i sure do. oh yeah, they had it so much better back then! sure would hate to get tortured in a SAVAK blacksite. well, at least i can wear my miniskirt!
12 days ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)1 child
On the American political spectrum, you have to notch everything once or twice to the left. 'Conservatives' are thus actually liberals; 'liberals' are actually social democrats and democratic socialists *a la* Sanders. This is why American 'conservatives' do not conserve much of anything—because liberalism does not call for conserving anything but itself—and American 'liberals' routinely advocate for government intervention, such as for the banning of 'hate groups' and 'hate speech'.
This is why the American 'Right' is attacking Iran from the Left, and would be considered Left ('reformist') within Iran. They do not like the *hijab*, for instance, precisely because of their Leftism, whereas I support it, and I despise the French and others who fight against the veiling of women. But that is because I am of the Right and America's 'Right' is of the Left: it is 'Right' only because it is Rightward of America's Left and for no other reason. There is plenty of space on the political spectrum for one to be Rightward of the Democratic Party while still being on the Left. Andrew Yang's obscure little splinter group from the Democratic Party is a prime example of something Rightward of the Democrats that is still objectively Leftist.
Returning to the end of the first paragraph, liberal arguments, e.g. for harm avoidance, ultimately lead to the Left: Mill went from liberal to Leftist late in life; Popper is an excellent example of someone who shows that liberalism is more Left than Right. Popper unfolds liberalism to the point of realizing that liberalism paradoxically requires authoritarian means to sustain itself.
This is part of why most or all of America is fated to become an Anglophone version of Brazil: liberalism is too close to the Left to actually be opposition. Liberals are insufficiently different from Leftists, the fighting between them is merely fraternal infighting by people who do not realize that they are ideological brethren. They are historically ignorant, and so do not see that socialism, including Marxism, came out of liberalism and only differs in the sense that it accuses liberalism of being insufficiently liberal.
The same Left bias emanating from that burger-buggering cesspool is already affecting politics elsewhere. I assume that you're Indian-German, and able to speak German. So you know full well that much of the AfD hierarchy, e.g. Peter Boehringer, are in every respect, including by self-identification, liberals, and only a minority of the party, e.g. Bjorn Hocke, are actually objectively Right-Wing. An AfD-led government, exceedingly likely in future, would not be a government of the Right; it would be a government of the Centre after decades of governments of the Left. Anyone who believes otherwise laughably believes that there could be such a thing as a lesbian Fuhrer and Far-Right Israeli homosexuals. Since no sane person entertains such nonsense, we must accept that the AfD is not a party of the Far-Right.
Let's think about why the CDU is actually Left-leaning. Notice that Merkel and Merz oppose AfD more than they do the SPD or even Die Linke? Why is that? If they were really Centre-Right as many think, they would find themselves closer to anything objectively Far-Right than they would to the Centre-Left or the Far-Left. But that is not the case. They do not even like the Centre to Centre-Right AfD. Merz considers AfD to be his main enemy, and CDU co-operation with Die Linke is more likely than CDU co-operation with AfD. If I remember rightly, they began co-operating just after Merz's election because they needed to in order to prevent an AfD victory somewhere.
So why would a 'Centre-Right' party align itself with a Far-Left party before a Centre to Centre-Right party? The answer to all this is that the CDU is Centre-Left, indifferentiable from the SPD, and far from the Centre-Right. Some might erroneously think that people calling themselves Christian Democrats must necessarily be Right-Wing, but such persons would be stumped by the simple fact that it was Italy's Christian Democrats who merged with the Italian Communist Party to form the Centre-Left Partido Democratico. Quite simply, the *Centre-Left* CDU is closer to Die Linke and the SPD than to AfD because the Centre-Left is closer to the Far-Left than it is to the Centre-Right. *This* is why Merz would sooner work with Die Linke than with the AfD. It is because, like in America, we need to notch things once or twice to the left to make any real sense of it: the 'Centre-Right' CDU is actually Centre-Left, the 'Far-Right' AfD is actually Centre to Centre-Right. Only when we make these adjustments to our plottings of German political parties on the political spectrum do we see why the CDU behaves the way it does: the distance between it and the SPD is very little, and the distance between it and Die Linke is actually less than the distance between it and the AfD. *That* is why the CDU prefers the SPD and Die Linke over the AfD.
succinctly put, brother. everything you brought up has led me to check out of politics completely and focus on faith alone.
simply put, there is no political solution. our best bet is probably a reinstitution of monarchies but creating new noble houses or lineages, ~~once~~ ones that are deeply in faith to Christ.
This is why the American 'Right' is attacking Iran from the Left, and would be considered Left ('reformist') within Iran. They do not like the *hijab*, for instance, precisely because of their Leftism, whereas I support it, and I despise the French and others who fight against the veiling of women. But that is because I am of the Right and America's 'Right' is of the Left: it is 'Right' only because it is Rightward of America's Left and for no other reason. There is plenty of space on the political spectrum for one to be Rightward of the Democratic Party while still being on the Left. Andrew Yang's obscure little splinter group from the Democratic Party is a prime example of something Rightward of the Democrats that is still objectively Leftist.
Returning to the end of the first paragraph, liberal arguments, e.g. for harm avoidance, ultimately lead to the Left: Mill went from liberal to Leftist late in life; Popper is an excellent example of someone who shows that liberalism is more Left than Right. Popper unfolds liberalism to the point of realizing that liberalism paradoxically requires authoritarian means to sustain itself.
This is part of why most or all of America is fated to become an Anglophone version of Brazil: liberalism is too close to the Left to actually be opposition. Liberals are insufficiently different from Leftists, the fighting between them is merely fraternal infighting by people who do not realize that they are ideological brethren. They are historically ignorant, and so do not see that socialism, including Marxism, came out of liberalism and only differs in the sense that it accuses liberalism of being insufficiently liberal.
The same Left bias emanating from that burger-buggering cesspool is already affecting politics elsewhere. I assume that you're Indian-German, and able to speak German. So you know full well that much of the AfD hierarchy, e.g. Peter Boehringer, are in every respect, including by self-identification, liberals, and only a minority of the party, e.g. Bjorn Hocke, are actually objectively Right-Wing. An AfD-led government, exceedingly likely in future, would not be a government of the Right; it would be a government of the Centre after decades of governments of the Left. Anyone who believes otherwise laughably believes that there could be such a thing as a lesbian Fuhrer and Far-Right Israeli homosexuals. Since no sane person entertains such nonsense, we must accept that the AfD is not a party of the Far-Right.
Let's think about why the CDU is actually Left-leaning. Notice that Merkel and Merz oppose AfD more than they do the SPD or even Die Linke? Why is that? If they were really Centre-Right as many think, they would find themselves closer to anything objectively Far-Right than they would to the Centre-Left or the Far-Left. But that is not the case. They do not even like the Centre to Centre-Right AfD. Merz considers AfD to be his main enemy, and CDU co-operation with Die Linke is more likely than CDU co-operation with AfD. If I remember rightly, they began co-operating just after Merz's election because they needed to in order to prevent an AfD victory somewhere.
So why would a 'Centre-Right' party align itself with a Far-Left party before a Centre to Centre-Right party? The answer to all this is that the CDU is Centre-Left, indifferentiable from the SPD, and far from the Centre-Right. Some might erroneously think that people calling themselves Christian Democrats must necessarily be Right-Wing, but such persons would be stumped by the simple fact that it was Italy's Christian Democrats who merged with the Italian Communist Party to form the Centre-Left Partido Democratico. Quite simply, the *Centre-Left* CDU is closer to Die Linke and the SPD than to AfD because the Centre-Left is closer to the Far-Left than it is to the Centre-Right. *This* is why Merz would sooner work with Die Linke than with the AfD. It is because, like in America, we need to notch things once or twice to the left to make any real sense of it: the 'Centre-Right' CDU is actually Centre-Left, the 'Far-Right' AfD is actually Centre to Centre-Right. Only when we make these adjustments to our plottings of German political parties on the political spectrum do we see why the CDU behaves the way it does: the distance between it and the SPD is very little, and the distance between it and Die Linke is actually less than the distance between it and the AfD. *That* is why the CDU prefers the SPD and Die Linke over the AfD.
simply put, there is no political solution. our best bet is probably a reinstitution of monarchies but creating new noble houses or lineages, ~~once~~ ones that are deeply in faith to Christ.