Left Wing Discussion Thread IV: Oh Hai Marx

[Napkiraly]

Avoiding the far left and far right but accepting what you consider center left and center right. So your beliefs could be anything at all really. Lenin wrote a book denouncing what he considered left wing communism. I'm sure you wouldn't consider him a centrist. So what are your beliefs really without using the terms left or right?

Centrism.

[Napkiraly]

You mean like one of those Tumblr genders like Vapogender or Autigendered?

Please don’t be one of those people who think that is actually common...

I don't, much like transpartisan.

[New Emeline]

If you mean Macron, no, Macron's literally just a liberal centrist through and through.

And you have an exceedingly narrow definition of centrism if you think it means having middle-ground positions on every issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpartisan
And I said stop. I'm transpartisan, so call me transpartisan.

God if you took out the political context, this would sound like a gender argument.

Regardless of what you call yourself, what are your actual beliefs? Pros, antis, etc.

[Napkiraly]

I'm not setting out to offend you, but I'm telling you the truth as I and many other see it. Centrism does exactly what you describe as transpartisan. It's a cynical rebranding of centrist liberalism.

I can get the logic, but I want to avoid negative connotations and not be seen as a compromise candidate or the candidate you settle for because people think of mediocrity, and passiveness when it comes to centrists.
I'm not, if I am to be considered centrist, then my sort of stances are not moderate-in the sense that I don't come off as a moderate, who are seen in pop culture as compromising, sort of passive individuals in campaigning and the like. If I was to run, my campaign would be aggressive/passionate. Not aggressive as harsh, rude, attacking people, per se, but it would have a sort of fire to it, and be passionate
Even if I were to choose to be called centrist, it still has too many negative connotations to be taken seriously in the modern political environment.
So regardless, the people standing up against the far left and far right need a drastic rebranding as aggressive, energetic, fiery, not laid-back, calm, and underwhelming in the passion department.

So you don't want to be seen as being a compromise candidate whilst being a compromise candidate.

[Mattopilos II]

I'm not setting out to offend you, but I'm telling you the truth as I and many other see it. Centrism does exactly what you describe as transpartisan. It's a cynical rebranding of centrist liberalism.

I can get the logic, but I want to avoid negative connotations and not be seen as a compromise candidate or the candidate you settle for because people think of mediocrity, and passiveness when it comes to centrists.
I'm not, if I am to be considered centrist, then my sort of stances are not moderate-in the sense that I don't come off as a moderate, who are seen in pop culture as compromising, sort of passive individuals in campaigning and the like. If I was to run, my campaign would be aggressive/passionate. Not aggressive as harsh, rude, attacking people, per se, but it would have a sort of fire to it, and be passionate
Even if I were to choose to be called centrist, it still has too many negative connotations to be taken seriously in the modern political environment.
So regardless, the people standing up against the far left and far right need a drastic rebranding as aggressive, energetic, fiery, not laid-back, calm, and underwhelming in the passion department.

Yet it is okay if it is done for those you consider as "far-left" and "far-right"? Funny that.

[Ligurria]

I'm not setting out to offend you, but I'm telling you the truth as I and many other see it. Centrism does exactly what you describe as transpartisan. It's a cynical rebranding of centrist liberalism.

I can get the logic, but I want to avoid negative connotations and not be seen as a compromise candidate or the candidate you settle for because people think of mediocrity, and passiveness when it comes to centrists.
I'm not, if I am to be considered centrist, then my sort of stances are not moderate-in the sense that I don't come off as a moderate, who are seen in pop culture as compromising, sort of passive individuals in campaigning and the like. If I was to run, my campaign would be aggressive/passionate. Not aggressive as harsh, rude, attacking people, per se, but it would have a sort of fire to it, and be passionate
Even if I were to choose to be called centrist, it still has too many negative connotations to be taken seriously in the modern political environment.
So regardless, the people standing up against the far left and far right need a drastic rebranding as aggressive, energetic, fiery, not laid-back, calm, and underwhelming in the passion department.

You're passionately apathetic. Gotcha.

[Napkiraly]

Regardless of what you call yourself, what are your actual beliefs? Pros, antis, etc.

(Portraying this as if I'm a candidate)
Socially I'm extremely pro-lgbt(And would be whether I believed it was wrong or not, freedom to sin, free will, and all that), pro-multiculturalism, pro-secularism, and pro-life. Economically, I favor Rhine Capitalism, but am willing to move right or left depending on what would help in the current situation. I have great respect for globalism while not advocating globalism myself, because of my religious beliefs-I may be secular but that doesn't mean it can't influence some of my beliefs, hell I'm secular because of the bible, which sounds confusing when you think about it, but also makes sense.

I am cautiously pro gun control, but would prefer less intrusive measures to be taken to stop gun violence. But if there were no such measures, I would work to ensure that despite being pro gun control, I can work out laws and the like that can prevent the government from abusing that power to crack down on political opponents or dissidents.

My foreign policy would be pragmatically moral due to lack of a better word, I'd hesitate to rush into wars, but also not shy away from them if necessary. I would try to find measures that can defeat nations with as low casualties as possible.
I would definitely remain loyal to our allies, and speak out against oppressive regimes, but not be reckless about it or try to intervene all the time, but wouldn't be shy away from doing it, just calm, strategic, and try to secure a low-casualty victory whilst not being overly naive, respect the dead, and try to conserve resources as much as possible. It goes alongside my pro-life stance. I'm also against the death penalty, and torture.
I'm for government funded healthcare, strongly.
As well, I'd restructure and reform the education system, and try to reform the military budget to focus more on efficiency, rather than throwing more money at it, which I would also do with education, but with education, stress teaching both sides on arguments.
I'm quite pro-Israel, but am also a critic of it's provocative actions. I believe in consent of the governed as well.
I would work hard to boost alternative energy production, and am quite free-trade. Another core issue is reforming the transportation systems in america, and providing free internet to everyone in a cost-effective manner. We should also rework Obamacare and the Veteran retirement programs to be more efficient and cost effective. I would place stricter limits on political fundraising and repeal that law about corporations being able to donate to political candidates.
I would raise taxes on the rich, put regulations on companies, as well as environmental regulations, potentially a carbon tax, and more. I believe in free college, and reforming the criminal justice system, and the immigration system. I would make USA open to immigrants(But require background checks too), but require them to learn English here and provide free classes to learn it.
I would restructure the election system to be more open, and crack down on gerrymandering if possible. I'd also work to put more restrictions on lobbyists.
I would discuss with my voters every weekend and other people who didn't vote for me, and see what I can do to make their lives better, and ask them what they want, and spend much more time with the people than lobbyists.

I have many other beliefs and stuff, but that's enough for now for a general idea.

So Hillary Clinton?

[Napkiraly]

So Hillary Clinton?

Elaborate please.

I mean, you're just really rehasing a typical centrist Democrat position. You're a centrist. It's okay to admit it.

[Jelmatt]

I mean, you're just really rehasing a typical centrist Democrat position. You're a centrist. It's okay to admit it.

I don't think a lot of that is Centrist.
Besides, Centrism is dead. Nobody will be able to take centrists candidates seriously anymore, and they don't.

A centrist democrat cannot win in today's america in a liberal state unless they're part of the establishment, they're too unpopular.
At least, that's how it feels from analyzing the country's variety of opinions, especially the east and west coasts.
They don't appeal to the left or right, that's the issue. They only dissatisfy everyone, and that doesn't help and results in an increased partisan divide as the left and right grow more extreme.

So why do you think that you'll be able to do any better with essentially the same opinions and just a different label?

[Napkiraly]

I mean, you're just really rehasing a typical centrist Democrat position. You're a centrist. It's okay to admit it.

I don't think a lot of that is Centrist.
Besides, Centrism is dead. Nobody will be able to take centrists candidates seriously anymore, and they don't.

A centrist democrat cannot win in today's america in a liberal state unless they're part of the establishment, they're too unpopular.
At least, that's how it feels from analyzing the country's variety of opinions, especially the east and west coasts.
They don't appeal to the left or right, that's the issue. They only dissatisfy everyone, and that doesn't help and results in an increased partisan divide as the left and right grow more extreme.

It's basically the Centrist platform to a T. It's okay to admit it. You want a relabel, I get that. But a green apple and a red apple are still both apples.

[Bakery Hill]

The problem with the relabeling thing Eternal Lotharia, is that when you explain yourself every man and his dog are going to say "oh so you're a centrist then?" As Nap says apples are apples.

[New Emeline]

The problem with the relabeling thing Eternal Lotharia, is that when you explain yourself every man and his dog are going to say "oh so you're a centrist then?" As Nap says apples are apples.

I can see that logic.
Still, extremely hesitant to consider myself centrist.

Fair enough, but you’ll probably have to get used to others calling you one n

[New Emeline]

Fair enough, but you’ll probably have to get used to others calling you one n

And Ig I'll have to reject it.


Moving on:

What do you say to the claims that statism is leftist and that leftist revisionism made people think it wasn't?

In my opinion, statism isn’t really left or right. It can be either, or neither.

[Bakery Hill]

Fair enough, but you’ll probably have to get used to others calling you one n

And Ig I'll have to reject it.


Moving on:

What do you say to the claims that statism is leftist and that leftist revisionism made people think it wasn't?

Pretty stupid claims.

[The Parkus Empire]

Fair enough, but you’ll probably have to get used to others calling you one n

And Ig I'll have to reject it.


Moving on:

What do you say to the claims that statism is leftist and that leftist revisionism made people think it wasn't?

I think statism can be leftist, but also progressive or other. It originated with Cromwell. Leftism is not innately statist

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Fair enough, but you’ll probably have to get used to others calling you one n

And Ig I'll have to reject it.


Moving on:

What do you say to the claims that statism is leftist and that leftist revisionism made people think it wasn't?

In the context of a liberal democracy, statism is generally more leftist than rightist, at least economically. That's not to say that it's always statist though.

[Cekoviu]

And Ig I'll have to reject it.


Moving on:

What do you say to the claims that statism is leftist and that leftist revisionism made people think it wasn't?

In the context of a liberal democracy, statism is generally more leftist than rightist, at least economically. That's not to say that it's always statist though.

Statism is best exemplified by conservative national communist parties like PSRM in Moldova and the Communist Party in Russia, so I'd agree with that to an extent.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Isn't libertarian communism just anarchism?

Libertarian communism includes left anarchism/libertarian socialism, council communism, Autonomism, Open Marxism, Luxemburgism, and others.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

I don't see how that's hypocritical.
My belief about saving people's lives doesn't compare to the vast national and international destruction of those systems.
You're completely missing the difference.

Why is this discussion continuing? The short answer is, no I am not.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

I'm just taking a stand against the extreme left and extreme right viewing both as destructive.

Again, you keep on repeating the same line over and over again without actually saying what you do believe.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

A centrist democrat cannot win in today's america in a liberal state unless they're part of the establishment, they're too unpopular.

A centrist Democrat just won last week in Pittsburgh.

[Taihei Tengoku]

I'm just taking a stand against the extreme left and extreme right viewing both as destructive.

Again, you keep on repeating the same line over and over again without actually saying what you do believe.

He's spelled it out plenty.

[Irona]

It’s worth remembering that authoritarian leftists are still the enemy for democratic leftists.

[Ostroeuropa]

It’s worth remembering that authoritarian leftists are still the enemy for democratic leftists.

Authoritarian social democracy tho.

D E S T R O Y T H E K L A N
E D U C A T I O N F O R T H E M A S S E S
E N D P O L L T A X
W E A L T H T A X A C T
S O C I A L S E C U R I T Y

*applause*

I M P E R I A L P R E S I D E N C Y
M A X I M U M I N C O M E A C T
R O O T O U T T R A I T O R S
F I G H T F I R E W I T H F I R E
C A R R Y A B I G S T I C K

*confused applause*

( https://i.redd.it/usctwhicnag01.jpg )

Democracy and authoritarianism are not at odds, necessarily. Doesn't mean authoritarianism is good, just that it can be democratic.

Trump on the campaign trail appealed to the Auth-Soc-Dem sentiment imo.

[Irona]

It’s worth remembering that authoritarian leftists are still the enemy for democratic leftists.

Authoritarian social democracy tho.

D E S T R O Y T H E K L A N
E D U C A T I O N F O R T H E M A S S E S
E N D P O L L T A X
W E A L T H T A X A C T
S O C I A L S E C U R I T Y

*applause*

I M P E R I A L P R E S I D E N C Y
M A X I M U M I N C O M E A C T
R O O T O U T T R A I T O R S
F I G H T F I R E W I T H F I R E
C A R R Y A B I G S T I C K

*confused applause*

( https://i.redd.it/usctwhicnag01.jpg )

Democracy and authoritarianism are not at odds, necessarily. Doesn't mean authoritarianism is good, just that it can be democratic.

Trump on the campaign trail appealed to the Auth-Soc-Dem sentiment imo.

“Perfect democracy”

EDIT: In all seriousness I get your point. Maybe I should have said ‘anti-democratic’