Advertisement
by Draconisisia » Wed Dec 29, 2021 1:40 pm
by The free romanians » Wed Dec 29, 2021 1:48 pm
Draconisisia wrote:Just speaking for the USA, where I live, we have a two party system, so a third party that is economically left and socially conservative is unlikely to become very powerful or influential. However, Republicans are constantly harping on right-wing populist identity politics, since that's the primary way that they tend to win votes, especially with the majority of the professional class switching over to the Democrats. The Democratic party is more conservative in the classical sense, of preserving existing institutions, since the Republicans are basically revolutionary fascists who want to destroy our institutions.
by Draconisisia » Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:36 pm
The free romanians wrote:I wouldn't call republicans fascist
by American Legionaries » Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:51 pm
Draconisisia wrote:The free romanians wrote:I wouldn't call republicans fascist
In what way are Republicans not fascist? They advocate for all of the characteristics of fascism: nationalism, disdain for human rights, identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause, militarism, sexism, controlled mass media, obsession with national security, religion and government are intertwined, corporate power is protected, labor power is suppressed, disdain for intellectuals and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment, rampant cronyism and corruption, and fraudulent elections.
by American Legionaries » Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:54 pm
Draconisisia wrote:They support every tenet of fascism.
by The free romanians » Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:55 pm
Draconisisia wrote:The free romanians wrote:I wouldn't call republicans fascist
In what way are Republicans not fascist? They advocate for all of the characteristics of fascism: nationalism, disdain for human rights, identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause, militarism, sexism, controlled mass media, obsession with national security, religion and government are intertwined, corporate power is protected, labor power is suppressed, disdain for intellectuals and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment, rampant cronyism and corruption, and fraudulent elections.
by American Legionaries » Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:57 pm
The free romanians wrote:Draconisisia wrote:
In what way are Republicans not fascist? They advocate for all of the characteristics of fascism: nationalism, disdain for human rights, identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause, militarism, sexism, controlled mass media, obsession with national security, religion and government are intertwined, corporate power is protected, labor power is suppressed, disdain for intellectuals and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment, rampant cronyism and corruption, and fraudulent elections.
Except for nationalism and no separation of church and state
That sounds also like marxist leninism
by Krasny-Volny » Wed Dec 29, 2021 2:58 pm
by Krasny-Volny » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:00 pm
Draconisisia wrote:The free romanians wrote:I wouldn't call republicans fascist
In what way are Republicans not fascist? They advocate for all of the characteristics of fascism: nationalism, disdain for human rights, identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause, militarism, sexism, controlled mass media, obsession with national security, religion and government are intertwined, corporate power is protected, labor power is suppressed, disdain for intellectuals and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment, rampant cronyism and corruption, and fraudulent elections.
by Prima Scriptura » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:06 pm
Krasny-Volny wrote:The Jamesian Republic wrote:
Yes. I think it’s possible to be culturally conservative with leftist economics.
Most left-wing communist states - Laos, Cuba, etc - these days are considered “culturally right-wing” by Western leftists, yet they have command economies and are socialist in every sense of the word. They tend to fiercely nationalistic, enforce conscription, have massive defense budgets, and enjoy excessive displays of military power. Their ruling parties have semi-militarized youth wings that keep hair short, dress conservative, and impart military training. They have incredibly conformist societies where homosexuality and smoking pot and other “socially deviant” behaviors are discouraged.
And they also tend to rally around charismatic authoritarians.
This is what socialism looks like to most of the world that’s not America or Western Europe.
But Western leftists look at these regimes and see no difference between them and say, Putin’s Russia. The only difference is one has a command economy and one doesn’t.
by Krasny-Volny » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:14 pm
Prima Scriptura wrote:Krasny-Volny wrote:
Most left-wing communist states - Laos, Cuba, etc - these days are considered “culturally right-wing” by Western leftists, yet they have command economies and are socialist in every sense of the word. They tend to fiercely nationalistic, enforce conscription, have massive defense budgets, and enjoy excessive displays of military power. Their ruling parties have semi-militarized youth wings that keep hair short, dress conservative, and impart military training. They have incredibly conformist societies where homosexuality and smoking pot and other “socially deviant” behaviors are discouraged.
And they also tend to rally around charismatic authoritarians.
This is what socialism looks like to most of the world that’s not America or Western Europe.
But Western leftists look at these regimes and see no difference between them and say, Putin’s Russia. The only difference is one has a command economy and one doesn’t.
I see leftists on NSG and elsewhere defend Cuba as some sort of cultural liberal paradise very often. They make it seem it’s like San Francisco in the Caribbean.
by Uiiop » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:15 pm
So again: "Rebranded lib copium"Krasny-Volny wrote:Prima Scriptura wrote:
I see leftists on NSG and elsewhere defend Cuba as some sort of cultural liberal paradise very often. They make it seem it’s like San Francisco in the Caribbean.
“Tankies”, in Western communist parlance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
There is a vocal minority of Western communists that does approve of the old guard Soviet-style regimes. The fact that these regimes are often credited with standing up to US imperialism and are in impoverished, non-white countries gives them additional moral high ground to these folks.
This is a definite split in the modern socialist movements in Western countries hardly anybody outside those movements talks about.
by Bear Stearns » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:20 pm
by Bear Stearns » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:21 pm
Krasny-Volny wrote:Prima Scriptura wrote:
I see leftists on NSG and elsewhere defend Cuba as some sort of cultural liberal paradise very often. They make it seem it’s like San Francisco in the Caribbean.
“Tankies”, in Western communist parlance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
There is a vocal minority of Western communists that does approve of the old guard Soviet-style regimes. The fact that these regimes are often credited with standing up to US imperialism and are in impoverished, non-white countries gives them additional moral high ground to these folks.
This is a definite split in the modern socialist movements in Western countries hardly anybody outside those movements talks about.
by Prima Scriptura » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:21 pm
Krasny-Volny wrote:Prima Scriptura wrote:
I see leftists on NSG and elsewhere defend Cuba as some sort of cultural liberal paradise very often. They make it seem it’s like San Francisco in the Caribbean.
“Tankies”, in Western communist parlance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
There is a vocal minority of Western communists that does approve of the old guard Soviet-style regimes. The fact that these regimes are often credited with standing up to US imperialism and are in impoverished, non-white countries gives them additional moral high ground to these folks.
This is a definite split in the modern socialist movements in Western countries hardly anybody outside those movements talks about.
by Nationalist Northumbria » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:25 pm
Draconisisia wrote:The free romanians wrote:I wouldn't call republicans fascist
In what way are Republicans not fascist? They advocate for all of the characteristics of fascism: nationalism, disdain for human rights, identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause, militarism, sexism, controlled mass media, obsession with national security, religion and government are intertwined, corporate power is protected, labor power is suppressed, disdain for intellectuals and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment, rampant cronyism and corruption, and fraudulent elections.
by Middlegarden » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:29 pm
by Bear Stearns » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:29 pm
Nationalist Northumbria wrote:Draconisisia wrote:
In what way are Republicans not fascist? They advocate for all of the characteristics of fascism: nationalism, disdain for human rights, identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause, militarism, sexism, controlled mass media, obsession with national security, religion and government are intertwined, corporate power is protected, labor power is suppressed, disdain for intellectuals and the arts, obsession with crime and punishment, rampant cronyism and corruption, and fraudulent elections.
Nationalism: Obama made his 2012 Democratic nomination acceptance speech to the backdrop of a giant American flag, while his supporters waved American flags in the audience. Obama's foreign policy prioritised (his interpretation of) American interests above all else, even America's closest allies, including the illegal intrusion into Pakistan without the Pakistani government's consent and against international law to execute Osama bin Laden without trial.
Disdain for human rights: Can "we tortured some folks" be described as anything other than disdainful? That was Obama's description of horrific atrocities perpetrated against suspected terrorists, including those wrongfully suspected. While carefully maintaining a not-supporting-it---but stance, he justified U.S. intelligence agencies torturing people on the grounds that there was "enormous pressure on our law enforcement and our national security teams", and described those involved in torture as "real patriots."
Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause: "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations" - Obama's hatred for rural whites who had dared to commit the crime of voting for Hillary Clinton was so strong that, over the next eight years, he managed to completely drive them away from the party. They were then painted as being racist for quite reasonably not supporting a man who had revealed his hatred of them.
Militarism: Obama, going against a vote in the House of Representatives, joined the European intervention in Libya to bring down Gaddafi. This led to slave markets emerging in the chaos following the dictator's brutal, extrajudicial murder by NATO-backed radical Islamist insurgents. Despite this, despite in contrast Libya under Gaddafi having seen astounding improvements in living standards compared to its neighbours, Obama still described it as "the right thing to do."
Sexism: Obama used sexist dogwhistles and appealed to sexist sentiments in his 2008 primary battle with Hillary Clinton.
I can do more if you want.
by Nationalist Northumbria » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:33 pm
Bear Stearns wrote:Nationalist Northumbria wrote:Nationalism: Obama made his 2012 Democratic nomination acceptance speech to the backdrop of a giant American flag, while his supporters waved American flags in the audience. Obama's foreign policy prioritised (his interpretation of) American interests above all else, even America's closest allies, including the illegal intrusion into Pakistan without the Pakistani government's consent and against international law to execute Osama bin Laden without trial.
Disdain for human rights: Can "we tortured some folks" be described as anything other than disdainful? That was Obama's description of horrific atrocities perpetrated against suspected terrorists, including those wrongfully suspected. While carefully maintaining a not-supporting-it---but stance, he justified U.S. intelligence agencies torturing people on the grounds that there was "enormous pressure on our law enforcement and our national security teams", and described those involved in torture as "real patriots."
Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause: "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations" - Obama's hatred for rural whites who had dared to commit the crime of voting for Hillary Clinton was so strong that, over the next eight years, he managed to completely drive them away from the party. They were then painted as being racist for quite reasonably not supporting a man who had revealed his hatred of them.
Militarism: Obama, going against a vote in the House of Representatives, joined the European intervention in Libya to bring down Gaddafi. This led to slave markets emerging in the chaos following the dictator's brutal, extrajudicial murder by NATO-backed radical Islamist insurgents. Despite this, despite in contrast Libya under Gaddafi having seen astounding improvements in living standards compared to its neighbours, Obama still described it as "the right thing to do."
Sexism: Obama used sexist dogwhistles and appealed to sexist sentiments in his 2008 primary battle with Hillary Clinton.
I can do more if you want.
based
shit bush went out of his way to say islam was not the enemy. he was a bigger cuck than obama.
by Draconisisia » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:34 pm
by Diarcesia » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:38 pm
by Bear Stearns » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:38 pm
by Bear Stearns » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:39 pm
Diarcesia wrote:By definition, conservatism is the ideology of keeping the status quo. In this regard, if a left-wing government's policies is geared towards maintaining existing policies, it becomes conservative. An example would be the Soviets crushing counterrevolutionary activity.
by Dreria » Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:41 pm
Diarcesia wrote:By definition, conservatism is the ideology of keeping the status quo. In this regard, if a left-wing government's policies is geared towards maintaining existing policies, it becomes conservative. An example would be the Soviets crushing counterrevolutionary activity.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aggicificicerous, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Daphomir, Ineva, Jerzylvania, La Paz de Los Ricos, Mesogiria, Phobos Drilling and Manufacturing, Port Carverton, Senkaku, Sutalia, The Jamesian Republic, The Notorious Mad Jack, Tungstan, Vassenor, Washington Resistance Army
Advertisement