https://youtu.be/v6yE0lhTs-c
https://youtu.be/knOBycnf9IE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm--xjd_mTc (full)
He's walking into the hornets nest. Libertarians look more left than right from what I can see.
Wonder what they think about a guy who showered with his 11 year old daughter.
Got one , should have my bingo card filled ion by the end of the day
MAGA Excuse list
-Libturds control everything
-False Flag
-Fake News, MSM propaganda
-What about the other guy
-TDS
-We were only joking, it was satire
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ashley-biden-leaked-diary-accusation/
No bingo for you.
You appear you have missed the point by an astronomical distance.
I'm not debating the authenticity of said diary.
The point is it that your response has exactly zero to do with the thread topic: Trump making a dick of himself on stage again and being booed off
aka default MAGA response #4 - "Deflection"
usually phrased as "what about the other guy"
Nah, I like to remind Trump haters that their alternative is a creep.
90+ indictments or whatever the flavour of the day is can't hold a candle to showering with your 11 year daughter.
Waiting for that Dali Lama moment to get caught on camera any day now...
I dunno , Trump's continual lusting after his daughter is pretty close.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-ivanka-trump-creepiest-most-unsettling-comments-a-roundup-a7353876.html
Hey, you're using your own #4. Sweet.
shareHis Bingo board is one free space and 24 squares that say "dRumpf!!!"
sharesorta , but not really ,
I thought at this point of the discussion: " can't hold a candle" , we are directly comparing and weighing Trump & Biden
So pros & cons of both are on topic , especially as mine directly measured with yours . ( the two incest ones for clarity)
They are. Libertarians inevitably adopt all the same positions as the left. In general this is because their worldview, like the left's, is completely antithetical to human nature and observable reality. They both underpin their ideologies on the notion of extreme egalitarianism. But there is great variety in the abilities of humans at both the individual level and at the tribal/ethnic/racial level. For this reason, the leftist and libertarian projects will always fail in the real world.
shareAh yes, those famous libertarians who support state healthcare, nationalisation, welfare state policies, progressive taxation and industry regulation.
Do you have the slightest clue what libertarianism means? It's not just about policies on drugs and abortion.
>For this reason, the leftist and libertarian projects will always fail in the real world.
As opposed to all those successful catholic fascist states you endorse. Pretty much every single western democracy is a liberal/social democratic state and has been since the end of WW2 (excluding the Iron curtain states).
You're quite boastful for someone whose contemporary states more models the modern cultural titans of Afghanistan and Iran.
As usual, you ignore the point being made in order to argue the point you wish had been made.
Does libertarianism rely on a belief that humans are infinitely malleable - much as the various leftist schools do? Just like the differing flavors of socialism, libertarians believe that if you get the economics right everything else falls into place. But that's ass-backward. The great chain of causality is biology first, then culture, then institutions, which play a role in governing economics.
Libertarianism can only be made to succeed if everyone living under it can be convinced to abandon their human nature. It might work briefly if the land it encompassed was populated by 120 IQ Europeans, but even then it would only last so long as no usurper came onto the scene and exploited libertarianism's inherent contradictions. It's a fairy tale.
>Does libertarianism rely on a belief that humans are infinitely malleable - much as the various leftist schools do? Just like the differing flavors of socialism, libertarians believe that if you get the economics right everything else falls into place. But that's ass-backward. The great chain of causality is biology first, then culture, then institutions, which play a role in governing economics.
Right, but they're still different to social democrats or democratic socialists or leftists. They aren't the same. There's crossover on social issues, but not on nearly anything economically.
>Libertarianism can only be made to succeed if everyone living under it can be convinced to abandon their human nature. It might work briefly if the land it encompassed was populated by 120 IQ Europeans, but even then it would only last so long as no usurper came onto the scene and exploited libertarianism's inherent contradictions. It's a fairy tale.
And what human nature are we told to abandon?
And what should we be living under? Religious-derived fascism where women are treated like domestic livestock and gay people are targeted by the state? And where culture is dictated to, and restricted by the state? Immense soft power the authoritarian countries of the world have.
Authoritarian despot nations where life becomes pointless? Where we all become playthings of the dear leader or ruling council? The sort of places scumbag fuckfaces like yourself want to live under?
I laughed.
shareI'm left to actually fill in the blanks of your ideology because you're a cowardly little shit who won't actually tell us what type of society you want.
I do know you want to force women into the kitchen and remove their right to vote. You're blatantly authoritarian. I also know you think LGBT people should be "back in the closet" by you're unwilling to specify what that means, so I conclude for you what I suspect you support.
Gosh.
shareSkavau, you're making him look good. You do know that right?
He's made a good point or two, while you've... played troll boi. Clearly and obviously.
What good points has he made?
shareif you ignored them when he made them, why ask me to repeat them?
Oh, cause you're playing retard.
I know exactly what he's saying. He's claiming that libertarianism and leftism "adopt all the same positions as the left" (they don't) and that they draw from the same premises about humans (they don't).
Also, I am of the impression that you yourself would identify as a libertarian-adjacent voter. Aren't you for civil liberties? Maixu isn't. Maixu wants to take away women's rights.
If you knew the points, then why did you ask what hte points where?
Oh, right, because you are a troll boi fag.
Your behavior is making him look good. Consider that.
>If you knew the points, then why did you ask what hte points where?
I asked what **good** points has he made? I wanted to hear from you what precisely was so clever about what he said.
And as I asked: I am of the impression that you yourself would identify as a libertarian-adjacent voter. Aren't you for civil liberties? Maixu isn't. Maixu wants to take away women's rights.
>Your behavior is making him look good. Consider that.
I really couldn't give a shit what you think makes someone look good or bad.
That makes no sense. If you knew the points, then you knew the points. Asking me was just you,... being a fucking troll.
Adn that's all you have. Stupid shit. YOu've got nothing to say.
And in the process, you are making a man you hate, look good. FYI.
>That makes no sense. If you knew the points, then you knew the points. Asking me was just you,... being a fucking troll.
It's as if you can't read at all. I knew what he claimed. I wanted to know what about them you thought was somehow good. And even how you would claim they were good.
>And in the process, you are making a man you hate, look good. FYI.
I really couldn't give a shit what you think makes someone look good or bad. I think you're amongst the most dumbass users on the forum.
And as I asked: I am of the impression that you yourself would identify as a libertarian-adjacent voter. Aren't you for civil liberties? Maixu isn't. Maixu wants to take away women's rights.
i made a real point about how you were failing to address him points.
Instead of addressing that, you asked me "what points" when you immediately then admitted that you knew what points.
YOu choose to talk shit instead of actualy tallking, so, go fuck yourself.
>i made a real point about how you were failing to address him points.
I replied to his points. Libertarians and Leftists are not the same (leftism being a broad umbrella anyway) and hold many different positions on many different issues - chiefly on economic issues.
If you think there's something clever embedded in his initial claim, by all means, but it was just another simping argument for state control over people's lives. Because he's a totalitarian who hates democracy.
And as I asked: I am of the impression that you yourself would identify as a libertarian-adjacent voter. Aren't you for civil liberties? Maixu isn't. Maixu wants to take away women's rights.
Not really you didn't. You were mostly jsut talking nonsense, trying to put words in his mouth, or inventing strawmen. It was kind of painful to watch.
Luckily you disgust me, so my normal human empathy for someone in trouble was greatly muted.
>Not really you didn't. You were mostly jsut talking nonsense, trying to put words in his mouth, or inventing strawmen. It was kind of painful to watch.
I did no such thing. He specifically said: "Libertarians inevitably adopt all the same positions as the left."
This is just flat-out, untrue. His assumptions about how, and many other leftists view the world are also rooted in strawmen too.
>Luckily you disgust me, so my normal human empathy for someone in trouble was greatly muted.
Everyone who doesn't suck off Donald Trumps is disgusting to you.
So, you are the same time, hold to your strawmen of the list of policies, in hte same post you admit his point about the shared world view, which you did not address.
That was very telling.
>So, you are the same time, hold to your strawmen of the list of policies, in hte same post you admit his point about the shared world view, which you did not address.
I made no such admittance. I acknowledged that he made the claim. I disagreed with it. How many libertarians do you know that endorse progressive taxation, welfare state policies, industry nationalisation, business regulation and socialised healthcare?
It's a genuinely nonsensical comment.
Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
All of this now, and you led with ,
"what points"?
Do you realize how... what a fucking asshole that makes you?
No, I asked "what policies?" This isn't an argument comparing quality of policies - this is me pointing out how libertarians and much of the left are different at their foundation. Since you ignored everything, I will just copy and paste:
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
Your inability to be honest with ANYONE makes ALL of your words not credible.
You still have never pointed out a single lie.
Since you ignored everything, I will just copy and paste:
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
"Perfect"? LOL.
Of course what he said was not "perfect".
But, he was being honest and sincere in his beliefs and engaging you in real discussion.
You were playing retarded troll boi games, like "what points".
HE'S here to discuss stuff. YOU are here to be a troll.
You're the bad guy.
>Of course what he said was not "perfect".
You're back to this weird literalism again, I see.
>But, he was being honest and sincere in his beliefs and engaging you in real discussion.
I didn't say he wasn't honest. I've never said he was a liar. Although he is a pussy who won't tell me what he really thinks about various things.
>You're the bad guy.
Still no comment on him wanting to remove women's rights from you, I see.
And since you again, didn't answer:
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
You stated that I accepted his words as "perfect".
If you didn't want me to think that was what you mean, you could ahve used less extreme language.
>You stated that I accepted his words as "perfect".
Have you not heard of hyperbole? I was making fun of you for being easily impressed at what anyone says to me. I also wasn't specifically referring to maixu, but you.
It was a jab at your continued credulity.
i said he made soem valid points. Comparted to you who, now ADMITS to not being fair or honest.
That is hardly being "impressed". Being better than you is a low bar. A potted plant is better than you, more self aware for example, or less of a dick.
>i said he made soem valid points. Comparted to you who, now ADMITS to not being fair or honest.
Points you can't seem to repeat.
When did I admit to not being fair, or honest? Saying that I was never interested in a full discussion (or rather: I did't expect one because's a cowardly little shit who runs like a bitch every time).
>That is hardly being "impressed". Being better than you is a low bar. A potted plant is better than you, more self aware for example, or less of a dick.
Dude, I've seen you applaud total nonsense just because it was directed at me.
And you are no in no position to whine about honesty on anything.
And since you again, didn't answer:
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
I can't discuss polices with someone who is not here to have iscussions but just to bait people into bad behavior.
As you have admitted to being.
Completely ignored. I'll just copy and paste what I said again.
>i said he made soem valid points. Comparted to you who, now ADMITS to not being fair or honest.
Points you can't seem to repeat.
When did I admit to not being fair, or honest? Saying that I was never interested in a full discussion (or rather: I did't expect one because's a cowardly little shit who runs like a bitch every time).
>That is hardly being "impressed". Being better than you is a low bar. A potted plant is better than you, more self aware for example, or less of a dick.
Dude, I've seen you applaud total nonsense just because it was directed at me.
And you are no in no position to whine about honesty on anything.
And since you again, didn't answer:
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
Get back to me when you are serious
shareCompletely ignored. I'll just copy and paste what I said again.
>i said he made soem valid points. Comparted to you who, now ADMITS to not being fair or honest.
Points you can't seem to repeat.
When did I admit to not being fair, or honest? Saying that I was never interested in a full discussion (or rather: I did't expect one because's a cowardly little shit who runs like a bitch every time).
>That is hardly being "impressed". Being better than you is a low bar. A potted plant is better than you, more self aware for example, or less of a dick.
Dude, I've seen you applaud total nonsense just because it was directed at me.
And you are no in no position to whine about honesty on anything.
And since you again, didn't answer:
>Now you are playing retard, by pretending to not understand the difference between worldview and specific policies.
The claim that the worldviews are the same is also just pulled out of his ass. Leftist thought in itself is so vast that you can't isolate a singular origin point.
I would argue the huge differences on economic interventionism and state intervention in itself make libertarians and many branches of leftism completely incompatible from a foundational level.
>Like I said, you are making him look good and leftards look... fucking retarded...
Again, people could say "go away" to me and you'd present it as an amazing, flawless argument against me. Anything anyone says against me is automatically to you perfect.
>actually no. You are making leftards look like they are WRONG ON POLICIES.
What policies? I haven't made any policy pronouncements.
To be fair though, you're half-right. I don't really care to have 'honest' or 'sincere' discussions with fascists like him.
shareTypical lefty troll. Do bad behavior, get called on it, deny it, attack people for pointing it out, then, once it sinks in how stupid you look for denying what everyone can see, JUSTIFY the bad behavior, because "ist" or "phobe".
I don't recall ever 'admitting' that I was trying to have a serious long-form discussion with him. But I didn't lie about him, nor have I lied about anything else. I judge him as a little bitch coward. As a personal rule, I tend to just bait and try to goad fascists into revealing the depravity of their dreams.
shareSo, you admit that you were nto engaged in honest discussion with him. You were just "baiting" him, trying to provoke him into badd behavior.
So, when i First addressed you, you asked "what points", when an HONEST answer would have been something, like,
"you caught me, I am just baiting him because I strongly disagree with his politics."
The "what points" was just you talking shit to defend your bad behavior with... rhetorical devices and tactics.
>So, you admit that you were nto engaged in honest discussion with him. You were just "baiting" him, trying to provoke him into badd behavior.
Not really baiting him here. Only trying to get him to profess his actual beliefs, which he never (or rarely0 does.
>So, when i First addressed you, you asked "what points", when an HONEST answer would have been something, like,
>"you caught me, I am just baiting him because I strongly disagree with his politics."
Except that's not an accurate reflection of what I was doing at all.
>The "what points" was just you talking shit to defend your bad behavior with... rhetorical devices and tactics.
I'm not such a whiny little bitch like you that I think squeezing blood from a rock and trying to get someone to really tell me how they feel is somehow "bad behaviour".
Dear me, go find a curtain to hide in you crybaby little pissant.
YOu mean like I had to do to you to get you to be honest here? Oh the irony.
shareI never lied at any point.
shareYour pretnse of being in a discussion, when you were not, was a lie.
shareI don't recall having that pretense. I just wanted to call out his sloppy conflation of basically every other ideology other than the state authoritarianism he so wants.
shareThis is a discussion fromum. YOu entetred a thread and engaged in "discussion", except,
you didn't. YOu were only pretending to be discussing, you were actually just baiting him.
You have admitted this.
>This is a discussion fromum. YOu entetred a thread and engaged in "discussion", except,
There are almost no rules on here, as you've demonstrated (amongst others) repeatedly.
>you didn't. YOu were only pretending to be discussing, you were actually just baiting him.
"I just wanted to call out his sloppy conflation of basically every other ideology other than the state authoritarianism he so wants."
Literally answered my motive.
No he's owned both you and him. And it's wonderful you incels get pushback. Remember don't tell anybody to kill themselves.
share"INCELS"? lol!!! That's hilarious.
YOu are so stupid it is breathtaking.
[deleted]
Still trying to get me banned?
That is the worst kind of troll, one that purposefull is an asshole with the intent of provoking people into breaking the rules so that they can tattle to the mods, like a little pussy, and get someone banned.
It shows that they KNOW, that they are incapable of defending their ideas or beliefs honestly, but they still stand by them.
At BEST, it is because they think that they are stupid and have to play dirty to... "win",
but more likely they know that their ideas are wrong, and they suport them BECASUE they are bad and harmful to people or groups they hate.
Nope I've never reported anyone. Lol you know to behave though. I made my point.
Anyone who resorts to telling someone that like which you did, loses the debate immediately.
That makes no sense. If my analysis of your behavior is correct, then you are a piece of shit and reporting your bad behaivor is completely reasonable.
And there is nothing in reporting a troll such as yourself, that undermines any good argument.
So, that's just shit talk on your part.
Wtf are you talking about? I never reported anyone. I just know that was a scumbag move you telling someone that.
You just told on yourself. You reported me and I didn't report you lol.
Except, you're a known liar and a troll.
So, I don't believe you.
I don't give a shit if you do. You just admitted to snitching openly. Checkmate.
shareThey are. Libertarians inevitably adopt all the same positions as the left. In general this is because their worldview, like the left's, is completely antithetical to human nature and observable reality. They both underpin their ideologies on the notion of extreme egalitarianism. But there is great variety in the abilities of humans at both the individual level and at the tribal/ethnic/racial level. For this reason, the leftist and libertarian projects will always fail in the real world.
Can someone translate this?
"individuality bad. civil liberties bad"
"social democrats and democratic socialists and libertarians tend to support individuality and civil liberties therefore they're all the same"
and apparently civil liberties are antithetical to human nature, or something
I'll explain this again for your benefit. Libertarians and leftists (and Skavau) believe that all humans are blank slates that can be molded into model citizens under an open society - that they can be encouraged to always act in their own interests while simultaneously preserving strong social cohesion. Nominally intelligent people understand that's nonsense, a contradiction, and is counter to human nature.
shareThanks , That makes much more sense to me.
Just so you know also, maixu wants to remove the right of women to vote and wants to basically mass slaughter all major US politicians.
shareLook, we know your act is to be a pearl-clutching hysteric, but even that's a bit much.
The slaughtering part, that is. As for women voting, you're spot on.
>The slaughtering part, that is. As for women voting, you're spot on.
You specifically said that US politicians should all be trialed and sentenced to death for their roles in COVID restrictions.
Otherwise yes, I know you're a fuckwit piece of shit fash.
>I'll explain this again for your benefit. Libertarians and leftists (and Skavau) believe that all humans are blank slates that can be molded into model citizens under an open society
No, I don't. I believe that people should have the right to mould themselves. The state should, as much as possible, but out of telling people how to live their lives. The objective is an open society, not a "model society". A society without any personal freedom is a society not worth living in.
American libertarians fall on both the "right" and the "left"....sooo not sure the point of this post is.
The Libertarian Party in the US is hard left and woke AF, I'd never vote for them.
How on earth is the US libertarian party hard left and woke?
shareJo Jorgensen, 2020 Libertarian Presidential candidate on racism: https://x.com/JoForLiberty/status/1281638042315489284
There are wolves in the henhouse.
They are the slightly lesser younger sibling of the democrats.
How many leftists do you know that are against socialised healthcare, progressive taxation, welfare state and industry regulation? These are the cornerstones of the Libertarian party.
shareA party and/or a person can label themselves as anything; it doesn’t mean that they genuinely represent those ideologies and philosophies.
Modern left-libertarianism is conflated with classical liberalism.
They are not the same and it is incorrectly mislabeled and misrepresented on the fabricated bullshit spectrum created by leftoids.
>A party and/or a person can label themselves as anything; it doesn’t mean that they genuinely represent those ideologies and philosophies.
What are you suggesting here? Who is inaccurately labeling themselves? Leftists or the Libertarian US party? It's not clear who you are referring to.
Speaking of people who inaccurately label themselves - are you still pretending to give the slightest shit about freedom of speech and civil liberties?
>Modern left-libertarianism is conflated with classical liberalism.
I made no such conflation, and I know of no-one who makes this conflation.
And I don't trust the word of someone who literally has their own invented political compass that no-one serious accepts.
The current fabricated compass is a bullshit lie. They created it for dumbass gullible imbeciles.
shareWho is "they"? Who is it you think "created it"? And you again demonstrate that you just don't know how political compasses, or any model for identification works.
And I'll ask again: >A party and/or a person can label themselves as anything; it doesn’t mean that they genuinely represent those ideologies and philosophies.
What are you suggesting here? Who is inaccurately labeling themselves? Leftists or the Libertarian US party? It's not clear who you are referring to.
No such thing as a leftwing libertarian, its ‘classical liberalism’.
Your bullshit fabricated compass was created by leftoids for the gullible idiots and to convince the weak and ignorant that they belong on the left.
There are fake right-wing Libertarians, fake Republicans and fake Conservatives that inaccurately label themselves, ignorantly or deliberately.
>No such thing as a leftwing libertarian, its ‘classical liberalism’.
No, it's not. Left-libertarianism is another term, or closely related to libertarianian socialism. It's closer to anarcho-communism than classical liberalism.
>Your bullshit fabricated compass was created by leftoids for the gullible idiots and to convince the weak and ignorant that they belong on the left.
No evidence presented whatsoever for this claim. It can be dismissed as complete horseshit, like most of the claims you present without evidence.
>There are fake right-wing Libertarians, fake Republicans and fake conservatives that inaccurately label themselves, ignorantly or deliberately.
Who are examples of those "fake right-wing libertarianis" and how would you distinguish, policy-wise, the difference between a right-wing libertarian and a left-wing libertarian based on your understanding?
No, it's not. Left-libertarianism is another term, or closely related to libertarianian socialism. It's closer to anarcho-communism than classical liberalism.
https://libcom.org/article/anarchist-communism-introduction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism
I'm not responsible for you being an ignorant moron about leftist ideologies.
Leftist ideologies created and fabricated by leftist liars. Thanks for proving my point.
share...How can an ideology in itself be a fabrication? This makes no sense. If someone collects all of their values, beliefs, ideas, policies into a specific umbrella they can explain and then gives it a term that they can refer to as shorthand to communicate to others...how is it a lie? It is just the name given to a grouped set of ideals.
It's no more a "lie" than any other ideology. Newsflash: Every ideology is "made up".
Once again, that compass and the placement of most of those fabricated ideologies are there to convince the weak and ignorant that they belong on the left.
It's a deceptive compass with fabricated ideologies where they merge/combine words together to give it credibility and to obfuscate their meaning and placement on the compass.
Especially if/when both words are oxymoronic including their specific placement on the compass/spectrum.
No one here is responsible for your imbecilic gullibility of fake internet scriptures or feigning it by playing coy.
People with any critical thinking or common sense are aware that most of the information on the internet is bullshit filled with mis/dis-information and deceptive lies.
We all have the same access to the same sources that you are always citing to prove your bullshit narrative.
>Once again, that compass and the placement of most of those fabricated ideologies are there to convince the weak and ignorant that they belong on the left.
This is a nonsensical conspiracy theory that you have presented precisely zero evidence for, and can be dismissed.
>It's a deceptive compass with fabricated ideologies where they merge/combine words together to give it credibility and to obfuscate their meaning and placement on the compass.
Again: ...How can an ideology in itself be a fabrication? This makes no sense. If someone collects all of their values, beliefs, ideas, policies into a specific umbrella they can explain and then gives it a term that they can refer to as shorthand to communicate to others...how is it a lie? It is just the name given to a grouped set of ideals.
It's no more a "lie" than any other ideology. Newsflash: Every ideology is "made up".
>Especially if/when both words are oxymoronic including their specific placement on the compass/spectrum.
How are they oxymoronic?
>No one here is responsible for your imbecilic gullibility of fake internet scriptures or feigning it by playing coy.
So anarcho-communists specifically telling you they are.... anarcho-communist is "fake internet scriptures"?
You think Britannica.com is "fake internet scriptures"? You think marxists are lying about their positions?
>People with any critical thinking or common sense are aware that most of the information on the internet is bullshit filled with mis/dis-information and deceptive lies.
Right. And what you think about anarcho-communism isn't relevant here. It's a real ideology that people genuinely believe in.
Newsflash: Every ideology is "made up".
No. **every** ideology is made-up. Conservatism is made-up. Fascism is made-up. Communism is made-up. Libertarianism is made-up. Social democracy is made-up. They're terms by humans, for humans. They're all descriptors for a set of internally consistent (at least that's the goal) values that people group under and organise under.
shareAnd you just confirmed that it's made-up, but only leftoids continually add, revise, invent, conflate, improvise and merge existing ideologies to fit their narrative.
shareSomething being "made-up" doesn't make it a lie. All political ideologies and philosophical ideologies are made-up.
And yes, many political ideologies are conflations, mergers and fusions of other ideologies. This goes for many conservative ideologies too. So what? This isn't new. It doesn't make them "fake" or a lie.
Libertarians look more left than right from what I can see.
"don't conflate true Libertarians (MAGA) with fakes."
Now I'm totally confused.
I'm guessing "True Libertarians" object to criminalizing pornography. MAGA objects as well?
Styxhexenhammer666 is an avowed Libertarian & a big Trump booster
https://m.youtube.com/@Styxhexenhammer666
The mainstream of the modern day Libertsrian Party does lean more to the left politically, but there are more Centrist/Right leaning Libertarians like Ron Paul.
Styx is a MAGA-Libertarian and has 90% in common with right-wing ideology with the exception of conservatism.
He was an old school classical and moderate liberal (Centre-Left) that supported and voted for Obama.
I consider Styx as Centre-Right.
Centre-Left
Centre-Right
It doesn't matter. Either can be used.
Who are you confusing me with this time?
This is the third time that you have confused me with someone from some other country.
I've suspected that you are not a US citizen for awhile and your post with "centre" I now have no doubt.
shareLMFAO, you really are a dumbass. Centre or Center can be used. And yes, I'm a U.S. citizen.
shareIf you are a US citizen then you would have spelled "center" correctly. You spelled it "centre" twice. No American spells "center" differently. So you are either a foreigner or a very stupid American. Which is it?
shareShow me a rule that says that an American has to spell it using center instead of centre.
I actually use both. When I provide a political spectrum diagram, I always type it as center when used by itself; however, when I include left or right with it, I prefer centre because it appears more formal.
Center and centre have the same meaning. Center is the correct spelling in American English, while in British English, centre is correct.
You really are stupid. Especially if you're an American.
So you just admitted that they have the same meaning and you could not provide a rule that says one has to be used over the other based on nationality. Therefore; it doesn't matter which one is used, regardless.
So if a person uses the words "rubbish" or "shite", you automatically assume that they're not American or a U.S. citizen. LMAO. No wonder you believe in fake news.
So you admit you're an American but you are too stupid to spell "center" correctly. You've been misspelling "center" all your life and nobody corrected you? Now I don't care where you're from because no matter where you live you are very stupid. But then you never showed your proof that the 2020 election was rigged that you claim to possess so your stupidity and gullibility continues. Fake News?
"I don't understand it" = Fake News!
"I don't like it" = Fake News!
"It hurt my feelings" = Fake news!
"It's mean to Orange Master" = Fake News!
"It's truth and/or facts" = Fake News!
The real giveaway is when they use colour instead of color... or let a "wanker/bloody" slip out.
shareI've never used "colour", but I have on occasion used 'shite' and 'rubbish', and no one has ever confused me for been a 'bloody' Brit. lol
shareSteady on, mate. You're acting a right bellend
share