Left vs right…..

I think there is more nuance to "most" people, than being just left or right, many of us are somewhat in the middle, finding things we believe in from both ideologies.

a reply to: Akaspeedy

We all want to live this life to its fullest without interference from _____________.

I think we have more in common now than we did ten years ago. Also, we're more divided than we were ten years ago.

For the blank up top, I put other people/government.



A class participation thread. Love it.

originally posted by: snowspirit
How is anyone left or right? Everybody wants to put people in boxes. Shouldn’t sane people agree with some from left and some from right? Same with disagreements. Or are those people just hated by both sides.

In 2021 you either pick a side or be a target for both.

Riding fences is no longer safe.

a reply to: EdisonintheFM


A table won't stand with two legs. Centrism and moderation, choosing what works best for a given situation is actually a very valid choice. It's definitely not the easiest when extremists are the loudest voices, but it's probably the best choice at those times.

originally posted by: Akaspeedy
Yes, for sure but that’s not the point of this thread….what do we have in common…….? Do you like Chips and/or dips…..let’s keep this all about us and not post political leanings in any sense

a reply to: snowspirit

We like to laugh. We like to enjoy good times with others and have our moments of peaceful solitude.

We question our existence and our ending. If you believe the numbers, we like comic book movies.

But not everyone has the same common denominator. We're like snowflakes. Well, our fingerprints say it all, we're individually unique with some things in common.

There will always be groups. Never will there be an honest to goodness natural hive mind.

We all believe President Trump was a far superior President than the current loser, that’s pretty obvious now

originally posted by: Akaspeedy
I’m starting a thread to find out what we have in common, and not what we don’t……left vs right…..for example, divides us…let’s start a conversation where we focus not on what doesn’t…..I’ll start……we are all human beings……..who’s next…?

Side note, thanks mods for putting this in the correct forum

Both the Left and Right can read and respond to your inquiry.

a reply to: Akaspeedy


We all hate the left.

(The left self-loathe)

Well, we are all ostensibly human beings who eat, sleep, excrete and want some degree of material support, hope, comfort and affection for at the least ourselves and whomever we consider to be friends.

I'm equally sure we all would like an honest, efficient, kind government with as little presence in our lives as is possible while still having a civil society.

I'm also sure that we all pay careful attention to who reads our posts on this and other select sites using the nifty spyware a certain second cousin in the NSA gave us that one drunken weekend in South Carolina and I'd bet that we all fuel up with mountain dew, tequila and redbull and drive to the residences of the people who either conflict with us or neglect to recognize our brilliance for some light reconnaissance if the residence is within 1800 (or so) miles... though I guess having better or worse transportation makes the distance one is willing to travel vary, as does the level of transgression or infatuation one is affronted or transfixed by.

And finally, all of us are subject to the shadow darters that whisper in our minds and decide the fates for our objects de reconnaissance and we are all, of course, joined in the circle of shadows in the Always Now.

Right?

a reply to: Akaspeedy

We all want more __________.

knowledge?
freedom?
happiness?
money?

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein

What do the black and white chess pieces have in common? What about the red and black checkers?

Regardless of color, they move the exact same way as their counterpart.

Both share the silly belief you have to pick a side and that there’s a good and a bad one

We are all bound by the same awesome rules of nature.

originally posted by: EdisonintheFM

originally posted by: snowspirit
How is anyone left or right? Everybody wants to put people in boxes. Shouldn’t sane people agree with some from left and some from right? Same with disagreements. Or are those people just hated by both sides.

In 2021 you either pick a side or be a target for both.

Riding fences is no longer safe.

Hah! that's how they get you.
I think we've just lowered the bar on 'safe'.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

The bar has definitely been lowered. Hopefully it won't stay that way.

Once the 81 million see what they voted for they will come around.

originally posted by: nemonimity
a reply to: EdisonintheFM


A table won't stand with two legs. Centrism and moderation, choosing what works best for a given situation is actually a very valid choice. It's definitely not the easiest when extremists are the loudest voices, but it's probably the best choice at those times.

This is true; however, if the two pair of opposing legs get too far apart, the weight of the structure between them may become too heavy to support itself and the structure can still collapse with all four legs.

This is what I see happening. There is very little centrism and moderation left. I'm happy for people to have opposing views. I've always said that traditional conservatives and liberals need each other. The issue I'm addressing is not conservatism vs. liberalism. In current-day political discourse, I believe that people conflate liberals with "progressives". (I put "progressives" in quotation marks because they are in actuality regressive.)

Progressivism is disease that has within itself the seeds of its own destruction; the problem being that it will seek to destroy everything else before it self-destructs.

I, again, have nothing in common with this philosophy nor with those who espouse it (again, short of the fact that we all defecate).

originally posted by: EdisonintheFM
a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

The bar has definitely been lowered. Hopefully it won't stay that way.

Once the 81 million see what they voted for they will come around.

What 81 million? There were no 81 million.

a reply to: incoserv

It's very true that having two support systems very far apart causes instability. It's part of the the theory behind the free market, the idea being that if you have a demographic that is underserved or too dependent on and a binary system, natural order would take over to fix that instability and restore balance. It's never assumed to my knowledge however that the new disrupter will be one of the two existing entities though. It's a 3rd, 4th ,5th etc. entity entering the market that re balances the system.

I'm not sure where you get that progressivism is actually regressivism, but I think you're referencing one group of people. Progressivism has been around for hundreds of years and is arguably responsible for making the US the juggernaut of technology and freedom it is today (or in it's hayday some would argue, but as a techie I think we're still very progressive and ahead of most of the world). I tend to see people on the right conflating progressivism with democrats because there is overlap in philosophy, but a progressive isn't the same thing as extreme left anymore than, totalitarian is the same as the far right. They are extremists and ideologues where progressivism as a philosophy is more concerned with human development through the sciences.

It's a shame you don't think you have anything in common with progressives but there are a lot of great Americans who were progressives. It's an interesting read if you're willing to find out what a progressive really is and what progressivism is really all about.

originally posted by: nemonimity
a reply to: incoserv

It's very true that having two support systems very far apart causes instability. It's part of the the theory behind the free market, the idea being that if you have a demographic that is underserved or too dependent on and a binary system, natural order would take over to fix that instability and restore balance. It's never assumed to my knowledge however that the new disrupter will be one of the two existing entities though. It's a 3rd, 4th ,5th etc. entity entering the market that re balances the system.

We're not talking about economic market forces, here; we're talking about the philosophical and moral underpinnings that make a society work. There's a world of difference.

I'm not sure where you get that progressivism is actually regressivism, but I think you're referencing one group of people. Progressivism has been around for hundreds of years and is arguably responsible for making the US the juggernaut of technology and freedom it is today (or in it's hayday some would argue, but as a techie I think we're still very progressive and ahead of most of the world). I tend to see people on the right conflating progressivism with democrats because there is overlap in philosophy, but a progressive isn't the same thing as extreme left anymore than, totalitarian is the same as the far right. They are extremists and ideologues where progressivism as a philosophy is more concerned with human development through the sciences.

You're talking about two very different versions of progressivism here. The "progressives" of yesteryear never fought to make it a social norm to neuter pre-adolescent children (enforced gender dysphoria). The progressives of yesteryear never championed a racist doctrine that demonized people based on skin-color (Critical Race Theory).

What you are doing here is like unto claiming that the Nazi part represents socialists of all stripes because they have "Socialist" in their moniker. Apples do not compare with oranges.

It's a shame you don't think you have anything in common with progressives but there are a lot of great Americans who were progressives. It's an interesting read if you're willing to find out what a progressive really is and what progressivism is really all about.

Again, what is called "progressivsim" in today's socio-political marketplace is not what was called "progressivsim" in the past. Ask yourself if progressive leaders of 20 or 50 or 100 years ago would have trumpeted the idea of promoting gender dysphoria and administering puberty blockers to pre-adolescent children. Even the living progressives of today denounce and contradict positions that they supported ten years ago. Immigration, voter registration, abortion, homosexual marriage ... So many things.

No, yesterday's progressives are not the same animal as today's, at least not given what the mainstream calls progressive and what those who call themselves such represent.

a reply to: incoserv

You referenced a table moving far apart and not being able to stand even with multiple legs, I was following your analogy. A country can't operate with a binary philosophical system at all, it will inevitably fail. We are a capitalist society however and the philosophical theory behind are integral to our government functioning.

You were dictating the precepts of an entire philosophy with one group, that may or may not claim to represent that philosophy. It's the exact same thing as Woke SJWs claiming the KKK represent all of conservativism.

What you are claiming to be progressivism is not an accurate representation of the philosophy, any more than what some people on the left claim representation of Conservativism, or even libertarianism is for that matter. It's a fallacy concocted by the super woke on the left and the neo cons on the right, who are extremists and don't accurately represent their parent philosophical schools any more than say a mud skipper represents all fish.