Controversial General Political Discussion

[Logiko]

Im not american, so i wont ever be a republican or a democrat. Im free to criticize either of them or their supporters for whatever reason. doesnt make me a supporter of the other side, the world isnt black and white my guy.

I think you are misstaking me here. Democrats and republicans are political party, not political sides. Both are on the right side (republican being farther on the right).

Not taking side means refusing to be politicized on the political spectrum. Which means staying depoliticized when being politicized is an ethical necessity in all types of scenario. as such, being neutral is being unethical and taking a side on the political spectrum. The side that will be unethical.

I don't know if this was you meant, but this is what it means to be neutral and not taking side in politics.

 

[AL sama]

If you don't search the truth, you might fall for anything.

even if he hung out with LGBTQ+ people, that can't change what he said nor can it be justified

 

[Uncle Van]

This is how I see it....

Blame game is going on without anyone owning up for their own actions. Everyone is pointing fingers at others.

Left is blaming right, right is blaming left but thing is both are to be blamed.

You can never clap from one hand.

Both have flamed the fire at their own convenience to suit their agenda.

And, both are willingly carrying the seed of hatred in form of tit for tat.

A bird needs 2 wings to fly. The left wing and right wing keep trying to fly in different directions and clip the other, increasing it's acceleration as it torpedoes to the ground. Or so the saying goes.

 

[Mathias]

I would say it's right wing, either way it's bad

DNC is kinda wide and at the moment they have a bit of progressive values too especially in societal issues like kinda in favour of LGBT, a bit of healthcare and not too much for guns. Not against genocides though. And mostly neoliberal.

A bird needs 2 wings to fly. The left wing and right wing keep trying to fly in different directions and clip the other, increasing it's acceleration as it torpedoes to the ground. Or so the saying goes.

I like comparisons because they quickly show their limits. For instance why is mankind compared to the wings of a flying chicken ?
[automerge]1758043200[/automerge]

It's funny that in leftist space even social democracy is sometimes considered right wing

Because they have more than often betrayed their campaign promesses favouring neoliberal policies

 

[Uncle Van]

I like comparisons because they quickly show their limits. For instance why is mankind compared to the wings of a flying chicken ?

Cause mankind often show that their IQs are the same. Both birds and mankind often charge straight into solid objects for example

 

[Zenos7]

If you don't search the truth, you might fall for anything.

sure, im aware some of the soundbites are out of context where you actually go and listen to what he is saying, its very different. But, talking about stoning gays and that being gods perfect law for dealing with homosexuals is fucking crazy, and still i dont know what kind of context makes that any less evil. Pointing to him being polite with a gay person at his QnA or being "friends" with a lesbian doesnt help in the slightest to be very honest. . . .
[automerge]1758043613[/automerge]

I think you are misstaking me here. Democrats and republicans are political party, not political sides. Both are on the right side (republican being farther on the right).

Not taking side means refusing to be politicized on the political spectrum. Which means staying depoliticized when being politicized is an ethical necessity in all types of scenario. as such, being neutral is being unethical and taking a side on the political spectrum. The side that will be unethical.

I don't know if this was you meant, but this is what it means to be neutral and not taking side in politics.

Ok fair, i didnt mean it like that. But even still, left wingers can criticize other left wingers and vice versa.

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

 

[Zenos7]

even if he hung out with LGBTQ+ people, that can't change what he said nor can it be justified

"oh yeah we are friends and hang out together, but i actually want you stoned for your sinful life"

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

"oh yeah we are friends and hang out together, but i actually want you stoned for your sinful life"

"But I have black friends" type of argument

 

[Zenos7]

A bird needs 2 wings to fly

and to mate
[automerge]1758043903[/automerge]

"But I have black friends" type of argument

can we even consider that "friendship" if one wants the other executed? lmao

 

[eamonpro]

You dont see a difference between these quotes and shit you havent looked at?

You trying to fool me or yourself with this bs?
[automerge]1758031791[/automerge]

I still dont know what you are getting at. But apparently more celebration of people dying.

You do you
[automerge]1758031941[/automerge]

Ngl though, even this comedian i am mentioning here was extremely disgusted by the online celebration of kirks death, and he isnt conservative in the slightest, neither am i.

STOP BEING MEAN TO CHARLIE!

this outrage is performative. Go through human history. Go through the last decade. Then the one before that, before that, before that.

people have cheered when people died. People they knew personally, too, if they had what they felt was a good reason. It doesn’t mean you endorse terrorists or violence. If you don’t think cheering when thatcher died was endorsement of violence, then it’s arbitrary af to say everyone who does it for Kirk is a monster because he happened to die from a murder. Maybe they just feel passionately about child grooming.

if you hold the (reasonable) opinion that Kirk made money off of targeting children and grooming them to the far right and his religious cult, telling young girls at women’s leadership conferences to submit to Christian men immediately on graduation… then it’s reasonable to think the world is better off without that guy. Guess what, I’m still never killing anyone and I’m still pro putting the shooter in prison or whatever they choose to do

also comedy exists and we should be allowed to joke about assassinations lol

 

[Reborn]

I mean, i am not defending anyone of them or claiming they arent doing it. And i immediately reacted the same way on that laura loomer shit you shared, so i dont feel like im with you in that glass house, im definitely outside of it.


[automerge]1758041060[/automerge]

and if you are outside of this us vs them bubble and criticize either, the other side will foam from their mouths and get at your throat.

Identity politics - left and right have become identities.

People now pressure others to pick sides by flaming emotions and if you aren't on their side then they will see it as "you are against us".

They prefer to stick with "the team" rather than seeing the objective truth

What people doesn't realize is truth shifts and it goes beyond ideology ....being open minded matters more than clinging to a label or ideology.

 

[eamonpro]

The left can't handle freedom of speech otherwise they will start to have real arguments and logics and they don't.

The righties are always the first to threaten to kick your ass if you’re mean to them tho

 

[Uncle Van]

I actually watch him and Babylon Bee for the comedy. No idea how humor makes one conservative though

 

[Blax Blah]

STOP BEING MEAN TO CHARLIE!

this outrage is performative. Go through human history. Go through the last decade. Then the one before that, before that, before that.

people have cheered when people died. People they knew personally, too, if they had what they felt was a good reason. It doesn’t mean you endorse terrorists or violence. If you don’t think cheering when thatcher died was endorsement of violence, then it’s arbitrary af to say everyone who does it for Kirk is a monster because he happened to die from a murder. Maybe they just feel passionately about child grooming.

if you hold the (reasonable) opinion that Kirk made money off of targeting children and grooming them to the far right and his religious cult, telling young girls at women’s leadership conferences to submit to Christian men immediately on graduation… then it’s reasonable to think the world is better off without that guy. Guess what, I’m still never killing anyone and I’m still pro putting the shooter in prison or whatever they choose to do

also comedy exists and we should be allowed to joke about assassinations lol

Yeah I don't endorse the shooting

However the most sad thing about what happened imo is that he chose to live his life the way he did, Ravager said something like "do you expect every person who makes above 6 figures to donate all their money to children" and my answer was that's what they should do, almost all of their money anyway, and if Charlie Kirk lived that way the good he would have done would be of historic proportions, 12 million dollars put into funding unions and into charity would alter the course of history for the better so much it's crazy, but he liked it better sitting in his bank account

 

[eamonpro]

The left can't handle freedom of speech otherwise they will start to have real arguments and logics and they don't.

The righties are always the first to threaten to kick your ass if you’re mean to them tho

Be sure to consider the Context. This is nothing more than taking soundbites.
He had several people who he knew and hanged out with that were Gay, Lesbian.
Rubin, Jillian Micheals.
Jillian Michaels recalls Charlie Kirk's impact on her 13-year-old son | Fox News
Charlie Kirk's BEST Advice to Gay College Student 👀🔥

He was business partners and made money with some gay people who ran the same racket, ignore that he pushed kids toward Christianity while saying stoning gays was gods perfect law

why did he hold women’s leadership summits where he and the other speakers all told the women to submit to Christian men and avoid education and careers? Oh I misspoke, he told this to TEEN GIRLS. Can you spell GROOMER?
He said have more babies than you can afford with Christian men to his child audience, sold that to our youth.. yikes. If he was Muslim, I hope you’d agree he was engaging in child grooming.

we have to work against the tide of Christian grooming in our society, wouldn’t you agree? The plague of men pushing submission to boys on little girls… fucking pedo shit.

 

[Reborn]

A bird needs 2 wings to fly. The left wing and right wing keep trying to fly in different directions and clip the other, increasing it's acceleration as it torpedoes to the ground. Or so the saying goes.

Unfortunately, that bird is usa

And, there is a fox (China) waiting in shadows for this bird to torpedoes to the ground

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

I actually watch him and Babylon Bee for the comedy. No idea how humor makes one conservative though

I honestly never heard of either of them. I just find that thumbnail and title combo a little funny

 

[Zenos7]

also comedy exists and we should be allowed to joke about assassinations lol

Sure

STOP BEING MEAN TO CHARLIE!

this outrage is performative. Go through human history. Go through the last decade. Then the one before that, before that, before that.

people have cheered when people died. People they knew personally, too, if they had what they felt was a good reason. It doesn’t mean you endorse terrorists or violence. If you don’t think cheering when thatcher died was endorsement of violence, then it’s arbitrary af to say everyone who does it for Kirk is a monster because he happened to die from a murder. Maybe they just feel passionately about child grooming.

if you hold the (reasonable) opinion that Kirk made money off of targeting children and grooming them to the far right and his religious cult, telling young girls at women’s leadership conferences to submit to Christian men immediately on graduation… then it’s reasonable to think the world is better off without that guy. Guess what, I’m still never killing anyone and I’m still pro putting the shooter in prison or whatever they choose to do

"the world is better off without charlie kirk due his very dangerous rhetoric and grooming of kids" is a perfectly rational and calm statement, but if you are singing songs, cheering and legit being happy about it, you should go see a special kind of doctor.


Im totally with you on the right being bitches and performative losers though. And making people lose their jobs and shit over this is ridiculous.

 

[Logiko]

A bird needs 2 wings to fly. The left wing and right wing keep trying to fly in different directions and clip the other, increasing it's acceleration as it torpedoes to the ground. Or so the saying goes.

I don't know if it what you meant, but I interpreted that as you implying that both left are right are necessary for society to function, when in reality there is an ethical and an unethical side.

DNC is kinda wide and at the moment they have a bit of progressive values too especially in societal issues like kinda in favour of LGBT, a bit of healthcare and not too much for guns. Not against genocides though. And mostly neoliberal.

Technically, having those value is not what should place them on the left.
The real deal comes with the way they approach domination system. While some could lean on the left, overall, they are friends of capitalism and do not project to counter it or destroy it (aside from people like Sander who I could eventually call soc dem, a bit like the current PS in France at the moment, even LFI in a way)

left wingers can criticize other left wingers and vice versa.

Of course.

Identity politics - left and right have become identities.

You are not wrong. There is a lot of performative politics. Especially on the left.

People now pressure others to pick sides by flaming emotions and if you aren't on their side then they will see it as "you are against us".

But that's a different matter that has nothing to do with identity politics. Pressuring people to pick a side through emotion is a legitimate political action.

For the left, basically, if you don't take a side when we are showing you oppression, then you take the side of the one who perpetuates it. It's basic ethics.

What people doesn't realize is truth shifts and it goes beyond ideology

Lol no it does not.
For ex: slavery don't start to become ethical because political shift. It can become more or less accepted, but the ethic behind will not change.

This idea that truth is relative which would somehow justify the importance of not taking side or to keep looking at the rethoric of an unethical political side is simply a coping mechanism to justify our own refusal to act in front of oppression or unethical actions.