Controversial General Political Discussion

[Logiko]

Post automatically merged: Apr 12, 2024

-------------------------------------

To add to that little meme. I think the biggest mistakes we have made (and I'm guilty of that too) is to equate the political scale and system to a Balance.

In reality, its not a balance:

- Rightist values are not ethically equal to leftist values, they are more hurtfull, less empathic, less considerate
- The Far right is dangerous in all its forms, the Far left only has problems in its most autoritative state.
- Liberalism is based on myth while socialism is based on reality
- Capitalism is based on exploitation while Socialism is based on the opposite
- The right wants absolute freedom of speech at the expanse of the oppressed when the left wants to regulate it for that reason
- The rights ALWAYS tends to attack basic human right and identities while the left is fighting for those people
- The right ALWAYS favor the rich while the left fight for the poor
- The right favors societal myths and idealism while the left favor a society based on scientific knowledge

Etc. on 1000+ subjects...

We need to end this absolute disgrace of fallacious equilibrium between the right and left and see politics as they are:

There is an ethically right and an ethically WRONG set of political values.

 

[Roo]

Post automatically merged: Apr 12, 2024

-------------------------------------

To add to that little meme. I think the biggest mistakes we have made (and I'm guilty of that too) is to equate the political scale and system to a Balance.

In reality, its not a balance:

- Rightist values are not ethically equal to leftist values, they are more hurtfull, less empathic, less considerate
- The Far right is dangerous in all its forms, the Far left only has problems in its most autoritative state.
- Liberalism is based on myth while socialism is based on reality
- Capitalism is based on exploitation while Socialism is based on the opposite
- The right wants absolute freedom of speech at the expanse of the oppressed when the left wants to regulate it for that reason
- The rights ALWAYS tends to attack basic human right and identities while the left is fighting for those people
- The right ALWAYS favor the rich while the left fight for the poor
- The right favors societal myths and idealism while the left favor a society based on scientific knowledge

Etc. on 1000+ subjects...

We need to end this absolute disgrace of fallacious equilibrium between the right and left and see politics as they are:

There is an ethically right and an ethically WRONG set of political values.

the irony of this when historically it's the left who sides with right wing politicians to curb liberalism

 

[Logiko]

the irony of this when historically it's the left who sides with right wing politicians to curb liberalism

Liberals are not leftist mate

 

[Roo]

Liberals are not leftist mate

Did you actually read what I typed? how tf do you come up with this answer lmao

 

[Logiko]

Did you actually read what I typed? how tf do you come up with this answer lmao

Because those who you call "leftist who sided with rightist" are liberals. People who called themself leftist but who had rightist values.

 

[Roo]

Because those who you call "leftist who sided with rightist" are liberals. People who called themself leftist but who had rightist values.

Bruh actually pick up a history book, i'm talking about communist lol

 

[Gaimon The Pirate]

Bruh actually pick up a history book, i'm talking about communist lol

Why would you tell him to read when he proves again and again he does not have basic reading skill & understanding?

 

[Logiko]

Bruh actually pick up a history book, i'm talking about communist lol

1. We are talking about the actual political state of France, this has nothing to do with communist. You are out of subject.
2. I do not have a complete history of communist, do enlighten me sir :)

Why would you tell him to read when he proves again and again he does not have basic reading skill & understanding?

You are such a sweetheart

 

[Uncle Van]

Are we going by actual definitions or made up versions that we personally prefer?

 

[Logiko]

Are we going by actual definitions or made up versions that we personally prefer?

How about looking at the historical and political reality of movements instead of sticking to definitions ?

We need to end the "dictature" of definitions. They are limiting our thoughts and reasonning. Words have contexts, history, they change through time, they evolve, they are appropriated, desappropriated, reappropriated etc.. Definitions are limiting our understanding of concepts and words.

 

[Peroroncino]

How about looking at the historical and political reality of movements instead of sticking to definitions ?

We need to end the "dictature" of definitions. They are limiting our thoughts and reasonning. Words have contexts, history, they change through time, they evolve, they are appropriated, desappropriated, reappropriated etc.. Definitions are limiting our understanding of concepts and words.

sounds great, end definitions, words will mean whatever one wants them to mean am i right my penis?

 

[Logiko]

sounds great, end definitions, words will mean whatever one wants them to mean am i right my penis?

I'm not saying that we should end definition. I'm saying that we should end the injonction of sticking to definition during discussions. Word matter, but they matter because of their contextual usage, their historical and political meaning.

When someone tells me that liberalism is "the social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy and free enterprise" yes, its not wrong. But someone who in our current society that is not politically educated might think that its just a basic ideology that promotes progressism... when in reality the political reality of liberalism is the opposite:
- It promotes and idealistic vision of humanity
- It promotes capitalistic values
- It promotes the myth of meritocracy
- And its an ideology that has a lot of porosity with right wing and far right values.

So we must extend our reach to the contextual reality of words, not stick to their definitions. any linguists will tell you that sticking to dictionnaries is damaging to understand language.

 

[Peroroncino]

I'm not saying that we should end definition. I'm saying that we should end the injonction of sticking to definition during discussions. Word matter, but they matter because of their contextual usage, their historical and political meaning.

When someone tells me that liberalism is "the social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy and free enterprise" yes, its not wrong. But someone who in our current society that is not politically educated might think that its just a basic ideology that promotes progressism... when in reality the political reality of liberalism is the opposite:
- It promotes and idealistic vision of humanity
- It promotes capitalistic values
- It promotes the myth of meritocracy
- And its an ideology that has a lot of porosity with right wing and far right values.

So we must extend our reach to the contextual reality of words, not stick to their definitions. any linguists will tell you that sticking to dictionnaries is damaging to understand language.

i see so we only change definitions whenever it suits you, got it

 

[Ravagerblade]

Those who ignore History are doomed to repeat it. Sooner or later ain't nothing going to stop you from going to the extremes to punish people who don't agree with your own Neo World Views.

 

[Logiko]

i see so we only change definitions whenever it suits you, got it

I see that you didn't understand what I said..

Those who ignore History are doomed to repeat it. Sooner or later ain't nothing going to stop you from going to the extremes to punish people who don't agree with your own Neo World Views.

That's why we must look at the historical and political context of words to understand them, not just depoliticized definitions.

Looking only at definitions is a way to forget about history.

 

[Peroroncino]

I see that you didn't understand what I said..



That's why we must look at the historical and political context of words to understand them, not just depoliticized definitions.

Looking only at definitions is a way to forget about history.

oh i understood all right, you made up your own definition of liberalism and then you expect others to argue not with reality but with your made up definitions of it.
I see why they ignore you, one cannot argue against someone else's imagination

 

[Logiko]

oh i understood all right, you made up your own definition of liberalism and then you expect others to argue not with reality but with your made up definitions of it.

I did not made up any definition. I explained the political reality behind the concept. If you want I could also explain its historical context from its English origin to the appropriation of enlightened philosophers (Kant for ex)... but I'm sure you would deny that as well.. right ?

 

[Peroroncino]

I did not made up any definition. I explained the political reality behind the concept. If you want I could also explain its historical context from its English origin to the appropriation of enlightened philosophers (Kant for ex)... but I'm sure you would deny that as well.. right ?

whether it's the political reality or not is a matter of opinion but arguing with you is pointless because in your world words mean whatever you want them to

 

[Logiko]

whether it's the political reality or not is a matter of opinion

No its not. Its what liberalism is mate. Its not "relative"

You can promote this ideology if you want, but you need to understand what it is.

 

[Zenos7]

Are we going by actual definitions or made up versions that we personally prefer?

Never go by actual definitions

Post automatically merged: Apr 13, 2024

I'm not saying that we should end definition. I'm saying that we should end the injonction of sticking to definition during discussions. Word matter, but they matter because of their contextual usage, their historical and political meaning.

You know dictionaries can cover multiple definitions for words depending on context, right?