• Far-right insurgent Jair Bolsonaro elected President of Brazil
    249 replies, posted
NONE of the left wing parties that took part in this years election were proposing a collectivization of the economy. All of them were simply against an unregulated free market. Is it really that hard for you to admit that you have a flawed understanding of left wing politics, which is irreconcilable with social democracy?
Social democracy is often referred to as 'politics against the market' but that does not mean that there is no free market at all lol. It merely intends to regulate and make people less reliant on the market by making essential public services government-owned and providing citizens a safety-net against risks and poverty in general.
You only does nothing more than right-wing shitposting than "True Centrist" speak. So stop saying you are "True centrist".
It's also false, because as we know, Gamecube is the true console choice of True Centrist. Also, the fact that True Centrist is an attempt to simply move the overton window further to the right, by claiming the current right-side ideas as centrist.
It's a dumb argument because you're trying to prove that Norway's economics are more right wing than the US' economics, when they absolutely aren't.
A free market can absolutely be part of a left wing ideology. You yourself said that politics isn't black and white, and then tried to prove Norway is a right wing economy by using some black and white bullshit. The Nordic states utilise strong free markets, with strong government intervention and high level regulations (on the banks, for example) to curb excesses and dampen potential crisis. They have high progressive tax rates, extensive government funded programs, large state ownership of key industries, state control in at least 25% of publicly listed companies. These measures aim to flatten wealth distribution and as I said, curb free market excesses and dampen potential crises. Your main thesis is that Norway is a right wing economy, because free market (libertarian as you said?). Look at how much money the government collects, then look at how they choose to distribute this money, and again try and explain how Norway is a right wing libertarian economy.
That's not what I said. I said you degenerated multiple times into dictatorship and dealt with more threats from radical mass movements because of your political traditions. Anarchism, Marxism, syndicalism, nationalism, etc. all owe their growth in part to France's history since 1789. Your qualities here influence your center in a way that doesn't exist in the Anglosphere. That doesn't mean America is to the right of you. I wouldn't say any of these things are particularly socialist, it's another form of progressive disinformation besides the idea that we are wildly to the right of Europe. Europe owes 'socialism' to its right as much as its left, since its conservatives were not liberal-conservatives for most of recent history. Whether its Benjamin Disraeli, de Gaulle, or Bismarck, there's no left-wing monopoly on these policies and that kind of conservatism suffered the same as the left did during the death of Keynesianism in the 70s. My point was not that we are to the right of you, it's that our political traditions down to interpretation of the Enlightenment are considerably different. They are more liberal than yours. Never said they weren't, and our political values are better than yours for it. What I'm disputing is that this puts us to your right. It doesn't, and progressive ideology is largely a European import. That's because most of the developed world is in the European continent, where the right wing often has very different ideas than ours and can't be described as liberal-conservative. It's the same for the left. Our left consists of left-liberals, the European left trends illiberal. It's why you have a guy like Melenchon receiving 20% of the vote.
And Onyx Lorenzoni, the very first person in this scandal to admit to receiving illicit donations, who got off scot-free, is poised to be in government. Meanwhile, Bolsonaro's announced the fusion of the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of the Environment (great mix! bye bye Amazon!). He is also consolidating the Ministry of Treasury, Ministry of Planning/Budget, and Ministry of Industry and Commerce, under the sole leadership of his economic guru, Paulo Guedes, who has been accused of corruption and embezzling, though he and his lawyers have denied it, and the investigation is still ongoing. Magno Malta (notorious power-hungry flip-flopper, also accused of corruption, for now an ally of Bolsonaro) has submitted a change to antiterrorism legislation that was to be voted on this wednesday, but the vote was postponed due to opposition. The proposed changes have been denounced by various human rights groups, as it is likely that they would criminalize peaceful protests as terrorist acts. Alberto Fraga (sentenced for corruption, complained in a leaked audio about bribes being too low) was invited by Bolsonaro to be a part of his government. It was, however, a very informal invitation, that may not end in anything. Not that it isn't funny to see the tough, no compromise, anti-corruption president so comfortably rubbing shoulders with crooks
If you say that a man is a man and a woman is a woman then it is considered hate speech by them. I consider it domestic terrorism.
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/864/859/47c.jpg
Doesn't literally everything about america have it's roots in europe? The founding fathers were largely British, The country was a cobbled together patchwork of former french, english, and spanish colonies. A lot of american law has it's roots in english common law or going further back, roman law.
im convinced Seano12 is like some warp entity that manifested from the energies of the far-right/alt-right.
Our use of British common law that we didn't change when Britain did is why we still use the word attorney, and have grand juries, and are a jus soli country.
Will maybe write a full response to this later but this post gets basic things about european and french politics wrong. Like just factually wrong. Otherwise, of course the US political spectrum is way further right than the rest of the developped world, no bullshitting about european politics changes that. Climate change, right to abortion, lgbt rights, basic modern workers rights, universal healthcare, maternal leave and many other basic developped country policies are still being debated in the US. While an entire political camp is trying to convince their voters that climate change is a hoax in the US, every other developped country is debating what's the best way to approach dealing with the issue and that's just all you need to know. Wether or not you think it's a good thing you just can't pretend the discourse isnt insanely shifted right in the US.
You're proving my point.
Given your post history, im not sure you're entirely there either. By that, i mean mentally. Due to how disjointed and bizarre your posts tend to get. And also the fact you posted like gore pics and other fucked up shit in OIFY. And countless times you go "DEAD NIGGERS" or "NIGGER LOVER". Like i get OIFY is suppose to be shitpost central and people post that shit in an ironic way, but from what i've seen. You're the "Everyone thought he was joking but Oh fuck he's actually serious" type.
By calling me alt-right you are essentially saying that I am engaging in some sort of hate speech. Which proves my point that hard leftists believe any opposing viewpoint, however mild, is essentially hate speech. This bullshit is exactly why populism is on the rise as (beautifully) illustrated by my previous post. Also I am a very stable genius.
http://i.imgur.com/2xWR4um.png https://puu.sh/BUmqm.png https://puu.sh/BUmkq.png https://puu.sh/BUmkw.png STABLE GENIUS
he's baiting for replies and attention, his actual stance is unfounded garbage and his reasoning doesn't exist. how about we don't flood the thread with this nobody and just move on?
Stay safe and sane @zukriuchen
It does, and you're right. But, from my understanding and what I was taught (and my professors were not right-wing), we disproportionately drew from Scottish and English thinkers. We lacked the radicalism of the French revolution or the 1848ers and, basically, were founded on half a revolution in comparison. It has a lot to do with lacking a feudal history and also being the spawn of Britain. I think it's easy to mistake that as meaning we're to the right of Europe, but that's really up for debate and largely just an excuse for progressives to portray America as backwards and not having a true left since the New Deal era, if that. Some think Debs and the IWW were the last time we had a real left wing. It's how they portray the country as fringe and not themselves. The truth is they are not part of any historical mandate to 'correct' anything about us, original American progressivism wasn't liberal at all and FDR wasn't all that much either, and they're doing the country as disservice by importing the eurocontinental left. It has directly factored into polarization today, since the right looks at growing anti-capitalism and other subtly post-Western feelings as a threat to liberalism informed by tribalism and stakeless young people who have poor prospects to own a home, have a stable family, climb out of debt, and otherwise reach the middle class. The left just looks at it as an opportunity to break out of the grip of Third Way democrats, reactionary middle america, etc. and rehash the snubbed left-wing of the 60s which reached across the Atlantic. We are a large, heterogeneous, and postcolonial country, and our left and right reflects a balance that takes this into account. Our debates are about the degree government should ensure access to basic freedoms, expand democracy, and help economic development vs the degree state/local governments and private initiative should be empowered to help ensure a healthy political and economic balance within a federated union. It's 'city on a hill' liberalism and idealism versus 'conservative small town' liberalism and realism. Postmodern challenges have greatly damaged this arrangement of ours by hallowing out the middle class and growing inequality, growing a gap between city and countryside, requiring us to take measures to sustain long-term growth in our debt-driven system that mean viewing assimilation and equal development as a lower priority, having our education system not teaching Western civ, and renewing a debate over what our political influence on the world should be after the collapse of the USSR. Our renewed culture war is provoked by all this change leaving a lot of the country's future values up for grabs. Some do, yes, but I think much of this usually has to do with different perspectives on the role of government rather than outright rejecting rights or equality. Most libertarians and conservatives I know are not anti-egalitarian, for example, they just think equity is stupid, radical democratic movements are just rent-seeking movements, and you're better off peacefully achieving equality by prioritizing negative liberty over positive liberty and federal regulation. That's hardly reactionary. This idea that we are so right wing that we are a theocracy, oppress our workers, and have rampant out of control local government doing batshit things is just a vengeful, manipulative stereotype. Not everyone appreciates America's export of its political culture and plenty of people in Europe, especially on the continent, see it as very foreign. It works in reverse too, part of the reason our progressive left can be so disliked is because they are seen as detached middle class whites banking on globalization eroding the economic and therefore political gap with Europe.
Did you eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?
It's Seano. Consider his posts art, and you'll be less upset.
I thought you said the rights of the individual supercedes the right of the collective? Are those people not individuals who's individual rights ought to be respected so they can pursue their own path to happiness? It doesn't actually affect you at all to just nod and smile and let them get on with it, does it? I'm just trying to understand. Half of the UK, US and now Brazil consists of people like this. Mocking half the country isn't going to work. We're stuck with massive divides straight down the middle and the only way to start healing the divide is understanding the root of the issues. It might not make any sense in terms of reasoning, to you, but there must be a way seano thinks the way he does.
...But england itself has roots in the french? More than a few kings only spoke french and for a long period of time, french was the most commonly spoken tongue in england? It permanently changed the english language as we know it? I don't even know what you're arguing tbh. French people are radical and bad? English people not radical, not bad?
You know, I think you employ tactics in how you word, and create your arguments that are very similar to the shit pseudo intellectuals do.
Its almost like if you don't construct bullshit dishonest arguments around semantics and actually compare the policies of each countries, you'll realise that the US is currenly the furthest right developped country by far.
You're telling me those white things on the side of the house weren't pieces of white chocolate?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.