the old days when it was just us, against the bosses . Because we could not afford to break solidarity we were tough on scabs.

This was a strength, but also a weakness of the union movement because it generated alot of power but not everyone who used that power was a reasonable or decent person. It also meant that individuyals suffered and people who were compulsively individualist would suffer.

So accepting that sort of collective control that we saw with vaccine mandates could actually be called a traditional left wing behaviour.

However classical liberals do value individual rights over collective rights (hence their long standing opposition to unions here in Australia) and so wrt mandates, criticism of them is fair enough.

My point is that the quotes don't matter. The slash between the words, as if they are interchangable concepts, do matter.

hence:

As well, many conflate or intersperse 'leftist' and 'liberal' relatively freely.


These people have been brainwashed by far right corporatists into not understanding what they are on about.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Its worth pointing out at this point that back before vaccines, when the pandemic had just started an Australian travelled to the US on a plane for a work related trip. They were provided with a mask by their employer and told to wear it on the plane (there is plenty of evidence they ignored this instruction.) They got covid and died in the US without ever making it home again.

Their family sued the employer for not providing a safe workplace and eventually won. Despite the evidence of that person not using the mask they were provided with. I have a little sympathy for the employer here cos short of not sending that person overseas there was nothing they could really do to protect them.

But at the same time I take workplace safety very seriously, having worked various dangerous jobs over the years and as a volunteer fire fighter I led crews into some very dangerous situations and always got them home safely.

You can't see vaccine mandates as something that occurred separate to this court decision (which would have precedents in many legal systems given how high it went in our court system.) If you're an employer, ie you run a business that pays people to work, (even a small one where you only employ a mate you've known for years,) you are responsible for their health and safety and that includes their risk of covid exposure from the workplace.

So legally failing to require an employee to get vaccinated may leave you vulnerable to serious legal/financial consequences if another employee gets sick and dies from covid because of exposure at work.

That was the reality and failing to see vaccine mandates in that context means you aren't understanding the whole story.

(BTW Feel free to search the whole of the covid thread for me calling for mandatory vaccination. Good luck.)

[Belligerent Savant]

Actually lefties are historically in favour of collective action and collective rights.

Yes but not by default as imposed by State Power, and not without key reservations or scrutiny prior to adopting any 'collective' action. At least ideally. Problem is any strong ties to a political affiliation opens the door to being led astray, falling prey to honeypots or Trojan Horses custom-crafted for a given political ideology.

The 'collective action' as presented by the official/government covid response was a fraud, and would have been viewed as such by any sober assessment of the data and/or a measured review of historical recommendations for would-be 'pandemics', once mandates/lockdowns were initially raised as likely policy.

Rubes abound, and leftists are certainly not immune to tricks, demonstrably (although self-identified 'Right-wing' types are no less susceptible to equivalent tricks).

That is why we had unions, demarcation wars, fights with scabs who wanted to work (usually for more money than striking workers) etc etc. There is an element of unionism that is very authoritarian. Especially in the old days when it was just us, against the bosses . Because we could not afford to break solidarity we were tough on scabs.

This was a strength, but also a weakness of the union movement because it generated alot of power but not everyone who used that power was a reasonable or decent person. It also meant that individuyals suffered and people who were compulsively individualist would suffer.

So accepting that sort of collective control that we saw with vaccine mandates could actually be called a traditional left wing behaviour.

However classical liberals do value individual rights over collective rights (hence their long standing opposition to unions here in Australia) and so wrt mandates, criticism of them is fair enough.

My point is that the quotes don't matter. The slash between the words, as if they are interchangable concepts, do matter.

hence:

As well, many conflate or intersperse 'leftist' and 'liberal' relatively freely.


These people have been brainwashed by far right corporatists into not understanding what they are on about.

Largely fair and understandable perspective. I certainly agree that there is much confusion and conflation in this zeitgeist, arguably more so than standard for a given time period. I believe this is at least in part purposeful.

(The cringe-inducing call-outs of 'communism' among the Right-leaning groups, as JRiddler touches on, is but one example)

[Belligerent Savant]

LakeLurk
@EvilHeat4

Progressives and leftists are going to slowly back away from climate doomerism in the next decade, but are going to do that thing similar to COVID restrictions where they act 100 percent justified in supporting the wrong ideas and you're still a chud for being right initially.

Much like they feel the advent of the vaccine absolved them of their Covid sins, there will be some climate development that averts the worst-case scenario, therefore "we were right to be panicking" before the thing happened

10:22 AM · Dec 12, 2022

https://twitter.com/EvilHeat4/status/16 ... SQFrHSj-9Q

[stickdog99]

Bottom up collective action for economic justice <> top down "expert" driven authoritarian control and economic consolidation in pursuit of a dubious definition of collective good

Yes, the rank and file can't brook dissent against solidarity among the rank and file. However, it is not the rank and file who criminalized dissent against Branch Covidianism. That was the vast majority of the professional managerial class who relish dictating the sacrifice of others in pursuit of any goal that the elites that they so assiduously serve somehow manage to market to them as high-minded.

The rest of "left" fell into line while clicking their heels because of effective propaganda, intense tribalism, the inherent appeal (at least to most leftists) of self-righteousness granted to those who ritualistically practice pious collective sacrifice for the common good in any crisis.

Basically, the healthy collectivist ethic of leftists was successfully weaponized by the elite against everyone else. And the elite in now attempting to perform the same trick using the left's healthy environmental ethic.

Our robber baron authoritarian oligarch dictators have cloaked themselves in "healthy' "sustainability." And the much of left is actively clamoring to rescind the Bill of Rights in order to follow the WEF's paid pipers to a 100% centralized authoritarian dystopia.

If it saves one grandma or traps one nitrogen or carbon atom, it is well worth it!

[stickdog99]

[Belligerent Savant]

A liberal is someone who walks out of the room
When a argument turns into a fight

A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged

A lefty isn't a liberal either, despite the title of this thread.

Absolutely.

Liberals claim to be the left whenever the left presents a challenge, and seek to characterize the left as right-wing (horseshoe theory, etc.). Every since that one time when the left seemed very powerful, occupying the left space is extremely important in preventing and minimizing the left. Meanwhile, the right ALWAYS seeks to characterize everything to their left as "leftist" without distinction, or to paint liberals and anything new as the useful idiots facilitating communistm, and generally to render liberal and left synonymous.

All this follows from a realistic (using that in IR terms) or game theory approach. Game theory especially usually manifests what CW Mills called crackpot realism.

An example of this form of realism at work would be that Trump could shoot a guy on Fifth Avenue, or Herschel Walker could have beaten one of his own followers to a pulp yelling the n-word and humping the victim with his pants off on live TV, and he would have gotten pretty much the same vote shares, because to the right winning power is everything. To true liberals, as defined above, that's also true, but winning is not always defeating the conservatives or gaining office, but presenting the leftmost acceptable alternative.

To an establishment in all this (which can be both genuinely L or c but driven by interest to be neither L nor C but opportunistic), culture war works really well. More on that maybe later.

These are all kind of elementary observations about how US politics works, but applicable to a lot of European politics (the kind I know) going back to the counter-enlightenment.

.

I'd very much appreciate some clarification of what you think Liberal/Conservative and 'Left'/'Right' should mean to us in the context of Covid19?

Here is a polarising event which can now objectively be considered to be an oligarch created and driven event, itself in the context of the current 'culture wars' which themselves have perfectly served to obscure the nature and apparent design of the Covid19 event as if explicitly designed to do so, perhaps oportunistically. But we should note, the Culture Wars are themselves an oligarch-media driven event.. That is not to say the culture war does not exist, merely that it would not exist in its current form except for contemporary media, primarily MSM.

I ask this because, as was regularly observed on RI at the begining of the last three years, within Mainstream Media* it was mostly only the perceived 'Right' who dissented from the official view of the establishment on Covid19 in any significant way. These are the same people you are happy to characterise as "always seeking to characterise".

Your thoughts?


* Though arguably, not as not true of genuine Indi-Media.

Missed this initially. Worthwhile questions posed.

[Belligerent Savant]

Aaron Kheriaty, MD
@akheriaty

I said it a year ago and I'll say it again because it's even truer now: The real division today is no longer left/right, liberal/conservative, or Democrat/Republican. It is between those who will accept a technocratic biosecurity surveillance regime and those who will resist.

7:11 PM · Dec 13, 2022

https://twitter.com/akheriaty/status/16 ... WRKAox_ZEw

[stickdog99]

https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/think ... er-12-2022

The war this time

What’s strange and unique about Covid is that in 2020 developed countries throughout the world declared war on their own citizens at the behest of capital. Previously, wars were directed against an external “other” in order to capture markets/natural resources. Now capital is mining the bodies/cells of anyone with any wealth to generate profits for itself.

In a previous era, capital would use nationalism/racism to generate hate against an external other as the accelerant for war. Now capital uses fear of viruses to generate hate against one’s own body and cells (and neighbors and family members). In both cases the result is carnage for the masses and great wealth for the architects of the plan. ...

Nightmare

What a nightmare. Nearly all of my former political heroes have embraced fascism. They have no insights into the current conjuncture and no capacity for self-reflection. If capital can so easily fool the fiercest critics of capitalism then it is a power beyond devils and demons.

Tradeoff

At some point we have to come to grips with the fact that bougiecrats are fine with lots and lots of people just dropping dead from the shots. That’s a tradeoff (massive human sacrifice to alleviate their irrational fears) that they are willing to make.