Those are all serious risks, but there is something I think such a thread could be useful for - permitting debate without having to pander to those who reject the premise. For example, we could argue "what's the best way to run socialized healthcare", and anyone who shows up all "hurr durr if you didn't want to die of butt aids you shouldn't have chosen to be poor" can be ignored as a troll instead of debated on the level. Debate with such people will have to happen eventually, compromises may have to be made, but an internal debate of "what's the left's proposal?" doesn't need to lend them a voice, much as the right doesn't lend leftists a voice when they try to figure out what they're trying to accomplish.
I'd be particularly interested in a gun-control debate that isn't simply fighting for the idea that any gun control is reasonable, and not hijacked by molon-labe-shouting gunhumpers trying to legalize nukes. Because let's face it, most of the American left's attempts at gun control are just shoddy legislation. If we came forward and presented something sane, well-defined and respectful of legitimate uses (while still, y'know, actually being gun control), we might actually be able to get the sensible gunowners on board. I've been pondering a tiered-licensing system that I think could actually work.
I don't think ideas are good just because they're bipartisan. I don't think going to the iraq war was good just because both democrats and republicans voted for it.
Which isn't to say radical ideas are always better, but I don't see the point in putting bipartisanship on a pedestal.
Holy shit that iraq strawman, I laughed a lot.
Of course bipartisanship can yield results like that, it is in essence just a check and balance, bring some duality to the table to balance out people who would otherwise fall off the deep end.
Of course my viewpoint is eclectic - because I reject any sort of cohesive theory-of-everything, any historical narrative declaring "the story of mankind is the story of class warfare between the proletariat and the aristocracy", I end up with no coherent grand idea underlying everything. Except, of course, that everything should work. If Randian ultra-capitalism or Maoist agrarian-focused communism worked, I'd have incorporated such ideas into my viewpoint. I didn't, because they didn't, but if they had, I would have.
Nationalizing a business would be an extreme measure, only taken if the nature of the business is such that it cannot remain at least partially free-market. Some industries just naturally trend towards a monopoly, such as telecoms or healthcare - and once a monopoly is established, you lose out on most of the benefits of a free-market economy anyways. As long as there is actual competition for a failed business, I would not expect nationalizing it to be the best choice - and since there's millions of farms and banks, I don't see them being nationalized under any sensible government.
Also, by "directs the market" I mostly refer to making sure that there are no hidden costs, either by regulating them away or by taxing them so they appear in the cost. For instance, coal-burning power plants cause a huge social cost from all the mercury they spit out, but that's not really factored in to their prices. A stiff tax on such emissions would make the price of electricity from a coal plant reflect that otherwise-hidden cost, and so allow the market to naturally chose a better solution where available.
There is a certain danger in exposing people to more radical ways of thinking (which on its face is a great thing, ignorance of alternatives leaves one worse off) without also exposing them to criticism of said ways of thinking, and it is the absence of the latter that I am mostly afraid you will find in this thread and those of its sort when you name it something like "INSERT INGROUP HERE chat".
Rhetoric has a profound impact of people, as can be seen from many people radicalized from people speaking and ranting confidently alone, not questioning whether said people have grounds to be confident in their words.
Can we have a Libertarichat or would the only posters in it be me and @EmperorScorpious ?
I like the idea of a thread for lefties, but at the same time the OP doesn't contain too much left content - I mean, film and youtube just aren't places where a whole lot of leftist thinking actually happens. The Chapo Trap House mention is great though, and the Chapo Trap House subreddit is a wonderful niche lefty community on Reddit.
That said, I'm working my way through Chomsky's Rethinking Camelot and some discussion would be totally cool.
Judging by this thread, it doesn't matter what political spirit the thread is made in, it'll be full of all of us making fun of it for existing.
[
oh us libertarians should be kinda used to that. Left hates us because we are ridiculously pro capitalism, hate the environment, hate social services, love cigarettes and want legalized gambling and guns.
Righties hate us however because we are pro drug, pro abortive rights, frown on military spending, hate supporting the church (although I'm more pro religion then some libertarian bros), want all drugs legalized and perhaps most importantly are so laisse-faire capitalist that we don't want any goverment money spent on subsidaries and whatnot. Not even roads.
You're generalizing righties and lefties in a very unfair way right now. Yes people who care about the enviroment are generally left leaning, but it's not an issue that falls on the spectrum, honestly the same goes for gambling and guns, neither are issues that really fall on the left-right spectrum. This is why I don't like the whole left-right spectrum in the first place because it doesn't apply so much to modern issues.
Yeah this kind of goes back to my post about how leftist I am vs just how much further to the left I fall compared to the right. I feel like being pro-environment, particularly when it comes to climate change, shouldn't fall under the left-right dichotomy, but it does. I don't consider myself a leftist for wanting to move away from sources of energy and practices that contribute to global warming. It just seems the sensible thing to do when you have one planet to work with.
More content for the thread and to dispel western lies that many here might have subconsciously absorbed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rgyh8wu1nI
This is satire right?
Facepunch was pretty libertarian back in the day, like 2010-2015 ish. politically it was basically just the same as reddit was at the time.
of course now that's all tapered off what with all those millennials being over the age of 15 now
This thread just sounds like diet leftypol
would the world have been improved had trotsky won at the battle of warsaw and been able to conquer and unify europe under a trotskyite government
discuss
I, for one, think this thread is a good idea and much needed.
And that said, here's some good literature.
Where my anarchos at?
I mean sure. In fact, if the environment means shit to you, go ahead and put a plastic bag over your head and suffocate. I mean who needs air or atmosphere.
I have a hard time justifying calling myself a libertarian these days, I feel.
I'm pro gun and pro drug, but I'm also heavily pro environment over business. I'm pro capitalism, but I'm not all about mega corporations running the country and have a preference to small businesses.
I hate military spending, though I believe in Just War (though the last one we had was WWII imho). I'm fairly religious. I find myself being pro-life in regards to capital punishment as much as abortion.
I'm pro gambling but because I think it would be an excellent tax revenue for the states, however I think income tax and inheritance tax is essentially theft.
Also I kind of really like roads.
I don't think I really fit into any left or right ideology. I don't think there is a cookie-cutter brand that I fit in at all.
no because the revolution was still easily defeated elsewhere and the USSR would have overstretched itself. only by self-strengthening and by liquidating the kulaks could the revolution lay the groundwork for soviet power
No because poland could not have been dfeated in any parralel universe because we are so much stringer
how do ya do fellow leftists
refugees good
white man bad
Time to blacklist everyone in RIGHTY chat.
You can't actually blacklist people yet :v
Greeting lefts today let us discuss land value tax: how it has gained approval from socialists and capitalists and whether or not it works in practice
https://i.imgur.com/QAn9zXp.jpg
Not yet comrade. But soon the purge will begin. And I we will revel in my our enemies tears.
Alright, time to unfuck this mess. This along with a handful of other threads were left open because they *can* serve a legitimate purpose to discuss politics. Start using this thread for such. Anyone shit posting after this point gets a band.
Why are gun rights a right wing policy?
Left wing is suppose to be about liberalism and freedom, yet the freedom to defend yourself with use of a gun is a very stringently conservative belief.
I fully believe that in America, if the Democrats went pro-gun they would win every election in the foreseeable future.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.