The current crop of left wing debaters is weak

[SuburbanFarmer]

I don't think anyone on the new MHF is particularly "left wing" in the first place - depending of course, on whether you mean socially or economically Left.

We had avowed socialists, and a commie on the DCF (and an outright fascist). The range here is more like Center-Left to Hard-Right, with some Trailer Parliament sprinkled about. I don't think anyone here is particularly Socially Left.

A real SJW would be triggered the fuck out here to the point of suicide and then Dr. Hash would have to shut the forum down after xir family complained of bullying

I used to be way more Left but lingering thoughts that I've always held, combined with current events, hanging out at the DCF and here, and people like Dan Carlin and Dave Rubin got me to realize that the current Left is too far away from the classically liberal values I actually hold.

I then also realized that the latent thoughts of socialism I held simply would never work; they are utopian and unrealistic.

Same. But I still hold out hope for some mild form of socialism to save us from the tech revolution.

[ssu]

Same. But I still hold out hope for some mild form of socialism to save us from the tech revolution.

Socialism saves nothing.

Conservatism and the right did have and does have good ideas about improving the situation of everybody, it can look at the things from the collective viewpoint. Yet this has been totally sidelined especially in the US by this worship of anything can be said to worship of individualism by turning a blind eye on cronyism, widespread corruption, monopolies and totally unchecked corporatism.

Yet that doesn't mean that socialism and answer. It's never an answer. Socialism just makes everything worse.

The problem is that anything that isn't in favour of the rich elites is nowdays called socialism. And ignorant people believe the ludicrous rhetoric.

These days going against corruption, cronyism and monopolies is labeled to be socialist. That's the fucking problem.

[Hwen Hoshino]

Same. But I still hold out hope for some mild form of socialism to save us from the tech revolution.

Socialism saves nothing.

Conservatism and the right did have and does have good ideas about improving the situation of everybody, it can look at the things from the collective viewpoint. Yet this has been totally sidelined especially in the US by this worship of anything can be said to worship of individualism by turning a blind eye on cronyism, widespread corruption, monopolies and totally unchecked corporatism.

Yet that doesn't mean that socialism and answer. It's never an answer. Socialism just makes everything worse.

The problem is that anything that isn't in favour of the rich elites is nowdays called socialism. And ignorant people believe the ludicrous rhetoric.

These days going against corruption, cronyism and monopolies is labeled to be socialist. That's the fucking problem.

By which press outlets?

[Martin Hash]

These days going against corruption, cronyism and monopolies is labeled to be socialist. That's the fucking problem.

I don't see that on this forum? Libertarians are the most difficult to get the point across too, is that who you're talking about?

p.s. This forum doesn't seem to have anybody from The Right either: we're all Liberalists here.

[Hwen Hoshino]

These days going against corruption, cronyism and monopolies is labeled to be socialist. That's the fucking problem.

I don't see that on this forum? Libertarians are the most difficult to get the point across too, is that who you're talking about?

p.s. This forum doesn't seem to have anybody from The Right either: we're all Liberalists here.

Libertarians are still commonly referred to as right wingers.

[Martin Hash]

In the Liberalist paradigm, Libertarians are Right, but so are we. And Libertarians are so far Right that any intervention at all is considered socialism, so they are probably who ssu is talking about.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Same. But I still hold out hope for some mild form of socialism to save us from the tech revolution.

Socialism saves nothing.

Conservatism and the right did have and does have good ideas about improving the situation of everybody, it can look at the things from the collective viewpoint. Yet this has been totally sidelined especially in the US by this worship of anything can be said to worship of individualism by turning a blind eye on cronyism, widespread corruption, monopolies and totally unchecked corporatism.

Yet that doesn't mean that socialism and answer. It's never an answer. Socialism just makes everything worse.

The problem is that anything that isn't in favour of the rich elites is nowdays called socialism. And ignorant people believe the ludicrous rhetoric.

These days going against corruption, cronyism and monopolies is labeled to be socialist. That's the fucking problem.

Excellent post.

Maybe what I'm referring to as "socialism" is just that - a rejection of the corporatocracy.

[Martin Hash]

Corporatocracy is only an issue because they have captured or subverted the political class. What Corporatives do is amoral, they are simply preforming their side of their adversarial relationship with government. Government is what's failed doing their regulatory end.

p.s. I guess Libertarians are the real threat to society. I'd never considered the full ramifications to how their "it's about me" ideology affects me.

[ssu]

These days going against corruption, cronyism and monopolies is labeled to be socialist. That's the fucking problem.

I don't see that on this forum? Libertarians are the most difficult to get the point across too, is that who you're talking about?

p.s. This forum doesn't seem to have anybody from The Right either: we're all Liberalists here.

Lol. The American Right, maybe? This forum is a little of the mainstream. Or I don't know. And is there a difference between a liberalist and a libertarian?

What I was talking is more about right wing parties and their discourse. Only when they talk about national defence can they accept that it's something of a collective effort. Seems like people forget that things like social security was brought on by Bismarck, not a left leaning guy by any standard. Yes, the thing has it negative aspects, but some kind of safety net has also it's merits.

In my view a rich man and a poor man don't in reality have much in common. Hence some common thing like patriotism, a love for your country, or the values which ones country is based upon are extremely important. When the rich and the poor do share something, there is a society that both belong to. Otherwise there is no social cohesion.

[Martin Hash]

When the rich and the poor do share something, there is a society that both belong to. Otherwise there is no social cohesion.

There are ideologies that depend on an adversarial relationship; Marxism for example. Originally, Marxists pitted the Proletariat (poor) against the Bourgeoisie (rich), but in Western societies, Marxists tend to be Bourgeois, so the conflict became Oppressed vs. Oppressor. NeoCon ideology is competing militaries, and Libertarian ideology is Individual vs. State. Liberalists consider Liberty the primary imperative, live-and-let-live, I'll-leave-you-alone-you-leave-me-alone, you-are-my-ally-not-my-partner, but no real adversary other than the people trying to obligate them to things other than what they democratically agreed to.

p.s. Thanks to Jordan Peterson for clarifying my understanding of Marxism.