#left-wing
Text
Observation.
The fact that the ideas of the far Left do not work from a practical standpoint is yet another reason that the Left seeks federal power. Federal power mitigates the damage that these ideas do. Control of the money "printing press" means the ability to continually offset and delay the negative consequences of your decisions. When far Left ideas are simply left to function on their own, in cities on the local level, things quickly go awry. Federal power masks the harm. It was actually more federal money (not suitable border policy) that local Democrats like Mayor Eric Adams of New York were looking for recently from the President; money to support their sanctuary city policies. President Biden fortunately opted for a more realistic solution this time, after initially setting the welcome mat which encouraged the original crisis.
The fruit of Left-wing social policies and crime policies can be seen locally in blue cities across the country. But I think that New York is one of the most fascinating examples because there we can see the cause and effect more vividly than we can anywhere else. Each time the city has changed hands politically we have seen the tangible results. Liberals reigned over the city for over 20 years straight throughout the 70's and 80's, presiding over the worse crime wave in its modern history (we're talking murder rates 5 times higher than today). Many of its inner city neighborhoods visually resembled third world countries; President Ronald Reagan was left speechless upon visiting the South Bronx. They are conditions that would not even be tolerated in the city today.
The seismic shift came about when Mayor Rudy Giuliani was elected in the 1990's and remained in power for 8 years. He was followed by Michael Bloomberg who ran as a Republican and kept most of Giuliani's policies in place. The city soon became unrecognizable, but in a good way. New York eventually obtained the reputation of one of "America's safest big cities". Times Square which was once a no man's land after dark became a family spot. But ultimately the first Democrat in years was elected as Mayor in 2014. In just 4 years people were already discussing the deterioration of the city. Today it is a topic of discussion outside of the city.
Why would we turn our national government over to policies and to ideologies that we have seen we cannot turn our cities over to?
108 notes
·
View notes
Note
Why is the American Left so Anti-Saudia but they say nothing about Iran?
I always found it weird how much the Left seems to dislike Saudi Arabia and highlight its human rights abuses and why the alliance is against American national interest. This is far back as Michael Moore’s documentary Fahreneit 9/11, Vox who did a special on weapons sales to Saudis, Morning Joe which kept calling MBS a butcher, The View after Biden’s visit and Krystal Ball on Breaking Points.
Interestingly these same people always go at pains to say why US should seek peace with Iran and how the government does not represent the American people. When Trump was sabre rattling Iran they said he’d start WW3. It took until the hijab protest angle for them to cover Iran critically. Even Egypt who is an American vassal under El-Sisi gets criticised all the time including by Vox/MSNBC but when the Muslim Brotherhood got in power after the Arab Spring, which is against all sorts of progressive causes, they were never really criticised.
I always get frustrated by how people throw everything to the Left of Trump as "the Left".
Joe Scarborough is nobody's Leftist. He was a far-right wing congressman from Florida in the 90s and voted to impeach Clinton in 98. MSNBC has routinely fired left-wing and Muslim dissenters to the Mainstream Washington politics (which is center-right), and to this day is filled with center and right-wing talking points. You think the Left would have Raytheon War Privateers talking up Israel in itss slow-rolling genocide without criticism?
That being said, I would significantly advise OP read a book, or talk to a leftist. Preferably in real life. The concept of "The Left doesn't criticize Iran or Muslim Brotherhood" is somewhat divorced from the broader reality and context. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are American allies and their actions are things that the US Government directly or indirectly supports.
Saudi Arabia is a US ally, so the left is critical of that close relationship and the supplying of arms such as fighter jets to such a brutal regime (currently engaged in a devastating war in Yemen using American weapons). In contrast, the US has huge tensions with Iran, so the call from the left is "do not escalate this to war." In both instances the intent is the same: to reduce the threat of war.
Try to say what you're saying directly and in descriptive language and it falls apart at face value.
"The left-wing has no criticism of anti-democratic Theocratic states." Center-left criticism of the Muslim Brotherhood has been around for a long, long time. It's easily google-able.
Or how about: "Why does the Left criticize an American vassal state with a puppet in charge?"
Bringing up the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt just speaks to how little attention you pay to the Country. The Muslim Brotherhood hasn't been in power there since 2013 when a military junta took over and threw thousands of them in jail.
#left-wing#muslim brotherhood#politics#original content#international relations#saudi arabia#MBS#Iran
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
Among many “progressives,” the atrocities produced a profound sense of disorientation. This was because the Palestinians — people whose cause they had promoted as the acme of conscience and enlightenment — turned out to be barbaric savages.
Even worse, people the progressives had opposed and stigmatised as the “far-right” because they had regarded the Palestinians as murderous foes turned out to have been correct all along.
Worse yet again, some people on their own side actually turned on them for supporting Israel against Hamas. This was a terrible and destabilising shock. That’s because the left is governed by a herd mentality. Their views have to conform to the opinion of similarly “enlightened” people. Anyone who isn’t part of the progressive herd is “right-wing” and wrong about everything.
Moreover, since progressives believe that they embody virtue itself, right-wingers aren’t just wrong but evil. Yet the October 7 massacre revealed that the people supported by the progressives were evil.
This put progressives in a terrible bind. They couldn’t accept anything that revealed their own narrative to be so morally bankrupt.
British Jewish journalist Melanie Phillips, hitting the mark once again in her latest column, The Terror of the Right. In it, she points out that the Israeli people are united behind Prime Minister Netanyahu's strategy for defeating Hamas, even if they don't agree with him politically. Yet foreign observers, such as the Biden administration, convince themselves that removing Netanyahu will make the Israelis support a Palestinian state. It will not.
#progressive#melanie phillips#left#left-wing#israel#hamas#palestinian#palestinian terrorism#moral bankruptcy#journalist#commentary#spot on#binyamin netanyahu#savages#terrorism#stop terrorism#gaza
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
I will say, with the uptick in antisemitism coming from the Left lately regarding Israel v. Palestine, it'll be fascinating to watch the absolutely unprecedented levels of doublethink that'll no doubt transpire as they'll all be forced to vote for Biden yet again despite his very clear intention to support Israel in this conflict.
If y'all really think Israel is committing genocide, I'll be very intrigued to hear who you plan on voting for and how you'll justify it in your minds. 😏
4 notes
·
View notes
Quote
The very movement of Nietzsche's thought implies a destruction of the different possible foundations of current political positions. right-wing groups base their action on an emotional attachment to the past. leftist groups on rational principles. Now attachment to the past and rational principles (justice, social equality) are both rejected by Nietzsche. Thus it would have to be impossible to use his teachings in any given orientation. But his teachings represent an incomparable seductive force, and consequently quite simple a 'force,' that politicians are tempted to enslave, or at the very least to agree with, in order to benefit their enterprises. Nietzsche's teachings 'mobilize' the will and the aggressive instincts; it was inevitable that existing activities would try to draw into their movement these wills and these instincts that had become mobile and remained unemployed.
Georges Bataille, Acephale, pg. 22-23
#bataille#georges bataille#acephale#nietzsche#politics#orientation#right-wing#left-wing#anti-politics
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
I'M FUCKING SICK OF THIS!
I'm tired of reading headlines about people dying for being who they are.
I'm tired of bigots repeating lie after lie about marginalized groups.
I'm tired of having to actually argue about why a specific group deserves rights.
And to all of the motherfuckers that just close their eyes and only offer their sympathies to us. I have one thing to say to you: WE DON'T GIVE A SINGLE FUCK ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS!
We don't want it.
We don't need it.
We want support and change to protect our communities. We want pieces of shit preaching hate to no longer have a platform. We want action! Until that happens, fuck your country, fuck your flag, fuck your God, and fuck your freedoms!
12 notes
·
View notes
Text
support if you can, this is a genuinely cool thing: practicing what you preach
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
No wise man ever thought that a traitor should be trusted.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
Keir Starmer’s tenth and final pledge to the Labour Party membership when he was campaigning to be leader was:
"Effective opposition to the Tories
Forensic, effective opposition to the Tories in Parliament – linked up to our mass membership and a professional election operation. Never lose sight of the votes ‘lent’ to the Tories in 2019. Unite our party, promote pluralism and improve our culture. Robust action to eradicate the scourge of antisemitism. Maintain our collective links with the unions."
In September 2021, Starmer admitted that in his bid to beat the Conservatives he was willing to break all previous promises.
“Starmer: I’m ready to break pledges to make Labour electable." (Independent: 28/09/21)
Like Boris Johnson before him, Starmer is interested in one thing and one thing only – POWER. To that end he may well provide “effective opposition in Parliament” but it has been at the expense of the mass membership of the party.
The Labour Party has been haemorrhaging members since power hungry Starmer became leader and his Blairite credentials have became more apparent.
“UK Labour Party losing 250 members a day since Sir Keir Starmer became leader.” (The Levant: 26/07/21)
Under Jermy Corbyn membership reached over 500,000 because his policies were popular not only within the Labour Party itself, but within the electorate as a whole. Under Starmer, membership dropped between August 2021 and 2022 by 90,000.
Starmer is using the Labour Party as his own personal fiefdom, alienating not only party members but the trade unions as well.
“It’s no great secret that relations between Keir Starmer and trade union leaders have been worsening for some time. However, the recent sacking of Sam Tarry—dropped from his job as shadow transport minister for appearing on an RMT picket line—marks a further deterioration."
Having come to power on 10 left-wing pledges, Starmer immediately began to break everyone of his solemn promises. He is now openly flaunting his Blairite credentials, and instead of providing an “effective opposition to the Tories” by offering the electorate radically different policies and strategies, he is merely tweaking existing Tory policies, policies that have seen the majority of the population become considerably poorer and sicker over the last 12 years.
Starmer should take heed of this headline lest the same happen to him.
“…Blair went from a prime minister with a 93% approval rating in 1997 to one of Britain’s most loathed public figures – including among his own political tribe- offers invaluable lessons for Labour’s future." (Guardian: 07/01/22)
#uk politics#pledges#Trades unions#betrayal#opposition#Tory lite#tony blaire#fall from grace#left-wing
2 notes
·
View notes
Video
youtube
The Nightmare of Politically Orienting
#youtube#political compass#politcal videos#political#opinion#leftist#left-wing#right-wing#politics#thoughts#politics streamer
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
This summarises an interaction in the FB comment section, but the site won't let me post it there, so I'm posting it here.
2 notes
·
View notes
Note
This is a rambling thought so apologies in advance if it starts a shitkicking war in the notes.
Do you think ine of the reasons that more left leaning people tend to be less favourable on gun rights is because of the core of where the rights come from, in principle?
Like... healthcare, abortion, housing, etc. All (at least to me) boil down to bodily autonomy. Without the right to bodily autonomy you lose rights to these things, and you can't have tru autonomy without those things.
But guns... that's not true. Yes you CAN use guns to defend yourself, but you don't have to.
Like, in my head, the right to bear arms is kind of like if you insisted on the right to a 3 bedroom single family home. It's too specific. A right to shelter might include 3 bedroom homes, but doesn't guarantee it. Same thing with guns.
Does that make any sense?
TLDR; You're missing some aspects, but you're mis-identifying "left-wing" and "liberal".
_____________________________________________
It makes sense, and I can se the logic, but there are 2 things to consider.
"You go far enough Left and you get your guns back."
The people most consistently anti-gun are left-leaning Liberals. When you start getting to pro-gun leftist you're starting to approach people who are leftist even on the international stage. Not all leftists are pro-guns, but the belief in/respect for gun ownership starts increasing.
2. What you're saying makes sense, but you're touching on a few different things.
2a. the difference in the specificity largely comes from the promise of "guns = physical safety." We are going to sidestep the assholes who say that disingenuously for now. If you are a liberal and in the US and you fully believe in the inherent Goodness of the people, the systems, etc. then you are more likely to view guns as unnecessary for individual safety because you have Police, and the Rule of Law, etc. supporting your safety, and if there's ever a systemic need for you to fight then surely it'll be a draft or something, which isn't in the conversation.
Obviously, if you lose faith in the systems, or view the systems as inherently corrupt, bigoted, etc. you lose faith in the theoretical equal protections offered. It doesn't fully mean if you don't believe in the cops you'll go get an long rifle, but you're certainly less resistant to the idea.
2b. A lot of the left-wing or Liberal gun control measures tend to not be about principles but about practicality. So the Bodily Autonomy thing doesn't particularly factor into it.
For example:
It is, objectively, a fact that people with domestic abuse records are massively more likely to enact violence (and hence gun violence) on people around them, so it becomes a balancing act between that person's right to a gun (and what that means/is valued) vs. the foreseeable outcome that they're going to escalate their violent behavior to shoot somebody.
You'll see this in a lot of the rebuttals of right-wing gun framing, where the theoretical value of the gun isn't dismissed, but rather debunked in how people use it.
"You don't need it for safety"/"you're in more danger if you have a gun"
or when gun advocates/republicans say "the 2nd amendment protects the others" the response (rightly) is "When have you ever cared about the others?"
2c (bonus). Right-wing gun ownership has been celebrated in the US for decades now, and left-wing gun ownership has been the cause for entire political movements to be repressed, jailed, and killed/fire-bombed in the US. Part of the discrepancy you're observing is the natural result of Leftisists with Guns being called Terrorists and Right-Wingers with Guns being called Patriots.
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
“Every man jack of them voted remain, and they are considerably more leftwing than those at any meeting of any political party. In the interests of sounding mature, I should probably pretend to think there are rightwing book festivals, which people attend to worship David Starkey or ask creepy questions of Niall Ferguson, but I don’t think that. If even the Cheltenham literature festival turns the town briefly into a people’s republic, I can’t think what town would host a Toryfest.”
“The audience absolutely hate being politically misidentified, and they spend those first 10 minutes desperately signalling, with spontaneous clapping and foot-stamping, to indicate that nobody hates the government more than they. So it’s like a panto, with an audience metaphorically shouting “He’s behind you,” but really meaning it – as if you might not know.”
#book festivals#left-wing#remainers#this doesn’t surprise me at all#i’ve never met a well-read person who was a right winger
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
It seems that all the "centrists" I lurked at from 2018-2019, during that little left-centrist phase I had, either became:
1. typical right conservatives who still refuse to admit they are (bonus points if they went even more right to the point of being far right trump supporters)
2. Did a whole 180 and are hard left
Bonus: that one apparent liberal blog who always seemed to defend the centrists/right wing now comes off as one of those annoying white liberals, who think they're progressive, but their actually borderline annoying centrist, who thinks that: hate biogtry = liberal. They're "liberal via 1991 standards" type lol
1 note
·
View note
Text
Reduced But Still Egregious - 03/25/2024
Trump's bond deadline approached today and was extended to 10 days from today, the bond's amount was reduced to $175 million. So, I guess you can call it a win for Trump, and I'm glad it was reduced because over $450 million would have taken all his available cash for his campaign. Fanni Willis remains on the "Trump can't bring into question suspicious voting results case," in Georgia; in spite of her illegal love affair with the prosecuting attorney that she hired and paid an exorbitant amount of money to, and part of which they used to go on lavish vacations together to places like the Caribbean. Trump was hoping to get the "Stormy Daniels" case in New York delayed, that didn't happen. He also tried delaying the classified documents case in Florida because they were given over 100,000 of new discovery only weeks before the trial date, of which Trump's lawyers have to go through; but again, the judge did not grant him his extension request. A couple of minor setbacks, but Trump will win on appeal in all these cases, even if all of them wind up in the Supreme Court. It's more than obvious to me that all of these court cases against Trump are part of a coordinated effort from the Biden administration and the left-wing media to hurt him, to destroy him, to bankrupt him, to do anything they can to keep him from winning back the presidency; even it is illegal or unconstitutional, and immoral, which I believe all of them are. I think the bond should've been reduced to $0.00: all of these cases should be thrown out, -- period!
#trump#biden#fanni willis#stormy daniels#judge#supreme court#trial date#trial#cases#court cases#media#left-wing#illegal#unconstitutional#biden administration#lavish vacations
1 note
·
View note
Photo
This is not going to be easy...
Plague Dogs is one of those films that that leaves an distinct impact on you after you watch it. Very few films leave you so emotionally drained after seeing it. And the book has also been praised by pretty much everyone who has read it, and it is also hard for reviewers to properly review it without having an emotional breakdown.
I two, struggled to write a review, not because of the emotional impact. It's because... I don't like the original novel...at all.
Yes, I said it. The film adaptation is better than the novel, and there are many reasons why the film succeeds and the novel falls by the wayside. And no, it's not because it was a sad novel. I have read much more darker and depressing novels than this (E.G. NO.6 by Atsuko Asano).
The reason I hate this novel is for reasons that are shocking and makes you wonder how propaganda like this still runs rampant even to this day...
The Story and Characters
The story is about two dogs that escape an animal research centre and try to survive out in the wild.
But the novel doesn't focus on the dogs, only less than a third of the book actually follows the dogs. No, the main part of this book is to describe backgrounds in the Lake District and to make humans look like the worst thing in existence.
I am not kidding when I say that none of the human characters are likeable. Not one are redeemable in any way. One of the Characters, Digby Driver, is one of the most Despicable characters I have EVER read about. If your curious, read his backstory on Wikipedia! The novel makes his actions 10x worse here than a webpage can describe it.
The dogs are given no memorable traits. They are just blank slates that the readers can project their dogs onto. Which gives the novel a sense of manipulation.
From the very first page when the dog drowns in the tank, the reader knows that this is not going to have a happy ending and that it clearly has a left-wing, PETA-Like agenda against ALL forms of animal testing.
Yes, some animals are poorly treated in these facilities, but most of them are given suitable habitats, and other than the test that they will go through, they live relatively normal lives.
Before you PETA fanatic go at me and call me an animal hater, let me make one thing clear...
I have lived with a lot of animals since childhood and I am currently taking an animal care course, and a science GCSE. I have read a lot about the different experiments they have given to animals, and all the animals have one thing in common...
They are healthy test subjects.
If the scientists had cruelly treated the animals and they were already sick, how would they know that the test (in this novel's case, medicine and disease control) was successful or they need to go back to the drawing board and try again.
Would I rather see other means of testing medication, of course I do. But until that day comes, we need to preform this necessary evil for the good of all. Clearly Richard Adams didn't do his research!
The entire novel only gives you one side of the argument without actually giving any viable reasons to agree with them. The author is so immature about the subject of animal testing, that he gave the animal research centre the acronym, A.R.S.E (a British slang for you buttocks!).
The fact that a reader complained about the ending of this novel speaks VOLUMES about this novel and how happy he was to give the work a "happy ending", people say that the first printing keeps the original ending. Luckily, my library has the first edition, and it is simply not true.
I did a bit more research and it was at the manuscript phase that the novel was changed to give the dogs a happy ending and add a scene where a girl who is seriously ill talks about the good of medical research in a childish way with her father.
The worst thing by far (other than the clear manipulation through guilt) is the character, Tod. What have they done to you, Tod? He is the only reason I read as far as he did, but the final nail in the coffin was his death.
The film gave The Tod a heroic death when he is trying to lead the police dogs away from the two main leads. In the book, he is killed by the gunman who gets eaten by the dogs.
It is the most disgusting scene I have ever read, not only did Rowf go out of character and eat the man in explicit detail. The Tod is captured and killed by the dogs, the gunman looks at his body, and throws at his hunting dogs to tear apart...
I am the only person disgusted by this novel? I mean, I know where Richard Adams is coming from, and I'm sure he had only the best intentions in mind, but why did he let the dogs die?
Well, if (and when) the dogs survived, they would of stopped being a construct and started becoming actual characters. They would of had to go through survivors guilt and Snitter recovering from his brain operation. It would of made it harder to project their own animals onto the two dogs. It would become Snitter and Rowf's story, not the reader's beloved animals. So the two dogs drown and all their troubles in life die with them.
The fact he wrote a "happy" ending angers me. He doesn't focus on the dog's recovery or what happened after they were rescued by the boatmen. The ending focuses on a father and little girl reading DR.Dolittle.
Richard Adams didn't care about the dogs, all he cared about was the message, and it isn't a good one.
The Illustrations
The illustrations are the only redeemable thing in this novel, the detail on them is beautiful. But later prints are removing the illustrations in later prints is confusing.
Even though they are only backgrounds and don't really fit into the story all that well, it is respite from the slog that is this novel. But now they are gone unless you hunt down an old copy, and they are getting harder to find for a reasonable price.
Final Thoughts
I am amazed that the film became a masterpiece despite the odds, and I still enjoy the film even after reading this novel.
The novel is a stark reminder how even today, people can easily manipulate you. And with a controversial topic like animal testing, we need someone with more of a neutral opinion about this topic, and not a left-wing activist preaching the word of PETA and god outside of these facilitie, harassing the workers who look after these animals...
The Story 0.5/5
The Characters 0/5
The Illustrations (No Longer Available)
Overall 0/5
#plague dogs#Plague dogs review#novel#richard adams#overrated#overrated novel#propaganda#animal testing#PETA#left#leftwing#wing#left-wing#fox#dog#dogs#animal#animals#poor#enternal damnation#worst novel#worst#ever#written
0 notes
Text
Sorry for the bad photo quality, Tumblr doesn't like posts this long.
#ramblings#politics#communism#socialism#climate change#not a reblog#when our turn comes#we shall not make excuses for the terror#environment#enviromentalism#carbon emissions#carbon footprint#global warming#climate collapse#anti capitalism#radical left#left wing#long posts#long post#color of the sky#hot take#this took like 20 minutes to upload because Tumblr kept crashing#and like 90 minutes to make
43K notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
jpechacek
Jared Draws
angelnextdoor666
Amelia
tatelangdon-psycho
Tate Langdon
robrobbieblr
Mobile App Development company
miscellaneous-motion
*⋆miscellaneous⋆*