|
Pick posted:the idea that we can "infer" something different about Biden then the obvious thing that political science researchers repeatedly say about him (i.e. that, like it or not, he stands for "the democratic party, personified") gets into tea-reading conspiracy theory nonsense needs a Corvette
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 11:03 |
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Out of curiosity, why is a health care mandate a left-wing policy? The mandate is not a left-wing policy. I have never said that it is a left-wing policy. In fact, in the post you quoted, you can see that I posted that it is not actually a leftist policy. I did say that preserving the mandate, and the ACA in general, is a center-right policy. This is, relatively speaking, further left than the Republicans' extreme-right position of trying to tear down anything that looks even vaguely like a public health care system and revert to pre-ACA norms, which allowed for even more "market freedom" to deny people healthcare, or charge them exorbitant amounts of money. Fundamentally, the mainstream Democratic position on the mandate is conservative. The mainstream Republican position is ideological revanchism. The Democrats are not leftist on this issue. They are not even in the same ideological universe. But, still, the Republicans are so far right that the Democrats are to the left of the Republicans. The discussion was around whether the Republicans are to the left of Biden on any significant issues. I don't think anyone in this thread would claim that Biden and the mainstream Democratic party are left-wing or leftist. Epic High Five posted:It's not "leftist" just because the dems do it lmao. An individual mandate is literally the state using its ability to destroy without recourse any citizen it chooses to force them to enter into a contract with a private company. If this supposed system actually worked it would not be necessary, and if it is necessary it's because it doesn't work. It's literally the state intervening to protect the profits of private enterprise, the most right wing position you could possibly imagine. The pre-ACA status quo is no more left than the current. Nobody on either side is proposing a solution that would be anything but where we are at right now. You're ignoring what I actually wrote to argue against a position that only exists in your head. Can you please, please point out where I posted that the Democratic position is "leftist"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:49
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:All I said was that it's inaccurate to say the mandate makes no sense from the left or the right. The mandate is integral to selling retail health insurance without underwriting. There's a significant number of people who want to have private insurance with no underwriting and no mandate. That's because they don't understand the implications, not because the average right-wing voter is an anti-corporate accelerationist. So private options aren't sufficient enough to convince people that they're a better alternative than certain bankruptucy on their own, so state intervention is necessary? Why not just nationalize at that point? I thought the private markets were supposed to be more efficient and concerned about customer happiness? Seems like they make perfect sense to both the center and right because both work day and night to maintain it and ostracize and demonize the left for opposing it. Inferior Third Season posted:The mandate has already effectively been removed when Congress zeroed out the penalty for not having coverage in 2017. The premium death spiral was never off the menu, if you don't know someone who was stuck with the choice between 700/mo to cover their family and bankruptcy if they got sick and just normal bankruptcy if they got sick, consider yourself lucky 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ilhanmn/status/1330579314543370250?s=21 I'm excited if we can get more people this good at online messaging
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:52
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Do you think he knew Dems wouldn't win the senate when he laid out his policy page, or did he have a different excuse planned for that? If the Democrats don't have 100-0 control of the Senate then they just default back to the 08-10 excuse where there are just enough 'blue dogs' to keep them from doing good things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:52
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:Maybe the Governor of Massachusetts? Mmmmayyybeeee? Absolutely not, he hosed up our public transit infrastructure and, like Romney, any appearance of left-leaning policy is the result of a veto-proof majority in the state leg
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:You're ignoring what I actually wrote to argue against a position that only exists in your head. If you're admitting that it's an inherently conservative position to take, I don't get what your angle is here. Are you defending the conservatives who will gleefully admit that no amount of human life loss is too much for private profit, or defending the centrists who will say they aren't happy about the millions of corpses but say it's the best possible way? The mandate is a fundamentally incoherent policy unless one is willing to admit that the application of state violence upon the freedoms of the average citizen is necessary for the markets to be able to function, and at that point it's probably worth considering what you've become in your defense of the status quo
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Complications posted:If the Democrats don't have 100-0 control of the Senate then they just default back to the 08-10 excuse where there are just enough 'blue dogs' to keep them from doing good things. Did you pay attention to 08-10, there were more complications then that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats, where they line up on policies, and factual information that underlines distinctions, effects, details, are being ignored. It's not coincidental that Biden is "right-wing" after an argument that began with someone responding to me that all US political discourse is far right, and all news media an "authorised variant of the capital approved party line". There are more than two ideologies in the world, more points of view than just your own and a giant, nebulous mass of libfarrightfasccapitalists. Refusing to acknowledge these distinctions does not improve your ability to understand the world, even if it makes you so frustrating to argue with that people give up. If this is your way of approaching disagreeable information, you will never be able to actually parse the details of what is wrong with it.Cabbages and Kings posted:I would appreciate that a lot, and if you do, if you could PM me a link so I see it that would be amazing! I will, but it's clear that DnD isn't the place for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Do you think he knew Dems wouldn't win the senate when he laid out his policy page, or did he have a different excuse planned for that? Some different excuse. "The cupboards are bare", "Trump left such a huge mess, we'll have to put it on the back burner while we do X" or just set it to take fifteen years to slowly tick up to $15/hr so he technically followed through but nobody will see anything from it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
Pick posted:https://twitter.com/ilhanmn/status/1330579314543370250?s=21 *looking over FCC reports* hmmm I'm sorry but all those firms with effective messaging worked with progressives and are therefore BLACKLISTED
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:56
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Did you pay attention to 08-10, there were more complications then that. The big boogeyman ACA devil was passed by party line in both houses with zero R-votes in favor. The only thing stopping the Democrats from doing whatever the gently caress they pleased was... the Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2020 23:57
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats, where they line up on policies, and factual information that underlines distinctions, effects, details, are being ignored. It's not coincidental that Biden is "right-wing" after an argument that began with someone responding to me that all US political discourse is far right, and all news media an "authorised variant of the capital approved party line". There are more than two ideologies in the world, more points of view than just your own and a giant, nebulous mass of libfarrightfasccapitalists. Refusing to acknowledge these distinctions does not improve your ability to understand the world, even if it makes you so frustrating to argue with that people give up. If this is your way of approaching disagreeable information, you will never be able to actually parse the details of what is wrong with it. Yes it is, and I might go so far as to suggest a separate thread for it - but if that's not to your tastes, Ask/Tell might be a good environment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:00
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:If you're admitting that it's an inherently conservative position to take, I don't get what your angle is here. Are you defending the conservatives who will gleefully admit that no amount of human life loss is too much for private profit, or defending the centrists who will say they aren't happy about the millions of corpses but say it's the best possible way? I'm not defending the mandate. In fact, I posted earlier that I think the mandate is bad policy. You even quoted that post! I am saying that the claim that Biden and the median Democratic position are to the right of the median Republican position is not supported by the fact that Biden and most Democrats support the mandate and most Republicans oppose it. That's all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
Not to mention the ACA was basically Romneycare at the time. Maybe I'm just a grandpa but its pretty crazy that apparently Republicans pulling the Dems to the right constantly isn't obvious by now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats, where they line up on policies, and factual information that underlines distinctions, effects, details, are being ignored. It's not coincidental that Biden is "right-wing" after an argument that began with someone responding to me that all US political discourse is far right, and all news media an "authorised variant of the capital approved party line". There are more than two ideologies in the world, more points of view than just your own and a giant, nebulous mass of libfarrightfasccapitalists. Refusing to acknowledge these distinctions does not improve your ability to understand the world, even if it makes you so frustrating to argue with that people give up. If this is your way of approaching disagreeable information, you will never be able to actually parse the details of what is wrong with it. We are discussing market approaches and state intervention, not something as pathetically irrelevant as how some individual identifies or acts. I know it's a lot easier to just write me off as a left wing crank for saying that the "market solution" to a plague is to let it kill everybody who isn't immediately necessary for the economic status quo, but it does seem like a position that's in defense of it is going to get harder to defend as every day passes Complications posted:The big boogeyman ACA devil was passed by party line in both houses with zero R-votes in favor. The only thing stopping the Democrats from doing whatever the gently caress they pleased was... the Democrats. And this is what it comes down to in a lot of ways. The ACA isn't just an imperfect market based solution that has "factored in" mass genocide of undesirables, it's also literally the most we can expect from giving the dems the POTUS and supermajorities in both houses Epic High Five fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats, where they line up on policies, and factual information that underlines distinctions, effects, details, are being ignored. It's not coincidental that Biden is "right-wing" after an argument that began with someone responding to me that all US political discourse is far right, and all news media an "authorised variant of the capital approved party line". There are more than two ideologies in the world, more points of view than just your own and a giant, nebulous mass of libfarrightfasccapitalists. Refusing to acknowledge these distinctions does not improve your ability to understand the world, even if it makes you so frustrating to argue with that people give up. If this is your way of approaching disagreeable information, you will never be able to actually parse the details of what is wrong with it. Who are you even mad at? Name the problem, quote the problem, fix the problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:03
|
|
|
 Ok, no more new characters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:I'm not defending the mandate. In fact, I posted earlier that I think the mandate is bad policy. You even quoted that post! Supporting the mandate *IS* the right wing position, and the GOP would be embracing it as well if it wasn't more useful to oppose it to own the libs about being hypocrites or the simple fact that it's so insanely unpopular that it's basically free points to oppose it. The individual mandate is literally neoliberal economics made manifest, a literal ripping of money from the hands of the poor into the vaults of the rich
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:I am defining it as right wing because it takes money and power from the many (citizens) and transfers it into the few (Insurance company stockholders). The only technically correct definition of left and right wing is whether you believe Louis XVI should be executed. Everything else is a corruption of the original meaning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats, where they line up on policies, and factual information that underlines distinctions, effects, details, are being ignored. It's not coincidental that Biden is "right-wing" after an argument that began with someone responding to me that all US political discourse is far right, and all news media an "authorised variant of the capital approved party line". There are more than two ideologies in the world, more points of view than just your own and a giant, nebulous mass of libfarrightfasccapitalists. Refusing to acknowledge these distinctions does not improve your ability to understand the world, even if it makes you so frustrating to argue with that people give up. If this is your way of approaching disagreeable information, you will never be able to actually parse the details of what is wrong with it. You should really take a long read of what you've written and try to apply it to yourself becauee, as has been pointed out several times now, it's mainly you who's ignoring all the subtleties. It's incredibly easy to see differences between things and a rarer skill to make the connections between their similarities so it's often the case that the former seems so obvious and the latter so ephemeral. So you see the world as too complicated for you to be able to understand? That's a fine and ok thing to admit but it really doesn't follow that people who've spent a lot longer than yourself thinking on this actually do have a cohesive view of how it fits together and you should stop trying to force your own bewilderment as a general state of comprehension. Here is an analogy: The universe is a vast and complicated structure that no human can ever truly "know" in its entirety. However, by understanding the laws and forces that create what we observe, we can actually see that this immense complexity is an emergent property of a few very basic, and understandable concepts (or if you prefer the philosophy that knowledge doesn't really exist: We can build a very good model from simple building bricks). Moat importantly we can then use that understanding/model to make predictions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:07
|
|
|
It seems like most of this argument boils down to people being inexact with left-wing, right-wing, leftist, liberal, and conservative, along with picking different reference points whenever it suits them. The last 20 pages have been back and forth ranging from "Bernie would have won Texas" to "Biden doesn't really mean what he says" which all sort of further undermines what could be a more productive discussion. Can we try to move back towards current events and things that are in our power to change instead of hypotheticals and relitigation?Buckwheat Sings posted:Not to mention the ACA was basically Romneycare at the time. Maybe I'm just a grandpa but its pretty crazy that apparently Republicans pulling the Dems to the right constantly isn't obvious by now. Romney didn't actually contribute anything to Romneycare, the MA leg has had a veto-proof majority for ages and the governor position is mostly decorative. The only reason it became a talking point is because he ran against Obama and the fact that they could attach his name to the policy made attacks against the ACA less effective Edit: From Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform#Legislation On April 12, 2006, Governor Romney signed the health legislation.[21] He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment.[22] He vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid.[23] The legislature promptly overrode six of the eight gubernatorial section vetoes, on May 4, 2006, and by mid-June 2006 had overridden the remaining two.[24] BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:08
|
|
|
Complications posted:The big boogeyman ACA devil was passed by party line in both houses with zero R-votes in favor. The only thing stopping the Democrats from doing whatever the gently caress they pleased was... the Democrats. So are all democrats to blame for the actions of Joe Lieberman or should they of like threatened his children?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:09
|
|
|
Gerund posted:Who are you even mad at? Name the problem, quote the problem, fix the problem. I did. Cornwind Evil posted:All right. Discendo Vox posted:There are not just two ideologies, but ideologies of any kind will not help. Narratives are mental laxatives. Engaging with conservative (or leftist) fringe material is rarely productive and can be unmooring. We are not immune to propaganda or conspiracy theories, and spending long amounts of time reading any ideology will cause you to pick up and incorporate parts of it without knowing it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:09
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Would you say these answers Epinephrine and I posted are more a "partisan definition" vs actual right and left wing? Could you please explain how Romney is more left wing than Biden, especially with regards to these answers? This includes stating concrete left wing issues that Biden has said he will not support (i.e. not being able to claim that Romney is more left wing than Biden because of Romney's support of raising the minimum wage, since Biden has said he wants to raise the minimum wage). I think there are a plethora of different policies to analyze certain positions, and Mitt and Joe could be seen to swivel back and forth on them. For example, Mitt may be to the 'left' of Joe on wages. I say that because Mass raised wages while Mitt was gov, while the federal minimum wage stagnated under the Obama administration. And on other positions, they align perfectly. Joe has also supported tax cuts for the wealthy (his current proposal would put taxes squarely below where they were during the Obama administration). Your support of the ACA as "left-wing" is definitely something I would consider as the partisan definition. You could argue that certain parts of it are lefty (medicaid expansion and pre-existing conditions), while the larger healthcare mandate is definitively right-wing by any metric. Edit: Clarification. Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:09
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:And this is what it comes down to in a lot of ways. The ACA isn't just an imperfect market based solution that has "factored in" mass genocide of undesirables, it's also literally the most we can expect from giving the dems the POTUS and supermajorities in both houses Huh?? I understand your sentiment, but the Democratic Party were far from having a supermajority in the senate.... E: Cpt_Obvious posted:I think there are a plethora of different policies to analyze certain positions, and Mitt and Joe could be seen to swivel back and forth on them. For example, Mitt may be to the 'left' of Joe on wages. I say that because Mitt actually raised wages in Mass in 2006, while the Obama administration was in a position to raise them federally and didn't. And on other positions, they align perfectly. Joe has also supported tax cuts for the wealthy (his current proposal would put taxes squarely below where they were during the Obama administration). I mean, my main point was Romney being anti abortion as why it's laughable for trying to paint him as more "left-wing" than Biden. But also, Romney signed into law having a health care mandate well before the ACA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform). So I still fail to see your point of how ACA makes Biden more "right-wing" than Romney? Kalit fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:10
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1330649478097940481 Who are the other two, Rudy and Jenna?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:11
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:It seems like most of this argument boils down to people being inexact with left-wing, right-wing, leftist, liberal, and conservative, along with picking different reference points whenever it suits them. The last 20 pages have been back and forth ranging from "Bernie would have won Texas" to "Biden doesn't really mean what he says" which all sort of further undermines what could be a more productive discussion. Can we try to move back towards current events and things that are in our power to change instead of hypotheticals and relitigation? Nobody has brought up Bernie and the left here has been very clear about where the lines are drawn. Kalit posted:Huh?? I understand your sentiment, but the Democratic Party were far from having a supermajority in the senate.... Okay so they had 60 with 40 against, not a literal supermajority as it turns out. That said, it's 10 more seats than they'll have in the wildest most best case scenario we will see this year, and leadership is largely unchanged. Is that not cause for belief that the same people who couldn't deliver poo poo with way more power can possibly deliver poo poo with way less? These same people who couldn't even find it in themselves to destroy utterly the man who gleefully and publicly tanked the public option that Biden is now pitching as some kind of gimped salvation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:13
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:I think there are a plethora of different policies to analyze certain positions, and Mitt and Joe could be seen to swivel back and forth on them. For example, Mitt may be to the 'left' of Joe on wages. I say that because Mitt actually raised wages in Mass in 2006, while the Obama administration was in a position to raise them federally and didn't. And on other positions, they align perfectly. Joe has also supported tax cuts for the wealthy (his current proposal would put taxes squarely below where they were during the Obama administration). Why do people keep talking about Mitt Romney like he did literally anything in MA? Both chambers of the MA leg were overwhelmingly D and he had no ability to veto anything that passed, stop giving him credit he doesn't deserve for policies he didn't come up with or pass Epic High Five posted:Nobody has brought up Bernie and the left here has been very clear about where the lines are drawn. you didn't bring up Bernie in this most recent argument, but note that I said "last 20 pages", which includes the slapfight about the TX border counties BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I mean, my main point was Romney being anti abortion as why it's laughable for trying to paint him as more "left-wing" than Biden. But also, Romney signed into law having a health care mandate well before the ACA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massa...0Massachusetts.), so I fail to see your point? Yeah, so Joe is to the right of Mitt on wages, to the left on abortion, and dead even on healthcare. Glad we could agree.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:you didn't bring up Bernie in this most recent argument, but note that I said "last 20 pages", which includes the slapfight about the TX border counties 20 pages ago was 36 hours ago, if you want to relitigate it please do so in some way relevant to the present discussion
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1330644671693983750 3/5th's of a full Mooch. American history rhymes in some weird ways. Did those other two yabbos already bail?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
Glumwheels posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1330649478097940481 They are the ones spearheading this entire thing from what I gather. If they are gone it's possible that Trump will back down at some point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:Can we try to move back towards things that are in our power to change That kinda excludes all of US politics, doesn't it? After all, nothing will fundamentally change.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:21
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:
Unless you are 12, this literally can't be true. Republican % of the Hispanic vote peaked in 2004, and the Democratic % peaked in 12. What you should be taking from this isn't that 2012 was the floor, but the ceiling. edit: https://www.as-coa.org/articles/chart-how-us-latinos-voted-2020-presidential-election If this is true, Bill Clinton actually got the highest percentage by 1 in 96. But it also shows Biden doing 1% better than Hillary in 16.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:21
|
|
|
Complications posted:The big boogeyman ACA devil was passed by party line in both houses with zero R-votes in favor. The only thing stopping the Democrats from doing whatever the gently caress they pleased was... the Democrats. eh it gets complicated in 2008, because of the filibuster and the fact that they didn't have a filibuster proof majority for 3 reasons 1. Al Franken's election getting challenged until literally July 2. Ted Kennedy dying of brain cancer and not being able to really vote because he was dying of brain cancer. 3. Joe Lieberman being vote #60 and being kicked out of the party for being too conservative before you ask "why didn't they use reconciliation and only need 50", they did pass a ton of ACA related reform under reconcilation, but a lot of the actual statutory changes to set up the ACA can not be passed by reconciliation so there were 2 major acts passed for the implemntation Republicans have been largely unsuccessful at killing ACA because they don't have the votes to actually kill the statutory changes, though they did gently caress around with the reconciliationable aspects of it
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:21
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Yeah, so Joe is to the right of Mitt on wages, to the left on abortion, and dead even on healthcare. Glad we could agree. Cpt_Obvious posted:For example, Mitt may be to the 'left' of Joe on wages. I say that because Mass raised wages while Mitt was gov, while the federal minimum wage stagnated under the Obama administration. You know Romney vetoed that minimum wage bill when he was Governor...right? The only reason why it passed is because his veto was overridden... http://archive.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/08/01/minimum_wage_hike_veto_rejected/ And that's even if you want to reduce a women's choice about her own body and a minimum wage increase as "equivalent" on what's more left wing..... Kalit fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:22
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Yeah, so Joe is to the right of Mitt on wages, to the left on abortion, and dead even on healthcare. Glad we could agree. Here's a contemporaneous article rejecting this assertion WRT Romney- he was against the wage hike http://archive.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/07/07/deal_is_set_on_minimum_wage_hike/ Edit: GDI, beaten Point is, there are no good Republicans, so if you want to hate on Biden that's fine, but don't pretend like there are any Republicans in office that are to his left BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 00:28 on Nov 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I did. I don't think Cornwind Evil did any of the things you're complaining about, and I had a different take than you when I quoted & replied to Cornwind Evil- and I know that I didn't structure the world in a Left v Right schema in that post. So when you said "The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens." in the post I quoted, a post you did not make the effort to specifically quote anyone- who are you talking about? What are people doing wrong? Because if you actually want to discuss and debate it would be in good faith to explain what you are discussing & debating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 11:03 |
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The concept of leftism as it's being weaponized here is a pretty strong example of a selective ideological lens. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats, where they line up on policies, and factual information that underlines distinctions, effects, details, are being ignored. It's not coincidental that Biden is "right-wing" after an argument that began with someone responding to me that all US political discourse is far right, and all news media an "authorised variant of the capital approved party line". There are more than two ideologies in the world, more points of view than just your own and a giant, nebulous mass of libfarrightfasccapitalists. Refusing to acknowledge these distinctions does not improve your ability to understand the world, even if it makes you so frustrating to argue with that people give up. If this is your way of approaching disagreeable information, you will never be able to actually parse the details of what is wrong with it. Of course there is more than two ideologies in the world but in the 2 party system in America effectively blunts it out. I'm sure Amy Barret and Roberts both have substantial ideological differences but on terms of policy and how they will vote to impact our lives it does not matter, Rupert Murdoch and the Koch brother's probably have substantially different views libertarianism but in terms of funding radical right wing canidates with dark money and radicalizing people through media the actual results put us at the same place. Their is something to be said about being overly reductive but I don't see how framing the Democrats as being right wing when they will continue govern business as usual is making us "unable to understand the world". The Biden team has already stated they won't raise taxes on anyone making under 400k and I don't have the exact data but I would bet that's not even a return to what taxes were under Reagan. Material analysis of the world needs to be a lot more practical and I don't see how treating the Democrats as diet republicans is unfair when it comes to how it will affect the average american. We've mythologized leftist thought to the point where it only exists in academia and is totally unapproachable to working class people, we have leftist academics writing paid pateron dissertations about loving dolphins while the right has basically consolidated power in america for the conceivable future and is seen as the working class.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 00:27
|
|
