It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Myth of the Benevolent Left

page: 10
78
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

Just thought of something that might put things in perspective.

Would tweeting about a protest be the same as actually going out and marching?





originally posted by: greencmp

As long as the appropriate emoticons are deployed.



We would need to design separate and distinct sets of emoticons for Left and Right.





posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

That's called Slactivism.

No, it's not a protest by any stretch of the imagination.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Your views are, as usual, eloquently expressed and hit their mark successfully. Bravo!

Needless to say, your views here offer nothing new or original. Instead, you offer convincing evidence that 'thoroughgoing leftists' are as deluded in their dogmatism as a thoroughgoing rightist.

I'm not sure who worries me the most.

Is it the person who wants to take more of my earnings and donate them to people who will not even try to provide for themselves?

Or is it the person who would stand aside whilst people go homeless and hungry?



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Someone asked on here which right wing policies are not supported by evidence.

Trickle down economics.

Virtually every single environmental policy.

Cutting taxes on the job creators to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Really no evidence for it.

Fighting against any real wage increases that account for inflation and also vast increase in worker productivity. Wages should be much higher as a share of the economic production. Economists agree...

Universal health care or single payer. This one is one the Democrats too failed on.

Most right wing American foreign policy. Completely immoral and even war crime levels. (Iraq War, torture). The Democrats also fail on this. But the Democrats are NOT "left," they are center or center right.

The right wing consistently ignores the massive pile of research across virtually every single field regarding the causes and solutions to poverty. Literally not one single field agrees with them.... Instead they say it is about meritocracy and hard work (the first of which has been thoroughly debunked by again leading experts from sociology to economics).

Social conservatives base their views on tradition and religion, and usually nothing to do again with relevant social science research. So again, policy not based on anything objective. For example, gay marriage has zero evidence showing it is negative, but yet conservatives claim it is, with appeals to religion, tradition, and authority.


Lol since you mentioned evironmental quality. During the undercard NH debate Santorum stated he would cut restriictions so we could be more like china.... Anyone in thier right mind want to move to a chinese city right now with their air quality much less raise their children in it?



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Cypress

Oh, but Obama has stated time and time again that we should strive to be more like China.

China is a socialist/communist state-owned workers' paradise.

It is a good example of how communism and socialism do not care about the environment.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky


Needless to say, your views here offer nothing new or original. Instead, you offer convincing evidence that 'thoroughgoing leftists' are as deluded in their dogmatism as a thoroughgoing rightist.


Absolutely.



Is it the person who wants to take more of my earnings and donate them to people who will not even try to provide for themselves?

Or is it the person who would stand aside whilst people go homeless and hungry?


They are both the same person.

Until you are physically stepping in for the homeless and hungry, you are not stepping in for the homeless and hungry. As I argued, paying more taxes is pretty close to doing absolutely nothing for the poor or hungry.

edit on 23-2-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Bluesma

I think that's a cop-out. "If you're connected to the government then you are helping" is an excuse for not doing it yourself.

I'm "connected" to soldiers. But I didn't storm a beach at Normandy nor would I ever take credit for it.



"Not doing it for yourself"... I guess I don't understand your meaning there.

I think calling it "disconnected" and denying your part in it is a cop out.

"I hold no responsibility in what "it" is doing, so I have no reason to protest, vote or take any action at all besides sitting around judging."

By connected, I mean, you participate, you fund, you either choose, or let your neighbor choose what is done with that.
You are the employer of your government.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

Let me try to explain it this way -

You have an extra $5. At that point, you have a choice. You can either give it to the homeless man standing outside the Starbucks or go inside and get that coffee you've been waiting to treat yourself with all week.

The truly compassionate person realizes that the homeless man can likely make much better use out of that $5 and hands it over. Some even go above and beyond and do more to help him out - take him to the nearest shelter, buy him and entire meal, etc.

The type of leftist Les Misanthrope describes is the one who looks at his $5 and says, "I voted for Bernie. The government will take care of this man." And then, he proceeds to feel compassionate as though he helped the homeless man while he actually ignores him and gets his coffee.

Which one are you?



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky

I'm not sure who worries me the most.

Is it the person who wants to take more of my earnings and donate them to people who will not even try to provide for themselves?

Or is it the person who would stand aside whilst people go homeless and hungry?



They are both idiots in my mind.

The people who try giving money or food to people, and that's all, are only doing it for their own desire to feel "good" .

People in such positions need help and guidance with the aid, they need social workers, they need programs which help them learn how to budget, how to look for a job, have childcare so they can work, all kinds of aid. That means a lot fo work, and many jobs created to do that work!

One of the biggest problems I have seen from the american system (form the inside) is the existing value upon "doing it yourself" which is exaggerated, as well as the notion of every person having complete freedom of choice under all circumstances.

I've seen that it works better when freedom is something that is gradual, with your ability to handle the accompanying responsibility. If you are so poor you need help paying for shelter, then the help should be sent directly to the owner of the apartment, after being checked out and okayed by the state. Not given to the recipient.

In order to receive this aid, they should have a lot of obligations placed upon them. If one is financially dependent on the state, but in every other way, have all the freedom and independence they could want, what is the motivation for changing that??

I do wonder why everytime americans refer to these sort of proposed programs,
NOBODY seems to see themselves as a recipient!!!

It would be given to "someone else". So... nobody here has kids? Young adult children? A physical body which needs healthcare? Accidents, cancer...?



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: neveroddoreven99
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

"we put your money where our mouth is." Fixed it for you. Why don't you feed wild animals? If you come back and say, "people are not wild animals," then you're a clown.


Sure thing, mate.

Rather be a clown than an invalid.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Bluesma

Let me try to explain it this way -

You have an extra $5. At that point, you have a choice. You can either give it to the homeless man standing outside the Starbucks or go inside and get that coffee you've been waiting to treat yourself with all week.

The truly compassionate person realizes that the homeless man can likely make much better use out of that $5 and hands it over. Some even go above and beyond and do more to help him out - take him to the nearest shelter, buy him and entire meal, etc.

The type of leftist Les Misanthrope describes is the one who looks at his $5 and says, "I voted for Bernie. The government will take care of this man." And then, he proceeds to feel compassionate as though he helped the homeless man while he actually ignores him and gets his coffee.

Which one are you?


I will tell you exactly- since I live in a country that is "socialist" by american standards.
I have five dollars. I spend 2.50 on a coffee, and pay 2.50 in taxes.
If there is a homeless man in the city he will be approached daily by the social workers in the orange jackets that are walking around everywhere, and they will try their best to convince him to go to a shelter with them.
The only homeless people we can see here (rare) are ones that insist on living outside, describing it as being free of the system, having adventures, or some such colorful idea.

But if he agrees, he will be given an apartment, food, and daily guidance in cleaning himself up, making a curriculum vitae, learning to interview for a job, and any kind of skills he might need (in computers, for example). There will be a number of people doing all this, specialists in each their areas. I am not a specialist in all of these, and I do not have the time or space to work with them 8 hours a day on getting integrated into the community.

But I may get one of those jobs if I want (especially as they pay fairly well and have lots of security- the competition for government jobs is extremely tough). I am paying for this. I work hard for this. So that there is no guy begging in front of the café, or if there is, I can point out the social worker on the street and get him to her/him.


Giving your stupid five bucks isn't going to change his life- on the contrary, it is going to encourage him to live this way and buy some more wine today. That is only done for ones own self satisfaction. Wanting to take credit for the act all alone, is only arrogant pride wanting to see oneself as special or better than others because having done something "extraordinary".

To make any real difference, it takes everyone, and it needs to be "normal" not extraordinary, to care about the state of your countrymen.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality
Yes. The technology exists now where reactors recycle the waste that they create. pretty interesting stuff.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
A well thought out and reasoned post. Thank you, I enjoyed the read.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




The lefties I know are very vocal in the idea that their tax money should be spent on the above.


I am sure they are. They like to outsource the 'welfare' of their fellow man to the STATE.

Then pat themselves on the back for a job 'well' done.

Benevolence by the bold face authoritarianism of the state.

Oh yeah Left wingers really 'care'.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Everyone suffers equally, period. Money, no money, it does not matter. I'm not sure what a conservative is or a liberal. But, it seems when you speak to people with different opinions on this little election, everyone really wants the exact same thing, just said a little differently.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   


The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;


Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 8.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66


The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;


Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 8.




to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Clearly some people fail at reading comprehension.

Simply put.

They have the power of taxation so that government could pay it's own bills to function PROPERLY.

Not to pay our bills.
edit on 23-2-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

So basically, you ARE the type of leftist the OP is about. You assume that since you have a government who tells you it is happening that anyone who is poor and homeless is there by choice because you washed your hands of it ... it's the government's responsibility, but you tell yourself you are more compassionate than others because you live in a country with a government that purports to "care," and yet, it is self-evident that your poor are still with you, and you are very content to pass on by the other side of the road.

How are you any different than a heartless conservative who says that the poor are in that situation because of the choices they make?

You just said as much yourself. This man who is homeless has every chance to be helped but he must not want it ... so you wash your hands of him.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Gryphon66


The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;


Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 8.




to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Clearly some people fail at reading comprehension.

Simply put.

They have the power of taxation so that government could pay it's own bills to function PROPERLY.

Not to pay our bills.


Uselessly frivolous response as per...

"provide for the general Welfare of the United States; "...

Your reading comprehension is good...

But you hardline Reich wingers ignore it instead because you are antithetical to your progressive founders, and your Christ.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Don't think decent people would stand by and do nothing. It hasn't been established that the right owns disregard for the poor anyway. Don't believe that, own it or not, it gives some a reason to take more from whoever has it to give er be taken from them. And then stand overlord over the distribution pile. The accusative tone grows louder at one as they what....make more money?



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join