How to Spot a Left-Wing Fascist

I would chuckle if Creeping Charlie wasn't so obviously delusional.

After railing against all things defined by social liberalism for the last election cycle, the boards resident potted plant tries to appropriate the mantle of social liberal.

Pathetic.

Laz is conflating social liberalism for socialism....they aren't the same thing laz.

No matter how much you and the other progressives try or stamp your feetsies.

You can't name a single thing defined as social liberalism that I've been against.

I've openly supported everything in that list....public HC, Schools, food programs, shelters etc.

Just in a liberal way, USA kinda way....... not the 'progressive' jackbooted way.

See as a liberal American I want people and their communities to have the liberty to manage their own affairs. Do their own HC system, join someone else's or have "fuck you pay me" HC...whatever they think that they think is best for their state.

The fact that you and the other "progressives" are so desperate, absolutely foaming at the mouth with the desire to force 1 size fits all systems and policies down everyone's throats via some god king POTUS??? Is what makes "progressives" not liberal. :)
 
Last edited:
"See as a liberal American I want people and their communities to have the liberty to manage their own affairs. Do their own HC system, join someone else's or have "fuck you pay me" HC...whatever they think that they think is best for their state.

The fact that you and the other "progressives" are so desperate, absolutely foaming at the mouth with the desire to force 1 size fits all systems and policies down everyone's throats via some god king POTUS??? Is what makes "progressives" not liberal. "

This is where your assumptions go wrong....your focused on the individual, namely you. Your assumption is incorrect...communities do manage their own affairs in there respective states already via a free and fair Democratic electoral system(that does have flaws) and that doesn't negate it's ability to work correctly and provide for "liberty" as you call it.

There are no God Kings, even Trump isn't one, that is why he is getting the boot but good.

You fundamental assumptions disqualify you from being a social liberal because you've rejected the framework on which social Liberalism would need to work....compromise and concensis via a free voting system to move toward community and national goals.

So, now I'll wait for you to tell me how you haven't rejected the electoral system, which you rail about day after day....go ahead.
 
This is where your assumptions go wrong....your focused on the individual, namely you.

That's your wrong assumption, not my views.

Your assumption is incorrect...communities do manage their own affairs in there respective states already via a free and fair Democratic electoral system(that does have flaws) and that doesn't negate it's ability to work correctly and provide for "liberty" as you call it.

Yes...much to the ire and teeth gnashing of "progressive" democrat's who are totally enraged they can't force upon the entire union policy and programs they aren't even willing to TRY in their own states. :D

There are no God Kings, even Trump isn't one, that is why he is getting the boot but good.

Again, much to the ire of the left who incessantly fantasize that the POTUS and to a lesser extent their governors are.

You guys lost your collective shit because Trump wasn't Hitler enough for you. :D and upon Biden winning the election had (D) congressional leadership telling him to just bypass democracy and legislate via EO like a god king.

The left WANTS a dictator. :D collectivist always do.

You fundamental assumptions disqualify you from being a social liberal because you've rejected the framework on which social Liberalism would need to work....compromise and concensis via a free voting system to move toward community and national goals.

This is a flat out lie.

What 'fundamental assumptions' are you talking about?? Oh you can't name one because LIAR. ;)

And that "framework" as you call it has a name, it's called positive liberty. Which I fully support....making me a social liberal. And has nothing to do with compromise and voting, that's democracy, not social liberalism.

So, now I'll wait for you to tell me how you haven't rejected the electoral system, which you rail about day after day....go ahead.

How insane are you??

Where have I ever rejected the electoral system??

I'm the one who's had to explain to "progressive" tards for years that we don't have a simple majority ruled unitary state. :D

I'm not part of the group who screeched for the last 4 years to abolish the EC. :D

You can't cite a single case of me doing what you accuse me of here.

You're as bad as Rob, Coati and DanC.....can't support your bullshit? Just make up lies!!!
 
...communities do manage their own affairs in there respective states already via a free and fair Democratic electoral system(that does have flaws) and that doesn't negate it's ability to work correctly and provide for "liberty" as you call it.

That is one of the major problems we face, many many people do not feel our current political structure is fair. I don't just mean the current election shenanigans, what about gerrymandering, multiple tales of abhorrent behavior by elected officials, behavior that if you or I did such, we'd be arrested or at the very least vilified, yet they remain in power. Ask either side for ten examples of politicians that have betrayed their position, and you will get lists of names. When both sides claim the other side is unfair, where do we go?

There are no God Kings, even Trump isn't one, that is why he is getting the boot but good.

Maybe not, but I bet you can name without taking a breath three or four elected officials that have been in service for decades, enacting policies you find repulsive,
yet they seem to stay in power. What are they exactly?

Possibly that is yet another obstacle. There are two major sides, both disagreeing, sometimes violently. As long as they continue to act like they have been, nothing will get better, only worse.
 
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy
 
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy

You're an antinationalist version....congrats!! :D
 
That is one of the major problems we face, many many people do not feel our current political structure is fair. I don't just mean the current election shenanigans, what about gerrymandering, multiple tales of abhorrent behavior by elected officials, behavior that if you or I did such, we'd be arrested or at the very least vilified, yet they remain in power. Ask either side for ten examples of politicians that have betrayed their position, and you will get lists of names. When both sides claim the other side is unfair, where do we go?



Maybe not, but I bet you can name without taking a breath three or four elected officials that have been in service for decades, enacting policies you find repulsive,
yet they seem to stay in power. What are they exactly?

Possibly that is yet another obstacle. There are two major sides, both disagreeing, sometimes violently. As long as they continue to act like they have been, nothing will get better, only worse.

Very good points...thank you!
 
Since Democrats ignore or excuse their own fascist behavior, depending on the media attention, how does the world take them seriously? Oh, right: They don't.

:D
 
Back
Top