Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
His « tactics » of peace by fire is troubling. Droning Suleimani was a bet for instance. Same goes for threatening North Korea. These two tyrannies have been wise enough not to start a war. If they had responded with hostilities, then I don’t know what Trump would have done. He would become widely unpopular imo if a full scale war started only because he is cocky and threatens everyone.
Imagine having to explain to the families of US soldiers that their dad or mom died because Trump had a whim and wanted to drone Suleimani… moreover, his actions wouldn’t have to involve US or NATO troops but setting on fire the Middle East or the West-Pacific region doesn’t directly put the US in a position of war. Others would have to suffer the consequences of Trump’s whims before he does. I can feel he would ask Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Ukraine for even more money for their protection that he himself would jeopardize.
I can’t imagine what Ukraine will look like once he will be re-elected. I doubt Putin would just back off. Trump would be playing with fire and burn himself.
Imagine having to explain to the families of US soldiers that their dad or mom died because Trump had a whim and wanted to drone Suleimani… moreover, his actions wouldn’t have to involve US or NATO troops but setting on fire the Middle East or the West-Pacific region doesn’t directly put the US in a position of war. Others would have to suffer the consequences of Trump’s whims before he does. I can feel he would ask Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Ukraine for even more money for their protection that he himself would jeopardize.
I can’t imagine what Ukraine will look like once he will be re-elected. I doubt Putin would just back off. Trump would be playing with fire and burn himself.
Although I do not like to call people sheep, even far rightist.. I need to point out this:
Trumpist, far rightism and conservatism, are not "against the maintream", right now, they ARE a mainstream.
Or.. rather, they are one of the two social streams in society today:
- One being liberalism and a progressism of facade
- The other being conservatism and reactionnarism
They are on an equal scale, one does not overtake the other.
Those who are going against the current right now, are leftists and what you would call "woke" people. Right now, at the moment where I speak, we (this part of the people) are outnumbered.
In fact, there are three ways you can confirm this or understand it by yourself:
1. There are almost NO leftist gov on the planet (I do not count North Korea and China that are authoritarian dictatorships)
2. We live in a liberal world that is sliding slowly into a reactionnary one. The far right is emerging as victorious pretty much everywhere.
3. You can observes that in most country, the leftists are actually in minority compared to liberal and conservative party.
For the point 3 there are two example that you can look at:
The US : As you can see, there are no big leftist party and there was never a real leftist gouvernment.
France:
Here is the state of the french assembly
- The light blue are hardcore conservatives and the dark blue is the far right party.
- All the Yellow are the pro-capitalist liberals
ALL of them are considered on the right of the political spectrum.
Now,
- The dark pink are the socio democrats. They are the one who created liberal and social traitors like Macron and Hollande in the first place.
- The green are the ecologist (close in ideology to the PS)
- The dark green is the communist party (currently close to social democrats in term of ideology (at least their leader), yes, that's strange, but that's the reality)
- And the Red is LFI, the most radical reformist leftist party (who are not even on the extrem left, the extrem left is in the light pink)
In short, in France, radical leftists (meaning by that, those who want a real disruptive program against liberalism) have only one big choice : LFI.
This coalition (the New popular front) was created on a program set on the basis of a distruption against liberals. And yet, at the moment, the PS, the Communist party and the Ecologist are trying to stab us in the back by pushing for a big coalition with liberals. Which will simply means the end of our disruptive program and real progressive and social change in France.
So as you can see, the scarlet red, is not really present so much EVEN WHEN we technically won the election because of the New popular Front.
France is lucky. We have a strong leftist basis. But most country are not that lucky. In reality most country only have a choice between liberals or proliberal socdems AND Far rightist or extrem conservatist, there is no alternative for them.
So no. Trumpism and other far rightism are not against the system or the mainstream. They are forged and helped by it.
Trumpist, far rightism and conservatism, are not "against the maintream", right now, they ARE a mainstream.
Or.. rather, they are one of the two social streams in society today:
- One being liberalism and a progressism of facade
- The other being conservatism and reactionnarism
They are on an equal scale, one does not overtake the other.
Those who are going against the current right now, are leftists and what you would call "woke" people. Right now, at the moment where I speak, we (this part of the people) are outnumbered.
In fact, there are three ways you can confirm this or understand it by yourself:
1. There are almost NO leftist gov on the planet (I do not count North Korea and China that are authoritarian dictatorships)
2. We live in a liberal world that is sliding slowly into a reactionnary one. The far right is emerging as victorious pretty much everywhere.
3. You can observes that in most country, the leftists are actually in minority compared to liberal and conservative party.
For the point 3 there are two example that you can look at:
The US : As you can see, there are no big leftist party and there was never a real leftist gouvernment.
France:
Here is the state of the french assembly
- The light blue are hardcore conservatives and the dark blue is the far right party.
- All the Yellow are the pro-capitalist liberals
ALL of them are considered on the right of the political spectrum.
Now,
- The dark pink are the socio democrats. They are the one who created liberal and social traitors like Macron and Hollande in the first place.
- The green are the ecologist (close in ideology to the PS)
- The dark green is the communist party (currently close to social democrats in term of ideology (at least their leader), yes, that's strange, but that's the reality)
- And the Red is LFI, the most radical reformist leftist party (who are not even on the extrem left, the extrem left is in the light pink)
In short, in France, radical leftists (meaning by that, those who want a real disruptive program against liberalism) have only one big choice : LFI.
This coalition (the New popular front) was created on a program set on the basis of a distruption against liberals. And yet, at the moment, the PS, the Communist party and the Ecologist are trying to stab us in the back by pushing for a big coalition with liberals. Which will simply means the end of our disruptive program and real progressive and social change in France.
So as you can see, the scarlet red, is not really present so much EVEN WHEN we technically won the election because of the New popular Front.
France is lucky. We have a strong leftist basis. But most country are not that lucky. In reality most country only have a choice between liberals or proliberal socdems AND Far rightist or extrem conservatist, there is no alternative for them.
So no. Trumpism and other far rightism are not against the system or the mainstream. They are forged and helped by it.
Last edited:
It seems like you do since you intervene. What ? What do you want to tell us ?
That liberals are not really rightists ?
That liberals are progressive ?
That liberalism is not a political and social movement ?
That soft sociodem are not social traitors ?
That radical leftism is the far left ?
What ? What type of confusion do you want to create this time ?
That liberals are not really rightists ?
That liberals are progressive ?
That liberalism is not a political and social movement ?
That soft sociodem are not social traitors ?
That radical leftism is the far left ?
What ? What type of confusion do you want to create this time ?
The mainstream that gave Trump his votes and made him president you mean?
He prefers his head canon over actual reality, having to read about these topics on trustworthy neutral sources would make his brain implode and disintegrate, destroying the foundation of his very being.
And not fond of natives either
Many veterans voted for Trump in his first elections because they didn't want more wars.
That he wants to distract from your post's content by making fun of your English.
Post automatically merged:
He prefers his head canon over actual reality, having to read about these topics on trustworthy neutral sources would make his brain implode and disintegrate, destroying the foundation of his very being.
And not fond of natives either
Many veterans voted for Trump in his first elections because they didn't want more wars.
That he wants to distract from your post's content by making fun of your English.
The mainstream that gave Biden over 50% of the votes and made him president in 2020?
How very convenient that somehow, covid-19 started to spread like wildfire come election time (which may or may not have come from a Wuhan lab 🤔
Almost as if one of covid's intended (even if it could have been accidental) purposes was to make Trump's existing presidency coming close to the 2020 election a complete nightmare...
It gets hard when there are websites and article pages that provide extra evidence and/or insight into certain incidents but these either get taken down and/or search engines fail to bring them up to the forefront for more "mainstream articles".
How very convenient that somehow, covid-19 started to spread like wildfire come election time (which may or may not have come from a Wuhan lab 🤔
Almost as if one of covid's intended (even if it could have been accidental) purposes was to make Trump's existing presidency coming close to the 2020 election a complete nightmare...
Post automatically merged:
It gets hard when there are websites and article pages that provide extra evidence and/or insight into certain incidents but these either get taken down and/or search engines fail to bring them up to the forefront for more "mainstream articles".
The media/democrats want to bury the photo of Trump. I think they miss the fact any damage control of that situation was gone the moment that kid pulled the trigger. Because the glasses the media put over regular people's eyes came off. This inhuman villain, the media/democrats, made Trump out to be crumbled. He bled red; the color drained from his face (something that can't be faked), but he still stood. We saw sadness and relief in not only him, but his family. Now people are asking questions. Trump was one of the most powerful men on the planet before a lot of us were born. He has the means to live a life of luxury and peace, but he chooses to be (wrongly) prosecuted and shot at.
I can't say for sure Trump will win, because we live in a funny world, but it will be hard for him to lose.
Biden seems to have come down with Covid.
I can't say for sure Trump will win, because we live in a funny world, but it will be hard for him to lose.
Post automatically merged:
Biden seems to have come down with Covid.
I wish people would correct me...
I hate to speak and not be able to know when what I'm saying is wrong.
Because they are my political ennemies ?
Liberal is a current of thought that came (without a real name) around the time of the "Enlightinment". This current at the time of its creation was an alternative for the monarchy and the inequalities that came with it. This current, born from the philosophical current that is idealism, had great basis in theory : Freedom of expression, universalism, rationnalism, human rights, the push of the notion of free will, meritocracy etc.
Later.. This current gave birth to liberalism (more freedom for the market, less state actions, accentuation of privatization ..)
On paper, why not.
In reality, not so much.
You see, liberalism relies on big ideals about the world (and after all, its logical, it comes from an idealist philosophical vision of the world). In theory those notions are good, and some still are, but when we look closer at their impact on reality, we notice that those big ideals are in fact the factor of major problems.
Let's take them one by one shall we:
- Human rights : This one is good.. but let's look at its lack of application : Women are less and less able to abort even in "democracies", A "democratic" is doing a genocide right now with the help for "democratic" and liberal countries, basic human right are being smooshed all over those "democratic" countries in prostest, LGBTQI+ are being persecuted is those countries, there is systemic racism all over the place, a lot of hendicaped and neurA people are living under the minimum leaving wage, poor people and muslims are being demonized etc.
- Freedom of expression: Good thing ! Wait ! Freedom of expression also means the freedom of expression for racist and sexist people, right ? Well yeah... That's the big flaw in the project. Gladly, we don't have that in Europe, In France, we have laws against racism... so racist people uses dog whisles.. Now, instead of a skinhead neonazi, we have good looking radical conservatist in suits and nice hair (or with a wig in the case of Trump). You see, the freedom of expression is a great concept for politics and big medias. Scandals and big conflicts create a spike of audience, it makes people click and it makes people stay on the program. So this is not a surprise that big news channel are using this technique to survive. So the best is to frame insecurities or big societal issues (since this is what will make people stick in) and invite people to comment on it. The more radical, the better. And this is how you end up with far rightist and reactionnaries H24 on popular channels. This is how Trump was creates and this is what dediabolized the far right in my country. So.. freedom of expression, yes. But when it comes to the way liberals view it, its a danger.
The push for the notion of Free Will : Amazing concept in theory. This is a concept that stand on the idea that people are capable of choosing. Pushed farther, this is also the basis for the belief that people can choose their fate and stop their bad behavior by themselves. This is the biggest idealistic myth. In reality, what this concept means is that our thought process is independant of the elements material reactions of our brain. This is the theory of the mind over matter. In other words, this is the belief that our thought appear out of nothingness, that our thought is created by our will.. ex nihilo. This is obviously not the reality of our biological bodies and this is problematic because it creates a large number of fallacious beliefs about our control over our choices in life, when really, this is just an illusion.
- Universalism: This one is great on paper. Its based on the belief that all humans are born equal and should have equal rights. Again, on paper, its amazing. But how is it applicated on the fields : Well, if people are born equal, then they should have equal access to anything, right ? Seems logical... Until you start looking at the social reality of the lives of people. In reality we are not born equal, there are differences everywhere in term of colours of skins, economical capital, social capital, cultural capital etc. In reality two people with the same access to educations, culture and social services and rights, one living in one wealthy family and the other in the ghettos will have completely different lives and most likely great inequalities in term of living hoods. The reality is that universalism negates the sociological differences and negates the research on the matter. Its an idealistic system and belief system that look at us with blindfolded eyes. And this is the most prevalant when we talk about racism. Universalism is literally at the starting point of what we call "colorblindness". Its the negations of different forms of oppressions on the belief that they can't exist since we are all treated "equally".
- Meritocracy: I said everything I had to say already on meritocracy, you should understand my point of view on the subject by now. But rapidely, this is the belief that if we are rich, its because of either natural and positive circounstance and "its life" and thus shall not be criticized OR because of our merit (our skill and hard work) and its the belief that if we are poor, its the opposite. Its either "the natural consequence of life" that should not be questionned OR because people are not good enough or do not have enough merit. This is a notion that stands on the starification of the elites and the contemps of the poor. Its obviously a notion that doesn't take into account the reality of our world and the fact that we do not have equal access to all forms of capitals and we can't therefore have the same chances in life and the same "merit"
- Rationnalism : Good things.. unless when we understand that most liberal country doesn't really care about the researchs. Countries are still repressing massively environmental whistle blowers, activist and alarmist, liberals are doing absolutely nothing concret to reduce or counter climate change in an effective way despite the warnings of scientists. On the human science side of things, scientist and researchers are literally ignored. Liberals keep on pushing law that favors rich people, they keep on giving gift to big businesses, they pushes actively the privatization of the economy, they push away states medias, they refuse the redistribution of wealth and the taxation of superprofits, they keep on taking in the chest of social services.. and that DESPITE the studies, the warnings of researcher and the analysis of renawn economists on the subject. In reality, liberals are not rationnalist, their vision is an idealistic one, they view the world as they want it to be and not how the world really is.
In reality liberalism is not a rationnal, scientific or down to earth ideology or current of thoughts. Its a bag of made up idealists beliefs systems about the world and our human condition that - althought was an good alternative to feodalism or the monarchy - creates MAJOR INEQUALITIES and forms of oppressions all around the world.
Liberalism is the seat of capitalism. This is what justifies such a oppressive system.
So logically, this is what I'm fighting against.
I hate to speak and not be able to know when what I'm saying is wrong.
Because they are my political ennemies ?
Liberal is a current of thought that came (without a real name) around the time of the "Enlightinment". This current at the time of its creation was an alternative for the monarchy and the inequalities that came with it. This current, born from the philosophical current that is idealism, had great basis in theory : Freedom of expression, universalism, rationnalism, human rights, the push of the notion of free will, meritocracy etc.
Later.. This current gave birth to liberalism (more freedom for the market, less state actions, accentuation of privatization ..)
On paper, why not.
In reality, not so much.
You see, liberalism relies on big ideals about the world (and after all, its logical, it comes from an idealist philosophical vision of the world). In theory those notions are good, and some still are, but when we look closer at their impact on reality, we notice that those big ideals are in fact the factor of major problems.
Let's take them one by one shall we:
- Human rights : This one is good.. but let's look at its lack of application : Women are less and less able to abort even in "democracies", A "democratic" is doing a genocide right now with the help for "democratic" and liberal countries, basic human right are being smooshed all over those "democratic" countries in prostest, LGBTQI+ are being persecuted is those countries, there is systemic racism all over the place, a lot of hendicaped and neurA people are living under the minimum leaving wage, poor people and muslims are being demonized etc.
- Freedom of expression: Good thing ! Wait ! Freedom of expression also means the freedom of expression for racist and sexist people, right ? Well yeah... That's the big flaw in the project. Gladly, we don't have that in Europe, In France, we have laws against racism... so racist people uses dog whisles.. Now, instead of a skinhead neonazi, we have good looking radical conservatist in suits and nice hair (or with a wig in the case of Trump). You see, the freedom of expression is a great concept for politics and big medias. Scandals and big conflicts create a spike of audience, it makes people click and it makes people stay on the program. So this is not a surprise that big news channel are using this technique to survive. So the best is to frame insecurities or big societal issues (since this is what will make people stick in) and invite people to comment on it. The more radical, the better. And this is how you end up with far rightist and reactionnaries H24 on popular channels. This is how Trump was creates and this is what dediabolized the far right in my country. So.. freedom of expression, yes. But when it comes to the way liberals view it, its a danger.
The push for the notion of Free Will : Amazing concept in theory. This is a concept that stand on the idea that people are capable of choosing. Pushed farther, this is also the basis for the belief that people can choose their fate and stop their bad behavior by themselves. This is the biggest idealistic myth. In reality, what this concept means is that our thought process is independant of the elements material reactions of our brain. This is the theory of the mind over matter. In other words, this is the belief that our thought appear out of nothingness, that our thought is created by our will.. ex nihilo. This is obviously not the reality of our biological bodies and this is problematic because it creates a large number of fallacious beliefs about our control over our choices in life, when really, this is just an illusion.
- Universalism: This one is great on paper. Its based on the belief that all humans are born equal and should have equal rights. Again, on paper, its amazing. But how is it applicated on the fields : Well, if people are born equal, then they should have equal access to anything, right ? Seems logical... Until you start looking at the social reality of the lives of people. In reality we are not born equal, there are differences everywhere in term of colours of skins, economical capital, social capital, cultural capital etc. In reality two people with the same access to educations, culture and social services and rights, one living in one wealthy family and the other in the ghettos will have completely different lives and most likely great inequalities in term of living hoods. The reality is that universalism negates the sociological differences and negates the research on the matter. Its an idealistic system and belief system that look at us with blindfolded eyes. And this is the most prevalant when we talk about racism. Universalism is literally at the starting point of what we call "colorblindness". Its the negations of different forms of oppressions on the belief that they can't exist since we are all treated "equally".
- Meritocracy: I said everything I had to say already on meritocracy, you should understand my point of view on the subject by now. But rapidely, this is the belief that if we are rich, its because of either natural and positive circounstance and "its life" and thus shall not be criticized OR because of our merit (our skill and hard work) and its the belief that if we are poor, its the opposite. Its either "the natural consequence of life" that should not be questionned OR because people are not good enough or do not have enough merit. This is a notion that stands on the starification of the elites and the contemps of the poor. Its obviously a notion that doesn't take into account the reality of our world and the fact that we do not have equal access to all forms of capitals and we can't therefore have the same chances in life and the same "merit"
- Rationnalism : Good things.. unless when we understand that most liberal country doesn't really care about the researchs. Countries are still repressing massively environmental whistle blowers, activist and alarmist, liberals are doing absolutely nothing concret to reduce or counter climate change in an effective way despite the warnings of scientists. On the human science side of things, scientist and researchers are literally ignored. Liberals keep on pushing law that favors rich people, they keep on giving gift to big businesses, they pushes actively the privatization of the economy, they push away states medias, they refuse the redistribution of wealth and the taxation of superprofits, they keep on taking in the chest of social services.. and that DESPITE the studies, the warnings of researcher and the analysis of renawn economists on the subject. In reality, liberals are not rationnalist, their vision is an idealistic one, they view the world as they want it to be and not how the world really is.
In reality liberalism is not a rationnal, scientific or down to earth ideology or current of thoughts. Its a bag of made up idealists beliefs systems about the world and our human condition that - althought was an good alternative to feodalism or the monarchy - creates MAJOR INEQUALITIES and forms of oppressions all around the world.
Liberalism is the seat of capitalism. This is what justifies such a oppressive system.
So logically, this is what I'm fighting against.