of course if liberal means anti-puritan (not a terms with which I'm familiar, but I'll keep going) and liberals insist upon obedient conformity, it's not liberal any more, it's right wing conservatism, like all of these political brand names of the last 20 years or so, the relative positions are much the same, but the center point of the…
of course if liberal means anti-puritan (not a terms with which I'm familiar, but I'll keep going) and liberals insist upon obedient conformity, it's not liberal any more, it's right wing conservatism, like all of these political brand names of the last 20 years or so, the relative positions are much the same, but the center point of the bell curve has moved far left because the "left" views of the party that installed Biden are aligned with what was hard right last century …
I'm i'm following you correctly, all authoritarian governments, including but not limited to the USSR, Khmer Rouge and PRC are right wing conservative regimes?
"nor would I suggest Biden and the DNC are comparable to Stalin and the USSR …"
I am going to type a hyperbolic and alarmist comment. Stop reading now if you're not interested in that kind of thing.
"Biden" (a mummy behind a podium) and the DNC (the actual power structure) have far more sophisticated tools at their disposal than Stalin ever did. Jack D. has made it clear which side he's on; the side of the ascending power structure. It makes him some dimes.
You said if "liberals insist on conformity, it's not liberal anymore, it's right wing conservatism". I was curious if communist revolutionaries were liberal in your eyes. It sounds like you would brand them as right wing conservatives? Or maybe i'm completely misunderstanding you?
I always stress the point that only partisan hacks debate words like 'liberal'/'left' and 'conservative'/'right' over the more important descriptor 'authoritarian'. Engaging in that strawman debate is misdirection meant to exploit individual biases. The important word is authoritarian. Some 150 million people in the 20th century learned this the hard way.
"I always stress the point that only partisan hacks debate words like 'liberal'/'left' and 'conservative'/'right' over the more important descriptor 'authoritarian'. Engaging in that strawman debate is misdirection meant to exploit individual biases."
You can stand on a street corner, wearing a sandwich board, and yell this through a megaphone all day, yet most will refuse to hear you.
...what was Upton Sinclair's old chestnut? "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
You are correct, however I will point you to one encouraging trend. The number of people registered as independent now outnumbers registered republicans and is growing. According to some polls the number of independents outnumbers democrats as well. The number of people registered red and blue is declining. There is some reason to be optimistic. More and more people are waking up and can be reached.
of course if liberal means anti-puritan (not a terms with which I'm familiar, but I'll keep going) and liberals insist upon obedient conformity, it's not liberal any more, it's right wing conservatism, like all of these political brand names of the last 20 years or so, the relative positions are much the same, but the center point of the bell curve has moved far left because the "left" views of the party that installed Biden are aligned with what was hard right last century …
I'm i'm following you correctly, all authoritarian governments, including but not limited to the USSR, Khmer Rouge and PRC are right wing conservative regimes?
huh? is there any other form of government other than authoritarian?
I wouldn't broad brush the examples you cite, nor would I suggest Biden and the DNC are comparable to Stalin and the USSR …
"nor would I suggest Biden and the DNC are comparable to Stalin and the USSR …"
I am going to type a hyperbolic and alarmist comment. Stop reading now if you're not interested in that kind of thing.
"Biden" (a mummy behind a podium) and the DNC (the actual power structure) have far more sophisticated tools at their disposal than Stalin ever did. Jack D. has made it clear which side he's on; the side of the ascending power structure. It makes him some dimes.
You said if "liberals insist on conformity, it's not liberal anymore, it's right wing conservatism". I was curious if communist revolutionaries were liberal in your eyes. It sounds like you would brand them as right wing conservatives? Or maybe i'm completely misunderstanding you?
I wasn't thinking of Che Guevara
I always stress the point that only partisan hacks debate words like 'liberal'/'left' and 'conservative'/'right' over the more important descriptor 'authoritarian'. Engaging in that strawman debate is misdirection meant to exploit individual biases. The important word is authoritarian. Some 150 million people in the 20th century learned this the hard way.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.CHAP1.HTM
"I always stress the point that only partisan hacks debate words like 'liberal'/'left' and 'conservative'/'right' over the more important descriptor 'authoritarian'. Engaging in that strawman debate is misdirection meant to exploit individual biases."
You can stand on a street corner, wearing a sandwich board, and yell this through a megaphone all day, yet most will refuse to hear you.
...what was Upton Sinclair's old chestnut? "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
You are correct, however I will point you to one encouraging trend. The number of people registered as independent now outnumbers registered republicans and is growing. According to some polls the number of independents outnumbers democrats as well. The number of people registered red and blue is declining. There is some reason to be optimistic. More and more people are waking up and can be reached.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx