Dave Rubin Needs a Hash Adjustment

[jbird4049]

The same could be said for the Republican Party. If you deviate from the accepted checklist you are a RINO, or Republican in name only. So it's only natural that there DINOs too. I have been reading of various longtime conservatives who are no longer Republicans because they were effectively exiled.

As for me, even though I am a very long term very liberal person, I am no longer a member of the Democratic Party. I deal with the neoliberal BS which has much overlap with the neoconservative economic BS of cutting taxes, regulations, and the safety net, along with open boarders with no regard to the human costs to the lower 80% My social views were very, very liberal once, now I guess I would be...what I do not know. I can't abide the extreme social conservatism of the Republican Party, but I am not in line with the doctrinaire views of the current Democratic Party, or of the liberal side for a while.

There are plenty of leftists, and conservatives, and moderates too, but we have no party that represents our views, nevermind actively working for the welfare of most Americans. We need to change that. Perhaps we need to have both parties go the way of the Whigs.

But the Republican party wins elections. The leader of Republican party isn't saying prochoices are persona non grata in the party like the Democrats are with Prolifers. You are not getting a sense of proportion. Disagree with a Democrat and their SJW base calls you a far right nazi even if you are a democrat. Vice versa and they call you a RINO, same same? No not really.

The accepted range positions of both parties have been shrinking for several decades regardless of how much. One can debate the details, and currently the college students are leading the crazy. Both Parties have their own brands of fanaticism, and the triggers for calling out the hounds are different, but I think the gist is the same.

[clubgop]

Just look at the aftermath of the Georgia race. They are having the same arguments they had Nov. 9th. They are learning nothing. If that is the "gist" you are talking about then yes it certainly is the same.

[TheReal_ND]

I've been retweeting him a lot with the Hash account to try and get him to notice you.

Well... he's a jew so. Maybe try Instagram?

His interview with Rabbi Wolpe this week has me wanting to convert

Js maybe he won't like the Deutschland uber alles meme I tweeted heh

[Martin Hash]

*** For new lurkers. (There are some, you know.)

In the Hash paradigm: "Liberty" is the wants of the individual come before the needs of the group. "Socialism" is the opposite.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

What is the word for when you try to find solutions that don't pit the needs of the individual against the needs of the group in the first place?

[Martin Hash]

What is the word for when you try to find solutions that don't pit the needs of the individual against the needs of the group in the first place?

There is no such thing. Feedback, rather in business or government, requires an adversarial relationship, otherwise it's collusion.

[Martin Hash]

Us Liberalists (as opposed to Libertarians) recognize there are other people in society. We don't have to like or even respect them to make them our allies, so together we both sacrifice some of our Liberty to placate the other. I've identified 5 areas where Liberalists are willing to do that: protection, jurisprudence, social safetynet, environment & healthcare.

Socialists want it the other way around: they assume all things are group first, with carveouts for individuals.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

'Jurisprudence' seems like a pretty broad area of compromise there comrade.

[Martin Hash]

'Jurisprudence' seems like a pretty broad area of compromise there comrade.

It is. You agree to perform on contracts, obey The Law & abide by the adjudication of The Courts.

[jbird4049]

Us Liberalists (as opposed to Libertarians) recognize there are other people in society. We don't have to like or even respect them to make them our allies, so together we both sacrifice some of our Liberty to placate the other. I've identified 5 areas where Liberalists are willing to do that: protection, jurisprudence, social safetynet, environment & healthcare.

Socialists want it the other way around: they assume all things are group first, with carveouts for individuals.

Society is far from socialistic today. American society is particularly atomized. Once you've reached all unions are inherently evil, corporations are people, money is speech, taxes are theft, social security is communism, and any laws for the benefit of the community is bringing back serfdom, if not chattel slavery what is left?

Granted, I am a proponent of socialism, although not communism, but we are so far beyond that that it's one of the reasons some people have a hard time seeing corruption in our system; money is inherently a greater good and anything that hinders its acquisition, and use, is inherently suspect because of this.