Both political parties in America represent capital instead of people.
I align with Libertarian Socialism, a left ideology. This is also a leftist/anarchist instance and community. We aren’t Republicans in disguise.
One would have to have some serious bad faith or cognitive dissonance to be able to argue that both sides are the same as a person who firmly aligns with right-wing, capitalist ideology. Republicans thrive on promoting their differences in contrast to Democrats.
Left = Socialism, Right = Capitalism.
If you look at the Political Compass you will see that there are also authoritarians and libertarians (not the right-wing, capitalist ideology) on the Y axis.
Left authoritarians or left libertarians both are well educated on what the left represents. They are able to see the stark contrast between capitalistic parties and socialism.
Democrats are not left-wing or leftist, they most certainly aren’t socialist. They only tease at being socialist.
“bothsides” is by the majority of people in reference to the two political parties (in reference to america), not left wing and right wing in a political ideological sense. As you said both political parties operate within a system of opperssion fighting for control of power. Neither side is good, but one could say that one side is definitley more damaghing than the other in a realist sense.
i think though from my experience, today the left, specifically, moderern progressisvism has become far too socially authoritarian, as an arnarchist type i cant abide by any authoritarianism and the left is no stranger to it.
Here’s the point I withheld: neither capitalist party is preferrable and capitalism is destroying the planet.
Democrats are not able to fight extreme authoritarianism, fascism, and oligarchy. They have no power or political gravitas. They can’t even take a stand for universal health care…
Value judgements of which side is better are irrelevant: the capitalist US economy relies on various forms of slavery (even child slavery) and third-world exploitation. An estimated 40% of US agricultural workers are undocumented immigrants.
Modern slavery must be abolished. Neither party is calling for the end of slavery, let alone addressing it — it’s a carefully veiled reality.
Also anarchism is the opposite of authoritarianism. It’s a left libertarian ideology. Just saying.
The authoritarian socialist ideology is usually referred to as state communism, such as Marxism-Leninism. You can be a Marxist without being authoritarian. You can be a communist without being authoritarian.
I agree that neither party is preferable in the sense that the democrats should be praised or idealised and i definitely agree that the democrats and in my opinion “modern progressives” have no ability to combat facism. As they are both the product of eating with a silver spoon for too long and both dont want to change the system of power, they just want to seize control of it and weild for themselves.
The left today is just too scattered to compete with facism. Either you’re a social authoritarain who seeks power but cannot take any tangile steps like facism or you are leftist like many people on this plastform and get stuck in semanticallyu intel;ectualising bygon theories and hyper spefici idealogical labels
I am focused on solutions, not ideology. I do my best to not flaunt the label that most accurately aligns with my ideals (unless relevant) and my ideas generally resonate with Democrats and even some Republicans. People want change and people want progress, no matter where you fall on the political spectrum.
Everybody, regardless of ideology, should be able to focus on solutions and the change we’d like to see — on what kind of world we want to live in. I want to live in a free and kind world, without slavery. The vast majority of people likely feel similarly.
Even the authoritarian socialists you disagree with tend to resonate with that. They want forcefully to centralize power, resources, and control so eventually a more gentle world is born and the state is shed. They think force is necessary, I’m confident we can convince them otherwise.
Maybe it’s naive, but I can see a world that unifies under the banner of change and common sense solutions — a world that is able to cut past the propaganda and polarization and moves forward.
Yeah sorry i didnt intent for any of that to come accross like it was targetted at you.
To clarify i dont mean authoritarian socialists - i mean modern progressives who focus on social issues (not socialism) being overtly authoritarian within the realm of social dynamics in society.
I do think you are naive, but i think its a comendable mindset and just because i think you are naive does not mean anything other than that i dont share the same faith in people as you do. Maybe im too nihilitistic.
No, you’re perfectly fine, even if it were targeted at me I wouldn’t take it personally. I’m attempting to respond to you and also represent my own viewpoints for the thread — and I’m sorry for the misunderstanding.
I just think that without non-polarizing idealism and unity, the alternative is modern horror, a revival of barbarism, and destruction on a scale that the world has never seen before.
I don’t want to believe that will be the outcome, though. But it still won’t stop me from doing everything in my power to open and soften hearts so such a reality never comes to pass. I don’t think anybody really wants a world of renewed violence and suffering, when there already is so much suffering and violence.
I’m well aware of the realities of this world. Too aware, I’d say. Most people escape and distract themselves — or they are simply uninformed. I’d rather be the person who knows and still chooses to be perceivably naive, seeing the best in others — even if it’s not obvious or readily apparent on the surface.
Both political parties in America represent capital instead of people.
I align with Libertarian Socialism, a left ideology. This is also a leftist/anarchist instance and community. We aren’t Republicans in disguise.
One would have to have some serious bad faith or cognitive dissonance to be able to argue that both sides are the same as a person who firmly aligns with right-wing, capitalist ideology. Republicans thrive on promoting their differences in contrast to Democrats.
Left = Socialism, Right = Capitalism.
If you look at the Political Compass you will see that there are also authoritarians and libertarians (not the right-wing, capitalist ideology) on the Y axis.
Left authoritarians or left libertarians both are well educated on what the left represents. They are able to see the stark contrast between capitalistic parties and socialism.
Democrats are not left-wing or leftist, they most certainly aren’t socialist. They only tease at being socialist.
“bothsides” is by the majority of people in reference to the two political parties (in reference to america), not left wing and right wing in a political ideological sense. As you said both political parties operate within a system of opperssion fighting for control of power. Neither side is good, but one could say that one side is definitley more damaghing than the other in a realist sense.
i think though from my experience, today the left, specifically, moderern progressisvism has become far too socially authoritarian, as an arnarchist type i cant abide by any authoritarianism and the left is no stranger to it.
Here’s the point I withheld: neither capitalist party is preferrable and capitalism is destroying the planet.
Democrats are not able to fight extreme authoritarianism, fascism, and oligarchy. They have no power or political gravitas. They can’t even take a stand for universal health care…
Value judgements of which side is better are irrelevant: the capitalist US economy relies on various forms of slavery (even child slavery) and third-world exploitation. An estimated 40% of US agricultural workers are undocumented immigrants.
Modern slavery must be abolished. Neither party is calling for the end of slavery, let alone addressing it — it’s a carefully veiled reality.
Also anarchism is the opposite of authoritarianism. It’s a left libertarian ideology. Just saying.
The authoritarian socialist ideology is usually referred to as state communism, such as Marxism-Leninism. You can be a Marxist without being authoritarian. You can be a communist without being authoritarian.
I agree that neither party is preferable in the sense that the democrats should be praised or idealised and i definitely agree that the democrats and in my opinion “modern progressives” have no ability to combat facism. As they are both the product of eating with a silver spoon for too long and both dont want to change the system of power, they just want to seize control of it and weild for themselves.
The left today is just too scattered to compete with facism. Either you’re a social authoritarain who seeks power but cannot take any tangile steps like facism or you are leftist like many people on this plastform and get stuck in semanticallyu intel;ectualising bygon theories and hyper spefici idealogical labels
I am focused on solutions, not ideology. I do my best to not flaunt the label that most accurately aligns with my ideals (unless relevant) and my ideas generally resonate with Democrats and even some Republicans. People want change and people want progress, no matter where you fall on the political spectrum.
Everybody, regardless of ideology, should be able to focus on solutions and the change we’d like to see — on what kind of world we want to live in. I want to live in a free and kind world, without slavery. The vast majority of people likely feel similarly.
Even the authoritarian socialists you disagree with tend to resonate with that. They want forcefully to centralize power, resources, and control so eventually a more gentle world is born and the state is shed. They think force is necessary, I’m confident we can convince them otherwise.
Maybe it’s naive, but I can see a world that unifies under the banner of change and common sense solutions — a world that is able to cut past the propaganda and polarization and moves forward.
Yeah sorry i didnt intent for any of that to come accross like it was targetted at you.
To clarify i dont mean authoritarian socialists - i mean modern progressives who focus on social issues (not socialism) being overtly authoritarian within the realm of social dynamics in society.
I do think you are naive, but i think its a comendable mindset and just because i think you are naive does not mean anything other than that i dont share the same faith in people as you do. Maybe im too nihilitistic.
No, you’re perfectly fine, even if it were targeted at me I wouldn’t take it personally. I’m attempting to respond to you and also represent my own viewpoints for the thread — and I’m sorry for the misunderstanding.
I just think that without non-polarizing idealism and unity, the alternative is modern horror, a revival of barbarism, and destruction on a scale that the world has never seen before.
I don’t want to believe that will be the outcome, though. But it still won’t stop me from doing everything in my power to open and soften hearts so such a reality never comes to pass. I don’t think anybody really wants a world of renewed violence and suffering, when there already is so much suffering and violence.
I’m well aware of the realities of this world. Too aware, I’d say. Most people escape and distract themselves — or they are simply uninformed. I’d rather be the person who knows and still chooses to be perceivably naive, seeing the best in others — even if it’s not obvious or readily apparent on the surface.