leftovers

Now, if the 1964 Civil Rights Act was amended to prevent Transgender men who do not get hair growth or removal treatments, hormone therapy and various surgeries to make their face, chest, and anatomy more in line with their new gender identity from playing Men’s sports , being a Boy Scout, and other Male only things and Transgender women who do not get hair growth or removal treatments, hormone therapy and various surgeries to make their face, chest, and anatomy more in line with their new gender identity from playing Women’s sports and being a Girl Scout and other female only things, I would be ok with that amendment change even though I am against them doing that amendment change. I would look the other way

Undocumented migrants/illegal immigrants who committed terrorism, major felonies (ecspecially hate crimes against BIPOC, LGBTQ+ , etc), who don't enroll in the above Dignity thing AND if they haven't assimilated or intergrated, or if they have committed espionage, treasonous acts or conditionally haven't been in the US for more than 5 years (give or take a year or so) should be deported (as long as their previous countries work with the US and take the initative in those deportation and resettlement and where those deportees are compensated by the US when they are deported so they can start a new ,BETTER life in their previous countries) .As noted below, this wouldn't be as common or as harsh as you think due to what I write below but there could be millions deported under the above system over the course of a half dozen years or a decade none the less if this system is abused

https://www.amazon.com › Men-Hat...

Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them : When Loving Hurts and You Don't Know Why Paperback - Amazon.com

Is this the way love is supposed to feel? • Does the man you love assume the right to control how you live and behave?

$14.29

virue signal abd pc aplogize is hollow , hive mind

To get around having Pro life laws, one idea is for private government or NGOs to indirectly encourage Libertarian for life pro life activists, psychologists, and medical professionals to create pro life therapy groups to help abortion seeking pregnant women find a way out. This therapy would voluntarily try to get women who are pregnant but who want an abortion to 'forget' that they are pregnant until they go into labor like how women who go into labor despite not knowing they are pregnant until they go into labor end up giving birth. This would allow those women to go through with their pregnancies.

To 'forget' they are pregnant would mean they would agree to find ways to live where it's like their not pregnant, find ways to bury thinking about their pregnancy, helping them hide their pregnancies form their friends and loved ones, while also having themselves not look pregnant via biggest loser weight loss boot camps and fat hiding clothes etc. So they wouldn't literally forget they were pregnant until they give birth (like the women who find out they are pregnant only when they go into labor forget the whole time until then they are pregnant) but would cosmetically be that way under this idea.

If hypothetically a machine or medication to literally make abortion seeking women in pro life therapy look and feel as unpregnant while being pregnant and uknowing of their pregnany as women who go into labor not knowing they are pregnant until they go into labor are, I would be conditionally half heartingly ok with those methods assuming i see the future and see that such measures was as positvely seen by pro choice activists and feminists as Roe v Wade was postively seen by pro choice activists and feminists (or where at worse those groups would react less negatively to said machine therapy than they do other mainstream pro life methods)

The pro life therapy would be voluntary, and the money put into said therapy would be used to fund Planned Parenthood and similar feminist causes. The pregnant women who go into the therapy would be there because they are open to not having an abortion or if they try to get an illegal abortion but failed or are caught trying to have one.

At the same time, when they give birth to the child, hospitals would then find emergency orphanages for said babies until they can find a new permanent home.

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 16. Vaush is explicitly anti left-unity: “God, I fucking hate leftists. There is no left unity with me."

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

Thank you for enlightening me, comrade. Another one, por favor.

Vaush

u/AutoModerator avatar

AutoModerator

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 9. Vaush has defended the consumption of child pornogrpahy because ‘there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism’. This paints a deeply troubling picture when added to his history of sexually innapropriate behaviour (See Vaush Fact 8) and his claim that under socialism the age of consent "should be lowered".

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

“You have nothing to lose but your innocence, young child. Oh the chains they come off later, we’re not at the higher stage of communism yet” - Vaush, probably

u/AutoModerator avatar

AutoModerator

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 21. Vaush freely admits to calling black and trans people ‘subhuman’.

wwii women working while men at war helped lead to them getting more jobs and higher jobs aftercwarcand since

[/s] If I was running the US, I'd place automatic Sporefall turrets (the Elder Wyrm's attack from FF XII) along the walls along the Mexican border and any illegal who tried to cross the border illegally would be hit with Sporefall on site by those automatic Sporefall turrets which would deter them from crossing the border illegally.[/s] I was just kidding of course I didn't mean that. They work so hard to get to our border, the least we can do is let them cross it without unleashing a FFXII enemy technik on them

Actulally all student loans should be forgiven -- but the obligation to repay should be laid upon the colleges that gave the students all those worthless degrees. The banking institutions should be authorized to foreclose on those institutions of higher learning that can't repay and liquidate them. It would have a salutary effect upon American higher education.

And then the whole federal loan program should be repealed and liquidated once and for all.

Koolrassow

12d

Join

What's the deal with this PatSoc/NazBol Scare thing? Is it an op?

Edit: I mean, they're so irrelevant, but now you have all these anglo anarchists and leftists hyping up this NazBol/tankie boogeyman, almost as if a Russia-sponsored red-brown alliance was about to make Red Dawn happen irl and take away their freedom, rights and "western democratic values". They're basically parroting neocon talking points at this point.

59 Comments sorted by

Best

u/living-psychology148 avatarLeave a comment

u/RedneckArab avatar

RedneckArab

12d

It’s a product of terminally online leftie infighting and the type of thing that should have been left in 2017. It has almost no real impact on real world politics or organizing beyond the occasional LARP march.

108

u/coolguyCEO avatar

coolguyCEO

12d

-7 votes

u/Marxstolemyjuul avatar

Marxstolemyjuul

12d

I’m gay

u/SLCPDTunnelDivision avatar

SLCPDTunnelDivision

12d

How gay?

u/Marxstolemyjuul avatar

Marxstolemyjuul

12d

Enough

Fact 20. Vaush Tweeted a literal Nazi meme – glorifying the Nazi-allied Finland for fighting against Russia in WWII.

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

u/rasm635u avatar

rasm635u

:Coat_Of_Arms_USSR:

92d

Vaush is a Nazi

u/AutoModerator avatar

AutoModerator

92d

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 6. Vaush said Black people trying to preserve their culture (that was systematically eradicated) is “exactly the same as white nationalism”.

Alright, as a frequent lurker and occasional participant in /r/FULLCOMMUNISM, and a long time Communist. I don't like that you decided to make a mockery of us in this way. I consider it a direct attack against us, and to be frank, I resent it greatly.

The entire purpose of the subreddit is to allow for more light content and semi-hyperbolic statements without fear of Liberal, reactionary, of Fascist retaliation. You've trespassed into our community to try and mock us. In doing so, either intentionally or unintentionally, you have benefited our enemies. Nevertheless, I'll explain it to you the best I can. I always seek to educate whenever the opportunity arises. I'll make this as brief as possible.

Any atrocity you could accuse us of, our enemies have done it before, and almost always they've done it ten times worse. We are those who want to rectify it, permanently. The plain truth is that we can't do it through daisy chains and peaceful protests. The Liberals and the Bourgeoisie wouldn't advocate for peaceful protest if it ever brought quick, meaningful, and permanent change. They have used every means at their disposal to destroy us.

The only real way is through forceful and determined action. Putting people, and yes, children in gulags is one such action. It's like when you have an infection and you're prescribed antibiotics, you start to take them for a few days, then you start to feel better. So, you just stop, you figure since you can't feel the effects of the bacteria they must be gone and defeated. Yet, when you stop, the infection comes back and sometimes even worse than before. It's not pretty, it's not cuddly, but it's the surest way. You have to get rid of all the filth before you can call it clean.

It's a similar principle here, if you don't eliminate those who are affiliated with the Old Guard, they'll raise their children to rise against you, or they'll grow up and seek to destroy you. That's why we do what we have to do, for the success of our goal, and the ultimate benefit of humanity. That's why we fight, to end human suffering and end tyranny.

I'd advise you to reconsider, because make no mistake. We plan to win this conflict, so either join us, support us, or move out the way. This is a friendly warning.

u/Conquestofbaguettes avatar

Conquestofbaguettes

Market socialism and market anarchism are absolutely things.

Hell, im an ancomm and while I dont personally support markets they are absolutely something that can work under a different property relationship. The devil is in the details

The ability of corporations to externalize costs and lower prices makes it difficult to determine net effects. We may save a few cents on certain products, but have a host of new health problems due to increased pollution. The consumer can recognize the former, but not the latter.

Worse still, the consumer is basically powerless to stop the externalizing. Boycotts and other consumer retaliatory actions have limited effect, and competition compels producers to continue their shady practices. Scrupled consumer get overridden by their frugal brethren, just as corporations get usurped by their socially irresponsible fellows.

Or at worst, I'd be conditionally halfway fine with allowing Day of the Dead and or Harvest holiday to be done in the US and Canada that uses said holidays as a memorial to people who died and promotes health things so people don't die sooner but only via virtual parties (or non virtual parties if they are done as I wrote above in the party section) and events that are in a big open area and with a limit capacity. Trick or treating would still be banned as it should.

I would have said "White Privilege is not real" if I was in the same situation that the white woman in this video below was in. If I was there when this happened and I saw this happen to this white woman, I would have told her that White Privilege is not real. https://web.archive.org/web/20210308060736/https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1267734418241830912

Clara zetkin anti idpol

Authoritarian conservatism[edit]

Main article: Far-right politics

Authoritarian conservatism or reactionary conservatism[54][55][56] refers to autocratic regimes that center their ideology around conservative nationalism, rather than ethnic nationalism, though certain racial components such as antisemitism may exist.[57] Authoritarian conservative movements show strong devotion towards religion, tradition and culture while also expressing fervent nationalism akin to other far-right nationalist movements. Examples of authoritarian conservative leaders include António de Oliveira Salazar[58] and Engelbert Dollfuss.[59] Authoritarian conservative movements were prominent in the same era as fascism, with which it sometimes clashed. Although both ideologies shared core values such as nationalism and had common enemies such as communism and materialism, there was nonetheless a contrast between the traditionalist nature of authoritarian conservatism and the revolutionary, palingenetic and populist nature of fascism—thus it was common for authoritarian conservative regimes to suppress rising fascist and National Socialist movements.[60] The hostility between the two ideologies is highlighted by the struggle for power for the National Socialists in Austria, which was marked by the assassination of Engelbert Dollfuss.

Sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset has examined the class basis of right-wing extremist politics in the 1920–1960 era. He reports:

Conservative or rightist extremist movements have arisen at different periods in modern history, ranging from the Horthyites in Hungary, the Christian Social Party of Dollfuss in Austria, Der Stahlhelm and other nationalists in pre-Hitler Germany, and Salazar in Portugal, to the pre-1966 Gaullist movements and the monarchists in contemporary France and Italy. The right extremists are conservative, not revolutionary. They seek to change political institutions in order to preserve or restore cultural and economic ones, while extremists of the centre and left seek to use political means for cultural and social revolution. The ideal of the right extremist is not a totalitarian ruler, but a monarch, or a traditionalist who acts like one. Many such movements in Spain, Austria, Hungary, Germany, and Italy-have been explicitly monarchist... The supporters of these movements differ from those of the centrists, tending to be wealthier, and more religious, which is more important in terms of a potential for mass support.[

As great as the 1964 Civil Rights act was, it caused a slippery slope with transpeople (ones who don’t meet my conditions below), drugees , felons, illegals, and pedos. Moreover it lead to Affimative Action ‘quotas’, which go against the very nature of that act

As great as the 1964 Civil Rights act was, it caused a slippery slope with transvestites (including cross dressers and ones who don’t meet my conditions below), drugees , felons, illegals, and pedos. Moreover it lead to Affimative Action ‘quotas’, which go against the very nature of that act

We have to amend the 1964 Civil Rights act so employees who are on drugs can be fired easier and not hired easier , to allow employers to discriminate against pedos (but not LGBTQ people), to be allowed to not hire illegal immigrants, to allow private businesses not be forced to hire felons.

I would not complain at all (but I would be half heartingly against) amending that law to prevent Transvestite men who do not meet 2 or more of this criteria: Intersex, have X, XXY, XXY or XXXY chromosome(s), they had at least one past life (or will have at least one future life) where they spent their entire life in that past or future life(s) as the gender they dress as in this life, when the Transvestite persons parents were pregnant with them, the doctor made a mistake and wrongly told their parents that the child (the Transvestite persons) would be a biological sex that said Transvestite persons were not born as (but ended up being the same gender that the Transvestite person pretends to be after birth), God considered making them the gender that they dress as but didn't, they were a tomboy or femgirl in their childhood as the gender they were born as from playing Men’s sports , being a Boy Scout, and other Male only things

and Transvestite women who do not meet 2 or more of this criteria: Intersex, have X, XXY, XXY or XXXY chromosome(s), they had at least one past life (or will have at least one future life) where they spent their entire life in that past or future life(s) as the gender they dress as in this life, when the Transvestite persons parents were pregnant with them, the doctor made a mistake and wrongly told their parents that the child (the Transvestite persons) would be a biological sex that said Transvestite persons were not born as (but ended up being the same gender that the Transvestite person pretends to be after birth), God considered making them the gender that they dress ad but didn't, they were a tomboy or femgirl in their childhood as the gender they were born as from playing Women’s sports , being a Girl Scout, and other female only things

However, after a torrent of media and blogospheric criticism, he changed course, telling CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, “I would have voted yes…. I think that there was an overriding problem in the South, so big that it did require federal intervention in the sixties.”

Which Rand Paul had it right?

more than anti white, it’s anti merit. Which means it’s anti human.

But what is true in his principle, we, too, must accept. And what is true is that before we can be active in any cause we must make it our own, egoistic cause—and that in this sense, quite aside from any material expectations, we are communists in virtue of our egoism, that out of egoism we want to be human beings and not merely individuals.[82]

I had dropped more or less by chance into the only community of any size in Western Europe where political consciousness and disbelief in capitalism were more normal than their opposites. Up here in Aragón one was among tens of thousands of people, mainly though not entirely of working-class origin, all living at the same level and mingling on terms of equality. In theory it was perfect equality, and even in practice it was not far from it. There is a sense in which it would be true to say that one was experiencing a foretaste of Socialism, by which I mean that the prevailing mental atmosphere was that of Socialism. Many of the normal motives of civilised life– snobbishness, money-grubbing, fear of the boss, etc.– had simply ceased to exist. The ordinary class-division of society had disappeared to an extent that is almost unthinkable in the money-tainted air of England; there was no one there except the peasants and ourselves, and no one owned anyone else as his master

USED to be about promoting economic justice. NOW it's about promoting "sexual" liberation (gay pride, tranny bathrooms) and replacing whites with non-whites. Take it up with Michel Foucault. He's the one who made the Devil's Bargain between theNew Left and the Corporate Power Structure.

about this. I am a learning leftist who has just begun reading Marx, Engels, and other communist philosophers / writers. I've also been watching some leftist YouTubers like Hakim and Prolekult. Excited to soon be joining my first socialist organization this coming week!

Anyway, I came across a post on my social media from an anarchist that caused some raised eyebrows, and I want to hear what you think about this. The cited post is from an article written by J. Grancharoff who I had not previously heard of. The post claims that ML is a bourgeois movement due to still involving hierarchical modes of organization, acceptance of state, and its emphasis on centralization. This sounds like a misunderstanding of Marxism to me, and pretty antithetical to what ML is all about. It even goes as far as saying ML "create[s] illusions in the heads of its followers" for thinking it isn't bourgeois, are not revolutionary, and that they make the process of capitalist exploitation smoother.

These are some pretty lofty critiques. They don't seem valid to me. It feels only meant to divide leftists and simply not at all what I have been learning about Marxism. Marxists are not accepting of the neoliberal, imperialist State, so why is Grancharoff saying we are? The fuck? Anyway, what might you say to an anarchist who criticized ML this way?

“What makes Marxism-Leninism a bourgeois movement? Many factors but basically they can be reduced to three: 1) acceptance of the State – a bourgeois institution – as a vehicle of social transformation; 2) emphasis on centralization at all possible levels: economic, political and social and 3) related to the first and second, the hierarchical mode of organization and its preservation as a social reality.

Marxism-Leninism, far from being a revolutionary science, is a reaction against revolution and especially against the Social Revolution, leveler of all class distinctions and privileges. The success of Marxism lies in its ability to create illusions in the heads of its followers, which affirm rather than refute its bourgeois essence as a movement. Marxism-Leninism does not make the world safe for socialism but it definitely makes it safe for capitalism. Not only is Marxism-Leninism a vehicle of capitalism, it is the savior of capitalism, it is capitalism par excellence. It does not engender revolution, it sprinkles rose oil for smooth capitalist exploitation.” - From an article on Marxist-Leninism,

SpurnedOne

97d

1) the capitalist state and proletariat state are fundamentally different. MLs reject the current bourgeoisie state and seek to destroy it and build a new state controlled by the proletariat

2) this point honestly makes no sense. How does centralization mean it's bourgeois

3) ML has been the historical largest enemy of capital in history. The USA/NATO/EU imperial core's main enemy was the USSR and now is China both of which are ML. If MLs supported capital why would capital constantly try to destroy ML revolutions? ML is fundamentally different from capitalism; it is socialism. It is a dictatorship of the proletariat. Therefore, it is not a "vehicle of capitalism."

Bakunin later claimed that Marx was a “hopeless statist” and advocate of “state communism” because of “his threefold capacity as an Hegelian, a Jew, and a German”. (Bakunin 1990, 142-3) This point was repeated elsewhere. Bakunin remarked in his 1872 letter To the Brothers of the Alliance in Spain that Marx “as a German and a Jew” is “an authoritarian from head to foot”. Within the same letter Bakunin wrote that Marx’s “vanity, in fact, has no limits, a truly Jewish vanity”. (Bakunin 1872a. For the German version see Bakunin 1924, 117, 115)

Over a hundred pages later Bakunin noted that “the rich commercial and industrial bourgeoisie and the Jewish financial world of Germany” both “required extensive state centralisation in order to flourish”. (Bakunin 1990, 138) Bakunin could have made his point about the relationship between finance capital and the state with a reference to bankers in general. He was an antisemite and so instead referred specifically to Jewish bankers and equated the rule of Jewish bankers with the rule of Jews in general. This was a common form of antisemitism during the 19th century because several of the largest banks in the world were owned by Jewish families, such as Rothschild and Sons. Such racist claims ignored that other large banks at the time were not owned by Jewish families, such as Barings. (Ferguson 2000, xxv, 20, 260-71, 284-8) It is furthermore the case that both today and in the 19th century the majority of Jews are not bankers or members of the ruling classes. Jewish workers do not benefit from the fact that some bankers happen to be Jewish. This is no different to the fact that workers who are Christians or atheists do not benefit from the fact that some bankers happen to be Christians or atheists.

They would help bridge the Syndicalist and Left Wing Laissez Faire (labor theory of value) parts of this People’s Democracy coalition together

This is not to say that Marxists can't be Anarchists and vice versa, as it seems Zoe Baker has shown. Kevin Carson in his latest book Exodus has also shown that there are some libertarian leanings in Marx's work, especially in some of Marx's conception of what his "State" should look like. Tucker is only really pointing to the Statist variety of Socialists (which he chooses to exemplify with Marx, the details and exceptions aren't much important for the essay).

Some philosophers have also criticized the aims of socialism, arguing that equality erodes away at individual diversities and that the establishment of an equal society would have to entail strong coercion.[511]

root out the taint of Marxism. Marxism and Germanism, like German and Jew, are antipodes. Here

If you don’t hold political office but still hope to take oligarch money while saying things that sound heterodox and vaguely left-wing, culture is your niche. Your job is to keep the spotlight off the specifics of the economy and on literally anything else.

There are hundreds if not thousands of extremely low circulation subsidized magazines, faux-newspapers, NGO report mills, etc. who can give anyone willing to play ball a comfortable life and more access to the mega-wealthy.

Flattering the rich is a growth industry, their budget for PR flaks grows with their wealth. As good investors, they know it makes sense to diversify your media holdings. Own a bit of center, a bit of left, a bit of right. Whoever comes out on top in the culture war will be in your pocket

Genzler

Right. The control of the MoP is dispersed among the shareholders. A socialist mode of production would pretty much supplant the shareholders with the labourers. You could still have a CEO elected by the workers.

Democratized workplaces sound so cool. I’d love to participate in manager, boss, and CEO elections. And good luck getting elected if you’re an asshole boss who treats employees like shi

long term unsustainable and something will have to change fundamentally. Likely what happens is that the initial capital will become too high and margins too small for there to be anything but more centralized production (even within capitalism) ie industry will trend towards monopolization and/or widespread crisis. The neoliberal (and, the social democratic) solution is antitrust laws or what have you, and when widespread crisis emerges, bailouts. Bailouts in a financialized world offsets the crisis by creating bubbles, but doesn't address the fundamental issue.

The issue with social democracy isn't its failure toward humanitarian goals, it's its failure to address the inherent crises that arise from the capitalist mode of production.

Feudalism has oddly satisfying aesthetics. Adventures, alliances & betrials, everlasting struggle for power & fortune

Maybe ancaps imagine themselves as heroes fighting against the dragon of state, who's accumulated all the riches, to grab those riches themselves & be free as in «money buy freedom»

support the Manitoba Canada 'unofficial' type of Multicultarism and the early mid 19th century type of multiculturalism that was done in Paraguay under José Gaspar Rod

environmental catastrophe we believe the answer is a resounding "no". And while no system will be perfect, we believe there is ample evidence that a communist society would function far better than our current capitalist one for the majority of people - even for the rich who often aren't happy despite their wealth.

the GOP’s warnings “that if I got elected, I’d bring the end to capitalism.” “Six months into my administration, the U.S. economy has experienced the highest economic growth rate in nearly 40 years,” he observed. “It turns out capitalism is alive and very well. We’re making serious progress to ensure that it works the way it’s supposed to work: for the good of the American people.”

Safety net programs, in general, do nothing to bring about collective ownership of the means of production. They do a little bit to “control” the economy, but so does any government spending.

Not everything falls into a neat division of “this is capitalist” or “this is socialist”, and most of the successful economies in the world today have a hybrid system that’s primarily capitalist with a social safety net and some socialist features. Let me suggest to you that practical success — doing what has been shown to work — is better than ideological purity.

Wendell Pierce al Twitter: "What I thought was just a political strategy ...

It's hard to see this when you collectivize individuals within the Black community by treating them as all being the same. 1. 5. Mostra les respostes

Did any European aristocrats support the rise of Communism, because it undermined the power of non-hereditary plutocrats? - Reddit

Myth #6: Socialists only care about class oppression—not other forms of oppression

Scandinavian Socialism is a Myth

Norway has some other very surprising things that you would typically not find on the ‘left’ side of the spectrum.

There is NO minimum wage in Norway.

Immigration is tightly controlled to the point that moving to Norway is more difficult than moving to the US.

The Sovereign Wealth Fund is propped up by non-green energies and despite PR stating they invest heavily in green alternatives, without the oil and gas wealth, Norway’s economic system would collapse overnight.

In communism or socialism, there is no state. There are no classes or even money.

NO ONE oppresses ANYONE

Evil is a subjective term, so personally I don’t it’s evil.

It has never existed (true communism/socialism, not including primitive communism where there is no technology)

Anyway, no ones ever starved or died or been worked to death, or enslaved.

In a communist society, you can do as you please. There are no limitations and when you’re successful, instead of being rich (no need) you are famous or reconized as a great person.

COMMUNISM IS HUMAN NATURE

ould start with a misconception about all ideological labels like “communism,” or “liberalism,” or “conservatism,” or “socialism.” They are better understood as red flags than as precise terms.

18th century “liberalism” meant small government and free markets. Today it means big government and a welfare state.

“Socialism” originally meant a society run for the benefit of the whole society rather than for the benefit of the owners of the means of production (corporate owners). The army and the police are socialist institutions: supported by tax dollars for the benefit of the whole society. What anti-socialists don’t like is tax dollars used to help the poor or the police used to restrain corporations.

Communism refers to a sharing society. That includes Stone Age hunter-gatherer societies who shared all their resources; or it may mean a totalitarian state run by a corrupt bureaucracy that executes its critics in the name of “the People.”

People who really understand political economy don’t deal in labels. They are concerned with the pros and cons of specific policies. Anything else is propaganda and name-calling.

TheRightMethod

Center Left

71d

I'd say Conservatives grossly underestimate the amount of in-fighting and disagreement there is within progressive politics.

u/Kakamile avatar

Kakamile

Social Democrat

71d

Or when there is disagreement, that it's a bad thing.

2 more replies

u/DoctorWatchamacallit avatar

DoctorWatchamacallit

Liberal

71d

one of my more liberal friends likes to joke that the scene from Life of Brian where they had the Judean People's Front arguing with the People's Front of Judea is the perfect encapsulation of liberal infighting.

u/54_savoy avatar

54_savoy

Democrat

71d

Splitter!

We pretend we work, they pretend they pay us." In lot's

saying: "If everything belongs to everyone, then nobody has anything."

China's cautious liberalisation policy as social, and political stability has been the very foundation of the ongoing development. At this transitional stage, China cannot afford to swiftly embrace western-style democracy because it risks civil turmoil - as seen in many developing countries.

I am Anti Woke Communism

I am ok with the UK having NHS (but there are negatives and corruption within the NHS), it would be interesting to replace the UK’s NHS with a US type model with consumer driven health care but with vouchers for Brits to travel and buy cheaper and more quality health insurance in countries that have better and cheaper healthcare system than the UK has now . This would be for left acceleration reasons to force the UK to create a less corrupt, less negative, more free, more public and more state healthcare system than they have with the current NHS

Though I do sometimes look at the profit motive of Capitalism in a non bad light (my fiscal views are all over the place).

Anti racism is essential for worker solidarity. You can't be socialist without being against racism. That being said, American leftist discourse does not emphasize class enough though in my opinion. Patenti called them ABCs: anything but class. Without a strong class element the black liberation movement will just fall to petty bourgoise fake woke grifting

Real quick, I want to make a somewhat picky objection: The "ultimate goal" of Anarchism is not "a liberated society" but liberation of all people (from the standpoint of the social anarchist) or liberation of oneself (from the standpoint of the individualist anarchist). In practice, both ideas applied by groups of people should be able to produce the same result - Anarchy.

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 8. [CW: sexual harassment] Vaush is a self-confessed sexual harasser. Despite this ‘apology’ he went on to ‘joke’ about scaring his victim into shutting up, said he had ‘done nothing to feel remorseful for’ and ‘nothing to apologise over’. In fact, his own sysadmin suggested he change his handle to hide from sexual harassment allegations.

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

u/IDoNotKnow4475 avatar

IDoNotKnow4475

Tranarcho Communist 🏳️‍⚧️☭

294d

This is another good introductory Vaush fact! You're a great bot!

u/AutoModerator avatar

AutoModerator

294d

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 10. In response to a Tweet saying the left ‘should stand up for the weak and vulnerable’ Vaush replied “Yeah, enjoy your Left, built on weakness and a collective inability to criticise one another. I’ll be over here building my left, which isn’t full of mentally ill crybabies desperately carving out safe spaces and whining about criticism. Debate it if you want, elsewise fuck off”

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

u/JimblesNewtronbo avatar

JimblesNewtronbo

294d

will 2 bots be summoned at the same time? vaush aoc

u/AutoModerator avatar

AutoModerator

294d

Thanks for signing up to AOC facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about AOC.

Fact 3. AOC went back on her promise to “only back progressive Democrat candidates” by supporting Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

u/AutoModerator avatar

AutoModerator

294d

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 2. Vaush laughed at a comic mocking trans suicides (drawn by the neo-Nazi Stonetoss), describing it as “pretty fucking funny.”

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

that Hitler was a left-wing socialist once and for all : r/socialism - Reddit

Nov 28, 2017 — You could even argue paternalistic conservatism is a right wing variant, though many would disagree. Either way, Hitler was not a socialist ...

Conservatism in the 60s is much different than what it is now. Conservatism now is more like progressivism in the 80’s.

xactly. I know most Reddit users are American, but it's useful to get a European perspective on things. In Europe we'd describe Christian Democrats as economic liberals, which has a totally different meaning than in the stat

u/newenglandredshirt avatar

newenglandredshirt

171d

Is that really what this cartoon is saying, though? Yes, the Black Power movement's intention is to uplift people against racism and the White Power movement tries to keep non-white people down. I'm not denying that. But the history is much more nuanced.

The Black Power movement of the 1960s is rooted in the systemic inequalities faced by black people in the United States. Why are those inequalities there? The short answer is the post-Reconstruction "reforms" made primarily in the south by the plantation owners who had lost their free labor when slavery was abolished.

As far as the racist White Power movement: although it has its roots in colonial racism and ethnonationalism, this was weaponized by the capitalist class before the Civil War so that poor whites wouldn't question their place beneath the bootheel of the rich gentry. (Reading recommendation: Poor Whites and Slavery in the Antebellum South)

tl;dr this cartoon is actually much deeper than the racist surface interpretation of "white power and black power are the same".

u/hexomer avatar

hexomer

171d

Fair enough but seems like the comments disagree with you. Having said that, it’s still a poor comic even with context

The goal of this subreddit is to point out the hypocrisy of the centrist types who often align with (sometimes extreme) right wing views. You are not being clever when you make a comment, modmail, or MS paint comic about how this is not a TRUE CENTRIST sub. The rules are in place to prevent hateful rhetoric from being discussed. If you avoid hateful rhetoric, you can express your viewpoint, but don't throw a fit when people disagree with you.

EDIT: Here are those promised mod mails

You know what, I'll throw OP a bone here. It's definitely a "both sides" issue in the sense that the US's military industrial complex has their hands all over this just like Russia's imperialism does, but that doesn't make both sides equally complicit. Russia is demonstrably more in the wrong. Democratic Europe specifically has a vested interest in protecting Ukraine's sovereignty. This isn't "enlightened centrism" as we're used to but it's definitely "both sides" reductivism that only defends Russia's occupation of Ukraine

God I wish Vaush could stick up for trans people without also being horribly misogynistic. Telling women it’s time to “shutup and start apologizing” is not a good way to get people to listen to you.

But it’s Vaush and we all know he can’t stop being a misogynist to save his life. Additionally his weird takes on CP and children being able to consent!

u/ChrisCrossX avatar

ChrisCrossX

151d

Him constantly talking about CP must be the libertarian part of his libertarian socialist ideology.

u/Aliii761 avatar

Aliii761

151d

Makes sense

While I absolutely have sympathy for the "blame the government, not the people" line, the problem with Israel is not with the policies of this specific administration, but rather with the entire concept of what Israel is supposed to be--an ethnostate built on stolen land. And just as the majority of white Americans and British colonists supported genocide of Native Americans, the majority of Israelis supports the occupation of Palestinian land.

The "fair" solution would be a single democratic Palestinian state with no official religion or ethnicity. Find me the major force in Israeli politics that supports such a thing, and then we can talk about showing proper sympathy.

u/LastFreeName436 avatar

LastFreeName436

86d

“neither party is meaningfully equipped to deal with our societal issues so we need a politically radical solution outside the system” is different than enlightened centrism, which is “radicalism is bad and we should refuse to act as much as possible”

critique of enlighten centrism is fundamentallya critique of false equivalency. False equivalency is found throughout the political spectrum.

I agree, both parties are fairly right wing, but one is clearly worse and more dangerous when in power. Pointing this out is central to this subreddits history.

u/FriendlyChimney avatar

FriendlyChimney

This sub has a lot of Yang fans. He's pretty left of center on most stuff.

u/girl_inform_me avatar

girl_inform_me

Idk. I really like him. I don't think he should be President but I'm happy to have him in the debates.

u/djosephwalsh avatar

djosephwalsh

Not trying to argue or anything. But why do you think he should not be president?

u/GandalfTheOdd avatar

GandalfTheOdd

It's that his ONLY policy is UBI and he wants to use UBI to replace all the other social safety net. He's a nazbol sympathizer and he's also just really fukin weird

I want equal distribution of economic power. Therefore, I feel that all macro economic decisions, like, decisions on running the whole economy should be made by the citizen body , collectively and without representation. But I feel that, micro economic decisions at work or at home should be made by the individual production or consumption unit via a proposed system of vouchers. I want an eventual economic democracy that is the authority of the community in the economic sphere I feel that economic democracy today is only viable at the level of the confederated demoi. This involves the ownership and control of the means of production by the demos. This would be radically different from the capitalist and 'socialist' growth economy. This would be different from various types of collectivist capitalism, like workers' control and the milder versions which are suggested by post-Keynesian social democrats. Therefore, the demos, becomes the authentic unit of economic life. To get to this ideal system, demotic self reliance, demotic ownership of the means of production, and confederal allocation of resources are prerequisites to achieve this Demotic self reliance means radical decentralization and collective self sufficiency, in the sense of relying on the resources of other demos' instead of via autarky. Demotic ownership of productive resources leads to the politicization of the economy (the real synthesis of economy and polity). This is like this because economic decision making is carried out by the entire community, via demotic assemblies, where the people make the fundamental macro economic decisions which affect the whole community (as citizens, instead of as vocationally oriented groups like workers) Workers, apart from their participatory work in the demotic decisions regarding the overall planning targets, would also participate in this (in the above broad sense of groups who are vocationally oriented) in their respective workplace assemblies. This process would be of modifying and implementing the Democratic Plan and also in running their own workplace. The resource allocation of Confederal is a must because, although self reliance does allow many decisions to be made at the community level, there is a lot to be decided at the regional, national and supra-national level. However, the delegates (other than than representatives) are the ones with specific the mandates from the demotic assemblies whom are involved in a confederal demotic planning process that, in conjunction with the proposed system of vouchers, would effect the resource allocation in a confederal inclusive democracy. A model of economic democracy, as an important cog of an inclusive democracy. The main characteristic of this proposed model, which also differentiates this from the socialist planning models, is that it explicitly presupposes a stateless, moneyless and market less economy which have precluded private wealth accumulation and privilege institutionalisation for some sections of society, while not relying on a ‘mythical’ post scarcity state of abundance, or sacrificing our freedom of choice. The proposed system will do the following: meet the real needs of all citizens, which requires basic macro economic decisions must be made democratically, securing freedom of choice, this requires that the individual make important decisions affecting their own life (like what work to do, what to consume etc.) We need democratic planning, that would involve a process with feedback between workplace, demotic and confederal assemblies I feel that meeting basic needs is a fundamental human right that should be guaranteed to all who are in a physical condition to offer a minimal amount of work (satisfaction according to need) as opposed to having health care or public parks be free for all (consumption need model) and people being able to make particular need requests that are based on consumption, addressed case by case by others in the economy Remuneration according to the ‘need’ of each person' should only be applied in exceptional cases of basic needs and not to all of the needs that are defined as needs by the citizens' assemblies (as the Inclusive Democracy project declares). This would go beyond economic justice, and would be applied through norm four in appropriate situations such as in cases of illness, catastrophe, incapacity etc I feel that the equal distribution of power in institutions (like workplaces, households, educational institutions, economic institutions, cultural institutions etc) and self management should be secured by creating people assemblies to be involved in each workplace or education place (i.e workers', student and teachers' assemblies respectively) that, within the framework of citizens' demotic decisions that are taken by assemblies in regards to the general aims of production, education and culture respectively , make all vital decisions about the functioning aspects of these places. These assemblies should be federated at the regional and confederal levels in order for the confederal assemblies of workers, teachers, students etc can get involved with a constant interaction process with the citizens' confederal assemblies to define the general interest of society There should be a removal of the divide between the household and the public realm. Maybe the oikos and its values can be a substitute for the polis and its politics This may involve dissolving the public into the private or we can go the other way, and at least try to remove the public/private divide by dissolving all of our private space into a singular public, a socialized or fraternal state sphere but in a V Lenin New Economics way which allows some privatization . Another idea would be to recognize that the household belongs to the private realm, but to 'democratise' the household in the sense that its relationships should take on democratic characteristics and that the household should take a form which is consistent with the freedom of all its members. However the bigger issue is sustaining and enhancing the autonomy of the public snd private realms, such institutional arrangements should generally be adopted to introduce democracy at the household level and the social realm level (i.e in the workplace, educational establishment and so on) while at the same time enhancing the institutional arrangements of political and economic democracy So I feel that effective democracy is only doable if free time is distributed equally among all citizens, and that requires ending the present hierarchical relations within the household, the workplace and other places. Moreover, social realm democracy (like in the household), should require institutional arrangements that recognize the household’s character as a need satisfier and thus integrate the care and services that the household provides into the general scheme of needs satisfaction

We are 50–100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they crush us.

— Joseph Stalin[13]

Industrialization in the Soviet Union

CosmicRaccoonCometh

I don't think she was just being funny and playing with words. Goldman's anarchism was very much influenced by Nietzsche, and her writing shows quite clearly this influence (pieces like 'Minorities vs Majorities' for instance), and how she (much like Novatore) read Nietzsche's particular conception of "aristocracy" as something compatible with her own desires for anarchy.

She’s being funny and playing with words. It’s also a pretty sad moment for her life.

Full comment makes more sense:

My eagerness to go on a long tour paled under the fascination of my lover. A month of joy and abandon followed, but my dream was soon to suffer a painful awakening.

It was caused by Nietzsche. Ever since my return from Vienna I had been hoping that Ed would read my books. I had asked him to do so and he promised he would when he had more time. It made me very sad to find Ed so indifferent to the new literary forces in the world. One evening we were gathered at Justus’s place at a farewell party. James Huneker was present and a young friend of ours, P. Yelineck, a talented painter. They began discussing Nietzsche. I took part, expressing my enthusiasm over the great poet-philosopher and dwelling on the impression of his works on me. Huneker was surprised. “I did not know you were interested in anything outside of propaganda,” he remarked. “That is because you don’t know anything about anarchism,” I replied, “else you would understand that it embraces every phase of life and effort and that it undermines the old, outlived values.”

Yelineck asserted that he was an anarchist because he was an artist; all creative people must be anarchists, he held, because they need scope and freedom for their expression. Hunker insisted that art has nothing to do with any ism. “Nietzsche himself is the proof of it,” he argued; “he is an aristocrat, his ideal is the superman because he has no sympathy with or faith in the common herd.” I pointed out that Nietzsche was not a social theorist but a poet, a rebel and innovator. His aristocracy was neither of birth nor of purse; it was of the spirit. In that respect Nietzsche was an anarchist, and all true anarchists were aristocrats, I said.

Then Ed spoke. His voice sounded cold and constrained, and I sensed the tempest behind it. “Nietzsche is a fool,” he said, “a man with a diseased mind. He was doomed from birth to the idiocy which finally overtook him. He will be forgotten in less than a decade, and so will all those other pseudo-moderns. They are contortionists in comparison with the truly great of the past.”

“But you haven’t read Nietzsche!” I objected heatedly; “how can you talk about him?” “Oh, yes, I have,” he retorted, “I read long ago all the silly books you brought from abroad.” I was dumbfounded. Huneker and Yelineck turned on Ed, but my hurt was too great to continue the discussion.

u/CosmicRaccoonCometh avatar

CosmicRaccoonCometh

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

Hmm, yea that's likely. Maybe I'll try and explain myself by "play with words" and if I'm still a bit off the mark let me know?

By playing with words I'm referring to that process in say Proudhon's 'not kings and not the every man is a king we demand no man a king' or his claiming of anarchy as a positive value and "order" against its long historical association with chaos, or Bakunin's arguments against authority but by turning it on its head where I accept authority if we accept that authority is nothing or temporary, or Marx's argument structure of 'let's assume you are correct and see where that leads us.'

So in her "His aristocracy was neither of birth nor of purse; it was of the spirit. In that respect..." I'm thinking she's playing around with the term or accepting someone's remarks and further playing with the idea. But I also know dick about Nietzsche so if there's something else there I'm interested.

u/CosmicRaccoonCometh avatar

CosmicRaccoonCometh

Nietzsche spoke about a particular conception of aristocracy. And, as Goldman says, it wasn't based on the old aristocracy (Nietzsche specifically rejects what he calls the aristocracy of "the little von"), nor was it an aristocracy based on money. Nietzsche wanted a new aristocracy that would shatter the current values and create new values.

Goldman, Novatore and other anarchists saw their own anarchistic desires and projects as a possible version of doing exactly that -- of destroying the old order, shattering old values, and creating space for the creation of new values based on an uncompromising love of vitality. In short, Goldman and other anarchists identified their own anarchism as a version of Nietzsche's conception of aristocracy, hence you get Goldman here speaking of true anarchists as aristocrats, or you get Novatore talking about his "libertarian aristocracy".

So, she isn't just playing word games, she is rather being sincere, and demonstrating the way Nietzsche importantly influenced how she conceived of her desire and actions for anarchism.

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

Huh. That’s interesting. Thanks for clarification.

u/CosmicRaccoonCometh avatar

CosmicRaccoonCometh

What one must understand is what Goldman means (and doesn't mean) by "aristocrat".

Goldman, and many other anarchists, were heavily influenced by Nietzsche, including Nietzsche's concept of a "new aristocracy". These anarchists influenced by Nietzsche saw in their anarchism an example of Nietzsche's idea of a new aristocracy -- more specifically, they saw the individuals willing to fight and destroy the current order, and willing to struggle and wrought a new world and new values , they saw them as fitting into Nietzsche's concept of a new aristocracy.

All of these anarchists (unlike Nietzsche) are very clear in their writing and lives that they do not have in mind any sort of material domination when they speak of "aristocracy", so, for this reason, the "aristocracy" they have in mind is not incompatible with anarchism at all.

I wrote up a little discussion over on /r/debateanarchism about this elitist strain in anarchism a while back, and it is sort of relevant to addressing your concern with Goldman's talk of aristocracy here: Anarchist Elitism, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Libertarian Aristocracy, the tl;dr of it being that, while there is indeed an elitist strain that often pops up in anarchism, that anarchists for whom such elitism doesn't resonate shouldn't be concerned with this or try to tear it down, since this anarchist elitism is still part of the shared anarchist project of overcoming authority and hierarchy. Goldman in particular does a wonderful job of showing that the goals of the social anarchist are served by the goals of the individualist anarchist (and vice versa) , thus bridging the chasm that so often seems to exist between the individualist and the social anarchist.

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

Read Minorities versus Majorities. Emma was l

mean??? Obviously the rich are the only people that care about the poor.

Phat /s

u/elrathj avatar

elrathj

Ugh. I feel like the number of anarchists would double overnight if people knew what anarchism actually meant.

The anti- anarchist propaganda is some of the most successful I can think of.

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

Very true. My English teacher had us describe our perfect society and I described an anarchist commune, and everyone was on board. However, the minute I said it was an anarchist commune my teacher laug

"anarcho aristocrat". site:reddit.com from www.reddit.com

https://www.reddit.com › comments

The superior anarchism has arrived : r/GenZAncaps - Reddit

I have the mind of an Anarcho-Capitalist and the physique of an Anarcho-Aristocrat. Upvote 3. Downvote. Reply. 5 more replies. Additional comment actions.

https://www.reddit.com › comments

To actual Gen Z's : r/GenZAncaps - Reddit

Where's the anarcho-aristocrat option? I can't vote on this. আপভোট ১ ডাউনভোট. উত্তর দিন. u/ShenBapiro20 অবতার ...

Get the answer you’re looking for added to the

y Voice: Skeptics right to question man-made warming - Argus Leader

Jan 12, 2018 — David Rothbard and Craig Rucker. Many people are actively worried about global warming. And it frustrates them that skeptics and “deniers” ... usatoday

e is this god awful article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/09/02/where-did-donald-trump-get-his-racialized-rhetoric-from-libertarians/?utm_term=.c26fb42101ae

This little piece of slander doesn't approach providing evidence for any of it's absurd claims. My favorite is the allegation of Anti-Semitism against Ayn Rand, Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard. I'm guessing this 10 penny fairy didn't bother googling around to find out that these 3 people happened to be Jewish. The left has abandoned any shred of intellectual honesty or consistency they used to cling to. The now have only one tool, the word racist, and they employ it without discretion or hesitation.

There are 2 main reasons as to why so many schools are choosing to forego hosting Halloween celebrations: the fear that the festivities will make some students and staff feel alienated due to various personal or cultural and religious reasons.Oct 31, 2021

u/[deleted] avatar

[deleted]

Von Mises = Jewish

Anti-Semitism = Anti-Jewish

Does not compute

u/MakeThePieBigger avatar

MakeThePieBigger

Murray Rothbard

Didn't you hear that you're only a minority if you're left-wing. There is no such thing as right-wing Jew, or Black person or Asian. They become honorary Aryans /s

People are not gay, straight, trans or bi - they are either nasty or nice . That’s how I judge everybody I meet , your sexual orientation is exactly that- yours and is no basis on which to be judged by others , unless it is of a sick criminal nature that is harmful .

I am against repealing Obamacare , as the repeal of Obamacare would massively add to the national debt.

While I disagree with Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage, I believe that all Americans have the right to contract,” the Kentucky senator wrote in the op-ed, published Sunday night.

The government should not prevent people from doing so, Paul said, adding that “does not mean that the government must confer a special imprimatur upon a new definition of marriage.”

Perhaps the time has come to examine whether or not governmental recognition of marriage is a good idea, for either party, Paul said.

“Since government has been involved in marriage, they have done what they always do — taxed it, regulated it, and now redefined it,” he wrote. “It is hard to argue that government’s involvement in marriage has made it better, a fact also not surprising to those who believe government does little right.”

I am so angry at the US warmongering in the Middle East for decades that I am tempted to be snaringly passive to the new Taliban of Afghanistan soley as a FU to the neocon, imperialist US for their decades of Middle East imperialism and Middle East oil pillaging (ie for liberal anti war reasons like when the Iraq War protestors of the 2000s were showing Pro Taliban signs at protests solely out of spite for the US's warmongering in the Middle East) However, for me I am only tempted to do the above and not as much as those protestors did and only morally. I do not support the Taliban and I don’t sympathize with their barbarism, but I am refreshed to see bourgeois internationalism and cultural imperialism lose. Afghanistan's humiliation will only have been worth it if it replaces its old paradigm with new thoughts

yeah, only one joe i support

ning up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 26. Vaush unironically endorsed Keynesian economics, stating “I feel neo-Keynesian economists have the answer.”

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically ning up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 26. Vaush unironically endorsed Keynesian economics, stating “I feel neo-Keynesian economists have the answer.”

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically

defended the consumption of child pornogrpahy because ‘there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism’. This paints a deeply troubling picture when added to his history of sexually innapropriate behaviour (see Vaush Fact 8), his sharing of drawn CP on Twitter (see Vaush Fact 25) , his claim that under socialism the age of consent "should be lowered" and this exchange on Discord.

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 6. Vaush said Black people trying to preserve their culture (that was systematically eradicated) is “exactly the same as white nationalism”.

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 6. Vaush said Black people trying to preserve their culture (that was systematically eradicated) is “exactly the same as white nationalism”.

AutoModerator

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.

Fact 12. Vaush called the LGBT community ‘cancerous as fuck.’

For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.

I am a bot, and this action was performed

Vaush posted a meme saying that socialism must be ‘balanced with minority rights’, a clear nod to class reductionists.

For another Vaush fact reply

felt that way when I was a liberal pro gay person before I turned right ward and saw the light so I totally recognized and acknowledge those concerns that the gays and pro gay people have, which is why I am able to between sensitively pity in a sympathetic way and pretty much empathize with gays and pro gays even though I am against gay marriages that infringe on other people’s rights and not a supporter of people being gay

Moreover, even though I am no longer pro gay, that 2000 decade, liberal pro gay side of me didn't just magically vanish when I stopped being pro gay. That 2000s decade liberal pro gay side of me that I use to have before I stopped being pro gay is currently in a vegetative state inside of me as it lacks cognitive functionality.

Despite me being against gay rights that infringe on other people’s rights and gay marriages that infringe on other people’s rights however somewhere between sensitively pitying in a sympathetic way and pretty much empathizing with gays or pro gay people on the unconditional gay marriage issue and unconditional gay rights etc in general.

Here are some notable people who I am more pro gay than:

Every Pope since Peter including Pope Francis, the vast majority of Noble Peace Prize winners who died before the 20th century, the US's Founding Fathers, Charles Darwin, the vast vast majority of 19th century Abolitionists (ie Mark Twain, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglas), Thomas Edison, Theodore Roosevelt, Helen Keller, Amelia Earhardt, Albert Einstein, Henry Ford, Simon Wiesenthal, Jonas Salk, FDR, Winston Churchill, the vast vast majority of Allied troops who fought in World War II, Walt Disney, Mother Teresa, Eleanor Roosevelt, Rosa Parks, JFK, the clear to vast majority of Freedom riders from the 1950s/1960s, Martin Luther King Jr, Pope John Paul II, Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama during his first term in office as President

Trotskyistm is a great gateway political ideology for much better political ideologies (like my combined fiscal views in this blog)

no ab freedom. stars man stars ocean want not wish j hagee.

https://www.reddit.com › efvchi › h...

How America is reverting back to the feudal age : r/politics - Reddit

Dec 26, 2019 — Bernie would not be a 'moderate conservative' in Europe. He'd fit in with the left pretty well, in fact, his brother is a spokesperson for ...

Get

To go off of your question to the other guy I would differ from say social democracy in that I don't believe reciprocity is important. Social democracies believe in taking care of people, but also believe citizens have certain duties and obligations to fill like work and military service at times. I only believe in such things insofar as necessary for the functioning of society. In my ideal world no one would be obligated to do anything and we would all be able to live as we want. I emphasize basic income for this reason. It's a safety net that differs from most in the sense that it's just an unconditional check and you're free to do what you want with it and beyond that you figure it out.

niversal Healthcare Does Not Mean Government Healthcare - Center for a Stateless Society

May 12, 2012 — Left-Libertarian - Classics. Universal Healthcare Does Not Mean Government Healthcare. Charles Johnson | December 23rd, 2012

Blacknat.png Black Nationalism - I didn't say that socialist racial states can't be made by inferiors blacks... based! But like above, stop hating on BASED whites. Despite that, and many of you being descended from hereditary reactionaries, some of your views are fairly based, especially those wanting "Black Juche" which sounds really epic Now if only we can get Wjuche.png white Juche. Though we probably will need to remain separate in our own ethnostates, since most of you are not of the master race and thus cannot become "true" communists, although one of you is 100% /OURGUY/ and has proven to us that a true Afro-Slavo-Aryan does in fact exist.

Libertarian.png Libertarianism - Your economics are cringe but your gun rights are based and your foreign policy would be a useful measure to end US imperialism.

Natlib.png National Libertarianism - Improved version of above *specially

What if there is an alternate history where blacks and whites places in history in the US, Canada, Europe, Africa and the rest of the world was reversed from the beginning of time. In that alternate history, with blacks being the dominant race-ethnicty in the US from the colonial period and onward and whites being the minority race in the US from the colonial period and onward, how would blacks have treated whites in the US in that alternate history world? Would blacks have been racist against whites in the US in that hypothetical world? In that alternate history world, would blacks have done to whites in the US most of or everything that whites did to blacks in the US in our world?

What if there is an alternate history where Latinos/Latinas and whites places in history in the US, Canada, Europe, Africa and the rest of the world was reversed from the beginning of time. In that alternate history, with Latinos/Latinas being the dominant race-ethnicty in the US from the colonial period and onward and whites being the minority race in the US from the colonial period and onward, how would Latinos/Latinas have treated whites in the US in that alternate history world? Would Latinos/Latinas have been racist against whites in the US in that hypothetical world? In that alternate history world, would Latinos/Latinas have done to whites in the US most of or everything that whites did to Latinos/Latinas in the US in our world?

Whether the Democrats causing this is on purpose or by negligence/nihilism is moot, as noted below, the

Search This Blog

rghtcnvvethgts

leftovers

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

blog views

Parallel Right Mises Paleolibertarian , Left libertarian, Libertarian Party Anarchism

Parallel Far left blog Left Wing Left Libertarian