If lemmy.world finds this, please tell my starving children that I love them.
When you are to the left of someone, they always call you right-wing… Never fails…
I have never been called right wing, and I’m just about as far left as they come.
I think the down-votes illustrates my point exactly.
I’m pro expression of freedom, full bodily automony (my body, my choice), anti censorship, reign in corporate power, higher top marginal tax, ending foreign wars (inc Ukraine), diplomacy with every government (inc the ones labeled terrorists. Remember; Nelson Mandela was also labeled a terrorist), tax included high education, tax included healthcare, more money to public transport.
Well thats some of it, and most of the first points are traditional left-wing issues, but in todays society, you get “right-wing” label immediately.
Right vs left is about Capitalism vs Socialism, and generally upholding hierarchy vs abolishing it.
You would not get labeled right wing based on those views unless you had other nonsense going on in tandem.
I would absolutely agree with you on your first paragraph.
But please answer this honestly, “my body, my choice” during covid was labeled “right-wing”, you agree?
Doing diplomacy with Putin to end Ukraine war was also labeled “right-wing” putin puppet talking points, no?
Both these are traditional left-wing values.
“My body, my choice” was not a right-wing stance. It was instead an anti-science movement. If you just listen to the words, its easy to think it might be leftist, but the intent behind it was absolutely far-right. A good comparison is “All Lives Matter” or even “White Lives Matter” as a response to “Black Lives Matter.”
Diplomacy with Putin to end the war can be right or left. Opposing Imperialism is left wing, what matters is the way you wish to conduct diplomacy, and to what outcome.
So yea, good chance you could be right wing.
“Believe in science”, that’s anti-science. “My body, my choice” has always been in context of abortion, and viewed as left wing. Here it’s the exact same words, the exact same meaning in context of taking an experimental redefined definition of a vaccine. It’s in this setting that characters make or breaks. If you cannot uphold your values when they matter, you don’t have values, you have hobbies.
It sounds like you’re a moral absolutist, and that is absolutely right-wing. Context is key. You can say “It’s wrong to kill”, but what if the person you killed was trying to kill you, and you acted in self defense? What if killing them was the only choice you had to prevent them from killing you or somebody you love?
Similarly, you can say “My body, my choice”, but the situation is different when you’re talking about getting an abortion vs. getting a vaccine.
Here are the rules in Norway from our FHI.
Vaksinasjon er frivillig All vaksinasjon i Norge er frivillig. Personer som anbefales eller ber om vaksine må få tilstrekkelig informasjon om fordeler og ulemper ved vaksinering til å kunne ta et informert valg. Det skal også være åpenhet om usikkerhet og kunnskap som mangler.
Translate it and see for yourself.
If you are to the left of someone, and they are not informed, they will call you right-wing.
Nah, not bothering to do your legwork for you.
Why is the proposed solution always to just pay people more and not just make things cost less? The only reason I can find is that making things cost less doesn’t provide a scapegoat for everybody to rally behind, even though it would be more effective.
Because the stock market is the economy as far as our leaders are concerned. And they decided that anything other than green line go up is abhorrent.
The solution isn’t either, it’s to collectively own the Means of Production.
Money is a means of determining the distribution of resources. It doesn’t matter if stuff costs less or if people make more money, what matters is that nessecities, at a minimum, are more equitably distributed. You can make that end goal take different forms. Money is a little awkward for that end because you use money to purchase both food and nice cars.
Or just give people food. Where tf u bringing up cost of goods from?
I used to be that guy the first 28 years of my life. Then I realized many so called socialist gvt are backed up by the biggest monopolies, which in turn grow freely thanks to socialist unbalanced rules of competitiveness.
It’s cool to think socialist. It’s not cool to feed the monopoly.
What are you genuinely talking about? What are Socialist unbalanced rules of competitiveness?
Usually they refer to the government corporations.
Good thing America doesn’t have any monopolies under capitalism
What a relief!
Tax should pay for healthcare of all citizens.
Why am I paying tax if I still have to pay to see a doctor?
Sounds very american to me. Its very normal here to at least try take care of the less fortunate.
Well, so long as they’re not migrants anyway
But have you thought about the shareholders and the executives? They are the ones that really have it bad!
If only those lazy poor people worked harder and pulled themselves up by this bootstraps.
It’s not like we systemically work towards keeping them poor so we can have the power!
Last quarter my 401k dropped by 0.3%! IM THE VICTIM HERE
It’s more that the 401k grew 0.3% the previous. Still growing, still a lot, just not quite as much of an increase.
We can’t let the elites got taxed too hard. What if I finally win a lottery and join the elites? My wealth would be sucked dry by the excessive tax!
To be fair when you have that much money 0.3% is a lot of money (for a poor person)
they still have so much they wouldn’t miss it if there wasn’t a number on his balance telling him he lost money.
imagine how much 0.3% of some billionaire asshole’s money could help rebuild people’s lives.
My response was sarcastic, but also accurate, and yes that tiny bit could do a whole lot of good
I’m in my 40s and I honestly still don’t understand the appeal of the GOP to the average American. I have never seen them put forth a policy that does not seem to be shitting on one group or another. What has the GOP done in the last 40 years to make the average citizens life better?
shitting on one group or another
That’s the whole point. They’re the party of oppression, and the people that follow that party believe that those groups should be oppressed.
That’s the interesting thing they don’t. They typically do the best they can to make lives worse for their constituents and they’ll be happy about it as long as the “others” are getting fucked over more than they are.
I don’t think it even has to be “more” so long as others as being fucked over that’s good enough for them
That they hate some of all the other people the consevative voters hate, and they are happy to starve if the group they hate starve too.
It is a stupid premise I know, but you can see posts about evil things the gop does, and somehow “centrists” find a way to blame the democrats for that.
Its partly like that but its MORE so that they are utterly convinced that all thier troubles including they they are poor is some other groups fault, and even when they do have doubts theybare unable to express them without fearbof losing thoer status in theor in-group. So they will keep on voting against thier own interests and blaming the wrong people for the results.
Literally an echo chamber
That is also true.
I think that is actually true. The average poor republican doesn’t want to be wealthy, if that would mean that <insert minority of your choice> would also become more wealthy or have more rights. This also applies to other political subjects. I mean a poor republican who works a terribly paying job with no worker rights or healthcare would actively vote against politicians who say they’d want to change that situation, just to make sure that underage girls that got raped are forced to give birth to their unwanted childs they then can’t provide for.
It is sad, but I also agreed with that.
Not sure why they are like that but as long as the ones they hate also suffer the conservatives are ok.
But they never stop to see an alternative where anyone has to suffer.
One of the defining traits of the left is empathy.
One of the defining traits of humanity is empathy.
If you’re not left you’re less than. I said it. I stand by it.Dehumanization of the other
Woaaaah there buddy
I appreciate you
Empathy-like behavior and brain activity has been observed in many animals. Make it less than those as well
Humans are really good at empathizing. But we are also really good at delineating between in and out groups. It was crucial to protect your tribe over every other human. We now have a massive problem of entire countries or even the world being the “in-group” since we have enough resources for everyone to survive.
But those people wanting power are really good at exploiting that group mentality to cause groups to form in people’s minds. Then they use that delineation to withdrawn empathy from those new out groups. And when those delineations aren’t coherent among actual groups, it causes a lot of divisions that can be exploited.
If the human condition is to ever change in any meaningful way, the only solution is to modify the source code aka DNA. CRISPR could be a tool for good or a tool for evil, but at the end of the day it’s up to us how we use it. So how about this, instead of everyone following the immidiate instinct of the monkey mind and engineering their children to be perfect clones, why not simply focus on removing the dark triad personality from the genome? Easier said than done and I’m not an expert or even a novice but that seems like a logical first step looking at it from the view that like computers, we have a basic set of instructions programmed by default for survival. Prior to civilization it may have been advantageous, but today it’s a purely destructive force imo. It’s time for a firmware update.
The average poor Republican would starve to make sure a “Welfare Queen” or “Tweeker” didn’t get a free meal.
You’re not far left enough for me if you’re still thinking that instead of “let’s go grab the guillotine”
I don’t think people should die but I do think people have a right to steal if that’s what will keep them alive. am I not far left enough
I’m actually surprised by people who think others should just die instead of stealing, if that’s the choice. Who wouldn’t steal?
Guess we won’t know since those people are dead.
It appears symbolism isn’t a trait you possess.
This argument is basically the same as those put forward by the right wing nut jobs that think their second amendment rights to tote a rifle will let them fight against the US govt.
Just because a method functioned a couple centuries ago in a far simpler time, does not mean it will function today. Gotta keep up with the times there gramps.
Did it? Friendly reminder to all that the French Revolution was a failure.
Are you operating under the impression that the French Revolution created the current republic? If so, you’re missing many, many steps. One of which was a fellow named Napoleon who crowned himself emperor.
I’m… agreeing with you…
Ah, was not sarcasm. My mistake.
The important part is to direct the anger towards the real enemy: the leeches sucking our planet dry and planning their escape off world. „Left“ and „Right“ are categories we were told to think in, along with buzzwords like „neoliberal“ and „woke“.
As in the definition of a cult, special language is used to divide us further and cut us off from one another.
Even calling for guillotines is kind of the same thing. We should stop killing each other. Just seize everything they have and leave them fending for themselves, same as every one of us.
As in the definition of a cult, special language is used to divide us further and cut us off from one another.
Which definition of a cult is that? Because there is no scientific definition. There are models for high-control organizations (a term used specifically because “cult” has too much baggage for scientific methods), and language is only one aspect of information control. Every single organization on Earth will create its own language for things. That alone doesn’t mean they’re high-control.
I’ve been in a high-control organization. It doesn’t work like that, and I think diluting the term to cover such broad categories is insulting to people who have been there.
Saying something shares the mechanics of a cult is not insulting to someone who has been in a cult if that is what you mean.
Its a pattern I recognized. People fight over who is right and left, neo-contra-whatever. Its ultimately not informative and makes misunderstandings more common.
And what I‘m actually saying is that the media is controlled by the same people who benefit from us fighting instead of demanding housing prices go down immediately or wages go up accordingly. Its not that hard. We‘re just told its impossible.
The idea that Capitalists are directly controlling the media and intentionally inflammatory to create endless culture war that divides the Proletariat against itself is a firmly leftist belief.
I know. I‘m just trying to get peeps from hating each other because this only helps those in power.
From the downvotes I deduce that not everyone likes the idea.
I mean, it’s also objectively true, but “leftist” and “true” align more often than not.
Leftists generally are correct and also morally superior to conservatives, yes. Conservativism is reactionary and opposes liberation, in favor of maintaining current power structures, even if it relies on outward hatred of the less fortunate.
Although it is understandable that you are frustrated with the „others“, I think the „right wing nutjobs“ are not what conservatism actually aspires to be.
If you read up on conservative values, the ideas are partly morally sound:
- limited government
- rule of law
- fiscal responsibility
- human dignity
Those were the only ones I could find that are most probably agreeable. I agree that fascists are evil but if we put everyone in that basket who wants to take care of their homeland we’re no better than them. We should know better.
Or did I not understand you correctly?
There’s a difference between espoused values and practical plans. Conservatives want strong government, draconian punishment to keep people in line, limited social safety nets, and traditional gender roles and family structure. All of this is built on regressive outlook and results from reactionary outlook.
That is what current „conservative“ politicians in certain countries do. What I‘m saying is that we‘re only hurting ourselves if we hate each other. Instead we must agree on things and keep each other honest imo.
One reason why conservatives turn to right wing nutjobs is because someone (populists) promises them answers they can understand. The evidently more educated side instead looks down on them. Its obvious from the derogatory language some people use.
I‘m saying we wont make this world better by killing each other. The enemy is in control of the media and tries to cut off education (paywall it, dilute it) so we‘re easier to manipulate.
In my opinion, the actions of conservative people and politicians are inconsistent with their stated values.
I agree. Thats why I said it. Conservatism isnt the enemy. People are riled up against each other and ultimately themselves.
Far left in my country would be terrorist organizations from the leftover decades where terrorist groups formed around the Soviet communist idea.
That’s fine with me, I don’t have any interest in “let’s just kill a bunch of people” as an ideology. It’s objectively wrong.
In this case it would be self-defense. The only reason anyone thinks otherwise is because the danger posed by a billionaire money hoarder is far more abstract than what most people are accustomed to.
That’s not the ideology though, guillotine memes are essentially just pushing for revolutionary restructuring of the state and economy. Nobody simply thinks “kill rich” and stops thinking there.
Nobody simply thinks “kill rich” and stops thinking there.
That’s news to me, I always got the impression that “???” Was the next step after “kill rich”
More accurately, revolutionary restructuring of society is the first step towards a better future.
Billionaires aren’t people
Believe it or not, they are. Only humans are capable of such cruelty.
This is silly. Billionaires are people, otherwise guillotines wouldn’t be effective.
Right, a society of machines would never create something as vile, insidious and wasteful as a billionaire
The guillotines aren’t necessary if the rich would strive for a better society.
The thing is that they would never agree to that, so then we need the guillotine.
The path to a better society is elimination of Capitalism, so Capitalists aren’t really going to agree to that, no matter how nice it would make things.
The replies to this are insane. These people are actively harming millions. Its their fault if the world forms a fist aimed at their faces.
I’ve always wondered where i would land on the political spectrum if I didn’t live in the US
Do you think the Means of Production should be owned collectively, or individually? Do you agree with horizontal power structures being dominant, or do you believe more in centralization?
There’s a ton more to it, but those 2 questions pretty clearly give you a direction.
Choosing the first options is communism, right?
Collective ownership of the Means of Production is Socialism, generally. Communism is the specific Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society built on the foundations of Collective Ownership along Marxian analysis, but you can have Collective ownership in, say, Syndicalism, Anarchism, Market Socialism, Democratic Socialism, etc.
I really wouldn’t mind the whole rhetoric of pulling yourself by the bootstraps if it wasn’t rigged. The system is literally made to make ppl fail.
There’s also the fact that it originated as an expression meaning “doing something impossible” since pulling on your own bootstraps would PREVENT you from getting up.
Commie. The poor will just trade the food for drugs, might as well throw it away as trash and shoot anyone that gets near it.
Walmart is that you?!?!
Source: I used to work at Walmart and they threw away so much stuff and locked it in a dumpster with constant surveillance
This is kind of an aside but it’s always weird looking at caricatures of poverty from the 90s and earlier, where people live in modest homes they seem to own. Or people living alone in plain apartments in places like New York.
A six-figure salary in so many cities means that you can probably rent a decent apartment and never own anything. It’s just so obvious that this system isn’t working.
If there’s one thing Hollywood is known for it’s accurate depictions of the housing market.
You’re right, but on the other hand, no one in the 1980s watched Married With Children and thought, “a shoe salesman? With a house? How absurd!” Because houses were affordable.
housing used to be affordable. I’ve seen the value of the modest house i grew up in increase in value after my parents sold it so much that I can’t afford to even think about buying it now that i’m the age they were when they bought it. and it looks like the new owners have let it go to shit.
Exactly. People did talk about how homes on TV in the 1980s were unreasonably large, but the idea that Al Bundy’s family or Roseanne’s family couldn’t have a house at all was not even one people considered. Because of course you could afford a house.
Also, you could afford a house at this time with only one person working in the couple. The wife usually stayed at home until they progressively all went to work.
Well, if you want to abolish currency, inheritance, and all personal property you may be far left. Otherwise you may just be a compassionate for the poor.
No leftist in their right mind wants to abolish personal property.
Private property (factories and machinery) ≠ personal property (your clothes and fridge)
This is a far too little discussed distinction.
personalprivate property, fixed it for youTbf we should be capable of sustainability which by definition we wouldn’t need an economy that just funnels for the rich.
as somewhat of a ‘commie’ yea kinda, but again its crazy that someone who toils away at work for the better part of his life and earns a salary for his contribution to society will sometimes have to be hungry or homeless. on average you do all that and are at least always struggling for money come on.
considering we have smartphones, rockets and AI, at this point im surprised some people are not considering alternatives.
