Will Classical Liberalism Kill the Social Justice Left?

[Ardoki]

The 'regressive left' support free speech (which should rightfully be restricted by hate speech laws to prevent intolerance), religious freedom (when religion should be restricted to the private sphere [or eliminated and replaced with a progressive state ideology] to ensure secularity and they should pay taxes on revenue and not be hateful bigots), and the freedom for bigots to riot (when they should be tolerance and accepting of others).

I'm a progressive!

Stop contradicting yourself holy shit

Free is free. Get over it.

How did I contradict myself?

[Jochistan]

That's too much a utopian ideal to begin with. Chill the fuck out. Quit generalizing, you're proving Jochi right more than anything.

But Jochistan is talking about libertarians.

I ain't no libertarian!

I still think your views are terrible.

[Jochistan]

Fuck this shit, alt-right wackos and regressive lefties everywhere. So many people reacting to one movement by going way to far in the opposite direction.

Wow. I actually agree with you.

[Huguenoxe]

Aren't all words fabricated though? I mean, if you accept that words are granted meaning by the society which uses them, then I think "Regressive Left" is an actual word since most people will understand what it means.

Ok.

I agree. That's why I oppose the Regressive Left.

The 'regressive left' support free speech (which should rightfully be restricted by hate speech laws to prevent intolerance), religious freedom (when religion should be restricted to the private sphere [or eliminated and replaced with a progressive state ideology] to ensure secularity and they should pay taxes on revenue and not be hateful bigots), and the freedom for bigots to riot (when they should be tolerance and accepting of others).

I'm a progressive!

I sense a troll afoot?

[Ardoki]

The 'regressive left' support free speech (which should rightfully be restricted by hate speech laws to prevent intolerance), religious freedom (when religion should be restricted to the private sphere [or eliminated and replaced with a progressive state ideology] to ensure secularity and they should pay taxes on revenue and not be hateful bigots), and the freedom for bigots to riot (when they should be tolerance and accepting of others).

I'm a progressive!

I never heard the Regressive Left support that. Here's the definition of Regressive Left:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left

So progressives are against freedom of speech and religion? Confirms what I knew, but thanks anyway.

A lot of religions have hateful and anti-scientific views. We can't allow people to be intolerant and ignorant.

The so-called 'regressive left' support defending religious bigotry.

[Pizza Hell]

Hopefully

[The Liberated Territories]

The 'regressive left' support free speech (which should rightfully be restricted by hate speech laws to prevent intolerance), religious freedom (when religion should be restricted to the private sphere [or eliminated and replaced with a progressive state ideology] to ensure secularity and they should pay taxes on revenue and not be hateful bigots), and the freedom for bigots to riot (when they should be tolerance and accepting of others).

I'm a progressive!

I reject hate speech on the same grounds that I reject capital punishment. The way to confront ideas is not to ban them but engage with them. Let the marketplace of ideas work itself out and if you have such faith in your ideas they will win a large enough portion of the population in order to have them enacted in society. You don't defeat Brownshirts with Brownshirt tactic's.

Pfft, haven't you heard of Antifa? The only way to defeat the fascists is to become the fascists themselves! Totally nothing contradictory about that.

[Victoriala]

That's too much a utopian ideal to begin with. Chill the fuck out. Quit generalizing, you're proving Jochi right more than anything.

But Jochistan is talking about libertarians.

I ain't no libertarian!

I mean duh

Stop contradicting yourself holy shit

Free is free. Get over it.

How did I contradict myself?

Supporting freedom =/= restricting it just because it's "hateful" or "not progressive".

[Ardoki]

The 'regressive left' support free speech (which should rightfully be restricted by hate speech laws to prevent intolerance), religious freedom (when religion should be restricted to the private sphere [or eliminated and replaced with a progressive state ideology] to ensure secularity and they should pay taxes on revenue and not be hateful bigots), and the freedom for bigots to riot (when they should be tolerance and accepting of others).

I'm a progressive!

I sense a troll afoot?

I wasn't trolling.

You should know I hold these views. Did you think Ardoki went against my opinions?

[Huguenoxe]

I never heard the Regressive Left support that. Here's the definition of Regressive Left:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left

So progressives are against freedom of speech and religion? Confirms what I knew, but thanks anyway.

A lot of religions have hateful and anti-scientific views. We can't allow people to be intolerant and ignorant.

The so-called 'regressive left' support defending religious bigotry.

???????? An SJW admitting to supporting Jacobin/Communist Chinese style tyranny? Does not surprise me tbh.

[Victoriala]

I never heard the Regressive Left support that. Here's the definition of Regressive Left:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left

So progressives are against freedom of speech and religion? Confirms what I knew, but thanks anyway.

A lot of religions have hateful and anti-scientific views. We can't allow people to be intolerant and ignorant.

The so-called 'regressive left' support defending religious bigotry.

You sound like a soccer mom you know that

[The Liberated Territories]

I never heard the Regressive Left support that. Here's the definition of Regressive Left:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left

So progressives are against freedom of speech and religion? Confirms what I knew, but thanks anyway.

A lot of religions have hateful and anti-scientific views. We can't allow people to be intolerant and ignorant.

The so-called 'regressive left' support defending religious bigotry.

In the atheist USSR, science that contradicted the "science" of Marxist-Leninism was either banned or amended in support of the state. A whole range of sciences were suppressed for being "counter-revolutionary."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppresse ... viet_Union

Now, I ask you, is it really religion that is the cause of hateful and anti-scientific views? Or perhaps it's merely large groups of people with an agenda engaging in a certain form of tribalism, that I think is the real problem.

[Writwross]

Social Justice is the great way forward and is in human nature

[The balkens]

Social Justice is the great way forward and is in human nature

no/

[Victoriala]

Social Justice is the great way forward and is in human nature

Elaborate

[Ranko Kanzaki]

Hopefully something does before they cause too much damage, but I'm not certain classical liberalism has what it takes yet.

We'll see if the future proves me wrong.

[Ardoki]

A lot of religions have hateful and anti-scientific views. We can't allow people to be intolerant and ignorant.

The so-called 'regressive left' support defending religious bigotry.

In the atheist USSR, science that contradicted the "science" of Marxist-Leninism was either banned or amended in support of the state. A whole range of sciences were suppressed for being "counter-revolutionary."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppresse ... viet_Union

Now, I ask you, is it really religion that is the cause of hateful and anti-scientific views? Or perhaps it's merely large groups of people with an agenda engaging in a certain form of tribalism, that I think is the real problem.

That was different, and you know it.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a country born embedded with the principles of freedom and equality for all humanity. Yes, they made a few little mistakes and were led astray, but you can't deny the principles the USSR fought to protect and promote.

[Victoriala]

In the atheist USSR, science that contradicted the "science" of Marxist-Leninism was either banned or amended in support of the state. A whole range of sciences were suppressed for being "counter-revolutionary."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppresse ... viet_Union

Now, I ask you, is it really religion that is the cause of hateful and anti-scientific views? Or perhaps it's merely large groups of people with an agenda engaging in a certain form of tribalism, that I think is the real problem.

That was different, and you know it.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a country born embedded with the principles of freedom and equality for all humanity. Yes, they made a few little mistakes and were led astray, but you can't deny the principles the USSR fought to protect and promote.

>defending the Soviets

Did you literally just

[Jochistan]

Many American "Libertarians" haven't remained too consistent. With the largely prevalent attitude among some libertarians/paleocons of "Government needs to get out of our lives! There should be laws against these foreigners, liberals, homosexuals, non-Christian, un American Commies!"

The platform of the Libertarian Party hasn't really changed much since the 70s. Consolidated and moderated, maybe, but the platform then supported gay marriage, as it does still today.

I can't recall many libertarians being against homosexuals, non-Christians, or foreigners. Have you watched the LP debates? All three candidates believe that immigration should be reformed to be more welcoming of immigrants while streamlining the process to our benefit, for example. All three have supported gay marriage (or more specifically, getting the government out of marriage.)

Can you point me the data of libertarians being against homosexual marriage, foreigners, et al? Here's mine:

http://www.isidewith.com/poll/965633/962379
http://www.isidewith.com/poll/1566865877/962379

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Tea_Pa ... Rights.htm

I was talking about Paleoconservatives that identified with the Tea Party movement. Sarah Palin/Alex Jones types and such.
http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/gayvaccinations.asp
https://youtu.be/bKR_UV8cxpQ

I really don't have a problem with people thinking and spreading their views on homosexuality being immoral.
But the stance some take seems pretty extreme.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomit ... ession_Act

[Ranko Kanzaki]

That was different, and you know it.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a country born embedded with the principles of freedom and equality for all humanity. Yes, they made a few little mistakes and were led astray, but you can't deny the principles the USSR fought to protect and promote.

>defending the Soviets

Did you literally just

Welcome to NationStates. Enjoy your stay.

[Victoriala]

>defending the Soviets

Did you literally just

Welcome to NationStates. Enjoy your stay.

I know how Ardoki works but this is a whole new level of something

[Jochistan]

Social Justice is the great way forward and is in human nature

no/

Maybe they just don't know the connotation.

Social Justice, as in Human Rights, is important to be organized and ensured.

Leftism is not.

[Writwross]

Evolutionary theory supports the great way of Social Justice Ideology, for humans evolved to survive and Social Justice involves the removal of all societal elements which act as dead weight and do not assist society in advancing in parallel to time. Society is necessary for survival of most human beings because it provides a framework for Social Justice.

[Ostroeuropa]

There is no unified "SJW philosophy". Attempting to look at it this way won't work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudo-Marxism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudo-Ma ... urt_School

Kay. (That it's based partially on freud should clue the informed in on why it's such a nonsensical worldview.)

[The balkens]

no/

Maybe they just don't know the connotation.

Social Justice, as in Human Rights, is important to be organized and ensured.

Leftism is not.

The kind of social justice that regressives often advocate is not justice, but retribution for an apparent "Original sin".