The far left has pushed me (far, far) away...

[columbus]

Sorry...but did you just say that journalists and media pundits are "people with a lot of learning"?

Yep.
At least, the Usonian people seem to think so.

Why else would Rush Limbaugh be important to anyone?
Tom

 

[buddhist]

Errr...ok.

If you really believe that, then whats the problem? If you have non-violent communists or marxists what threat do they pose to you?

(P.s. The Marxist belief in class struggle and social revolution means they are necessarily violent though they may disagree on the extent of violence to be used. Certian "evolutionary marxists" are more non-violent but virtually give up marxism in the process. Non-marxist Communism is more diverse).

Even if they're not using physical violence, I consider their tactics to be mental violence which will lead to mental illness, like the OP's example.

 

[Brickjectivity]

'Right' and 'Left' are only so useful. When you talk about 'Far left' its not at all clear what you are talking about. Its like saying "the thing" and "the other thing." You can be conservative, but the meaning of conservative changes over time. It just means keeping things the same. Left could mean almost anything, too, depending on where you live.

 

[Laika]

Even if they're not using physical violence, I consider their tactics to be mental violence which will lead to mental illness, like the OP's example.

I see your point. But as a form of "coercion" it boils down to peer pressure rather than a police state with death squads pulling people off the street and killing them as "enemies of the people".

It doesn't strike me as comparable but am I missing something here? I'm just trying to say its a bit of an exaggeration really.

 

[buddhist]

I see your point. But as a form of "coercion" it boils down to peer pressure rather than a police state with death squads pulling people off the street and killing them as "enemies of the people".

It doesn't strike me as comparable but am I missing something here? I'm just trying to say its a bit of an exaggeration really.

It's not just peer pressure, when they're now pushing for policies and laws against speech, with associated penalties, such as seen here.

 

[Laika]

It's not just peer pressure, when they're now pushing for policies and laws against speech, with associated penalties, such as seen here.

I see what your getting at. The problem is the threat of fines, job loss, prison sentence, etc. I agree that could be a problem. What do you think people should do to fight against it?

 

[buddhist]

I see what your getting at. The problem is the threat of fines, job loss, prison sentence, etc. I agree that could be a problem. What do you think people should do to fight against it?

IMO it would be best if the adults in society ignore them and paid them little attention, provide no media time to inflame others like them, and offer them remedial classes on how to gracefully handle what they might consider "emotional abuse" or "hateful speech" from others.

In the past, people spent their time earning a living, fighting disease, defending their homes, conquering nature and space, and more; now we are coddling children in the bodies of adults who are emotionally broken over words?

 

[Twilight Hue]

RF is not a representative sample of any population.
And besides, reality has a leftist bias. That's why people with a lot of learning and experience tend towards the left in free speech places like the USA. University profs, journalists, media pundits, the more you know about the human situation the more you tend to be leftist. At least, by USA standards.
Tom

Its ironic that leftist policies ultimately leads to the erosion of those principles by which this country was founded.

 

[columbus]

Its ironic that leftist policies ultimately leads to the erosion of those principles by which this country was founded.

It is also ironic that the liberals who founded this country were mostly slavers, good on genocide, and saw no reason for women to vote.

This country is more built on irony than immigration, and that's going a piece.
Tom

 

[ADigitalArtist]

It is also ironic that the liberals who founded this country were mostly slavers, good on genocide, and saw no reason for women to vote.

This country is more built on irony than immigration, and that's going a piece.
Tom

The two party system of the Adams administration doesn't make much sense compared to modern analogues anyway. The religious element were more tied into the Federalist party and we're bigger on women's issues and abolitionists, sure, but they were also for larger government and wall street's creation. The Democratic Republicans were super critical of Christianity, big on separation, and considered the elitist of the two parties. But they also represented small government, less taxes and the continuation of slavery as an important part of American agriculture.

 

[Laika]

Its ironic that leftist policies ultimately leads to the erosion of those principles by which this country was founded.

Actually the US was an extremely egalitarian society in terms of income distribution at the time of the founding fathers. Everyone was reliant on a subsistence agricultural economy so there wasn't really an ability to concentrate wealth in a few hands. Even with slavery, the source below (cautiously) suggests that the US was the most equal society in the world during the 1770's.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/262537/

As a sort of idealised rural egalitarianism, it was expressed in the idea of jeffersonian democracy. Thomas Jefferson warned against the rise of a commercial class and the polarisation of society with impoverished wage labourers based on the growth of industry and commerce.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffersonian_democracy

Left wing politics started in the French Revolution (the term originating from the "left wing" of the national assembly with the radical republicans and jacobins that supported social equality versus the monarchists as defenders of inequality). But America didn't have such sharp class divisions at that point because it was pre-industrial and did not have the burden of a feudal system like France and the old world did. It was only in the 19th century and industrialisation that class antagonisms gained more prominence and income inequalities widened to become a major issue.

 

[HonestJoe]

Ever since I moved to the Portland metro area, I've been slowly moving to the right politically. It is largely the result of resisting the ultra-left's attempts to claim dominion over every aspect of social policy and beyond.

Are you really suggesting that you're actively altering your personal political opinions because some people of a particular persuasion did something you disagreed with? To me, that sounds like deciding a sports team is less likely to win the championship because some of their fans are drunken thugs.

I'd suggest you're caught up in the labels and categorisation rather than focusing on actual beliefs and principles. Of course, many of the people you're perfectly reasonably challenging are guilty of the same kind of mistake.

 

[Laika]

IMO it would be best if the adults in society ignore them and paid them little attention, provide no media time to inflame others like them, and offer them remedial classes on how to gracefully handle what they might consider "emotional abuse" or "hateful speech" from others.

In the past, people spent their time earning a living, fighting disease, defending their homes, conquering nature and space, and more; now we are coddling children in the bodies of adults who are emotionally broken over words?

There are some real problems on the left and there is a sort of infantalisation in terms of how dogmatic there commitment to principles can be. The tendency towards "proffessional protesting" over practical politics is counter-productive to their own interests in many ways.

However, if this is a problem- it wont simply go away by ignoring it. Ideally, the solution is either to change the views with people you disagree with or find some sort of accomodation that doesn't require coercion. Addmittedly its hard to get past the label and actually talk to the "person" behind it given the passions involved. Nevertheless, I think you'll find that many on the left appreciate some of the things you describe- space travel is a good one as it blends a love of science and progress. often its better to find a more results orientated approach that makes a genuine difference. The "good" ones on the left who you can work with would appreciate that as it cuts through the polarisation and partisan politics and "gets stuff done". The point is to weed out and isolate the real screw ups by winning over the more moderate and concilatory ones rather than just being "entrenched in gridlock" if you will.

 

[buddhist]

There are some real problems on the left and there is a sort of infantalisation in terms of how dogmatic there commitment to principles can be. The tendency towards "proffessional protesting" over practical politics is counter-productive to their own interests in many ways.

However, if this is a problem- it wont simply go away by ignoring it. Ideally, the solution is either to change the views with people you disagree with or find some sort of accomodation that doesn't require coercion. Addmittedly its hard to get past the label and actually talk to the "person" behind it given the passions involved. Nevertheless, I think you'll find that many on the left appreciate some of the things you describe- space travel is a good one as it blends a love of science and progress. often its better to find a more results orientated approach that makes a genuine difference. The "good" ones on the left who you can work with would appreciate that as it cuts through the polarisation and partisan politics and "gets stuff done". The point is to weed out and isolate the real screw ups by winning over the more moderate and concilatory ones rather than just being "entrenched in gridlock" if you will.

I agree; one problem as I see it is that the few "moderate and conciliatory" adults on the left allow themselves to be outshouted and cowed by the more vocal infantile leftists.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ever since I moved to the Portland metro area, I've been slowly moving to the right politically. It is largely the result of resisting the ultra-left's attempts to claim dominion over every aspect of social policy and beyond. It's become clear that the far left is engaged in a political power grab, and they're not really interested in rational discourse. They're not even really interested in progress.

Take for instance what has been happening at the University of Toronto, where professor Jordan Peterson has been protesting legislation that would require people to refer to transgender individuals by the pronouns of their choice. He argued that it's an attack on freedom of speech, which it obviously is, whether you support it or not. During one of his speeches, they attempted to shout him down, as well as attempted to mute the speakers connected to his microphone, and create white noise so that nobody could hear him. By proclaiming that free speech is vital to a functioning democracy and civilization, he was literally accused by these people of perpetrating "hate speech." A very odd set of values. Conservative reporter Lauren Southern was even attacked by one of these people at the protest.

And this kind of behavior is now relatively common among the far-left. So common, there's now a buzzword for it. It's called a "shut down." Feminists have done it quite a bit. BLM is guilty of perhaps the most crazy instances of this; they actually shut down a police mural unveiling dedicated to apologizing to the gay community for the 1981 bathhouse raids. Are these people high or something? Talk about burning bridges...

Seriously, where is the desire to have a rational discourse? As far as I can tell, there isn't any. Their mode of attack has become pretty clear: dominate the conversation by claiming oppression and false equivalence. Legislate it. Acquire resources from the fallout.

Portlandia, eh?
It sounds like Ann Arbor, MI.
It can indeed be disturbing.
But always remember that one's little Sovietesque enclave is more the exception than the rule.

 

[David1967]

Why are you being xe-phobic racist by calling the Professor a "him" and "he"?

You now supposed to use "Xe".

Welcome to the new reality.

 

[David1967]

IMO it would be best if the adults in society ignore them and paid them little attention, provide no media time to inflame others like them, and offer them remedial classes on how to gracefully handle what they might consider "emotional abuse" or "hateful speech" from others.

In the past, people spent their time earning a living, fighting disease, defending their homes, conquering nature and space, and more; now we are coddling children in the bodies of adults who are emotionally broken over words?

Outstanding! My Buddhist friend, this post is very enlightening. No pun intended, that's spot on.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think the professor can have his way, but only if people can and will constantly and continually refer to him using female nouns.
It does make me wonder, those who see such things as a marginal problem, non-existent, or just not getting worked up over, it makes me wonder how quickly their attitude and opinion would change if they had to face said issues?

 

[buddhist]

Being a movement based around educating the masses about class consciousness, the far left as a group is the only major political group I can think of that's only method of transforming society requires the persuasion of the masses far beyond what occurs in a western election.

Persuasion? Nothing's wrong with rational, friendly discourse in an attempt to learn from one another and grow in compassion in such a way, but I see the far-left demanding the heavy hand of law and punishment against those who dare to hurt their feelings by their exercise of free speech.

Besides, instead of trying to force others into your image (transforming others aka "transforming society"), what ever happened to the ideal of individuals who sought self-growth and enlightenment by transforming one's own self, becoming more resilient to the endless external forces which might displease them? That's a mature adult - unlike the emotionally fragile child who is driven in every direction by its endless delusions, desires, and aversions, and resorts to external violence on others when it doesn't get its way.

 

[buddhist]

Outstanding! My Buddhist friend, this post is very enlightening. No pun intended, that's spot on.

Intend your puns, my Christian friend - after all, they're one of the best parts of language.