Any poster starting a thread blaming or attributing actions to 'Left'; 'Right'; Liberals; Conservatives; MAGAs etc is intellectually lazy.

[oggbashan]

The source is likely to be equally crap. There are no such organisations as the 'left'. or 'right'. They are just generic terms of abuse to be used by people who oppose whoever they are. MAGAs are not the whole Republican party. Left or Liberal is not the whole Democrat party. They are just terms of abuse. Please think before posting or your thread is just a waste of space.

 

[Sean Renaud]

While you're not wrong that they are generic terms they are not terms meant for abuse. I refer to myself as part of the left. Are there some crazies I disagree with? I'm sure there are but they seem to be pretty quiet. The MAGA crowd is crazy BUT while they may not be all of the Republican party they are either the majority or the majority refuses to purge them. At some point silence is violence.

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

I'm glad you were able to get that off your chest.

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...at-losing-roe-v-wade-will-do-to-them.1566087/

 

[ll74]

Lol....whoosh

 

[neuroparenthetical]

Right-wing and left-wing ideology and philosophy aren't monolithic or devoid of contradictions, but they're reasonably-accurate guideposts. I find it quite odd that you'd implicitly attach only the MAGA crowd to the "right wing," when the broad international academic consensus is that the GOP is an ultra-right-wing party across basically every policy category. The Democratic Party is more-or-less center-right. The latter flirts with left-wing ideology on certain social issues, and splits the baby on economic issues, but it's quite supportive of imperial hegemony both at home and abroad. Moreover, I'd say we're living through yet another depressing example of how the Democratic Party's academic-definition-conservative need for "stability" trumps (no pun intended) any serious effort to hold powerful people accountable for serious crimes.

One of the most oft-trumpeted excesses of "the left" is the French Revolution. How far away is the Democratic Party from beheading our various out-of-touch wealthy nobles? Light years. They hand out tax breaks and subsidies to them slightly more responsibly and ethically. They bleat for them to turn around and pay taxes, though they rarely actually make that happen. I already covered how terrified they are of holding any Republican politician accountable. They pay some lip service to unions, so that's cool I guess.

I'll grant you this much: right wing "ideology" is all-in on the meta-ideology of not being truly bound by any stated ideology. While everyone cries about the possibility that leftists will become authoritarian, right-wingers brazenly and proudly run towards it. They elevate it as a good in-and-of-itself, so long as "their" guy is the one on the throne. Leftists that embrace authoritarianism at least have the decency to act like it's tragic. That's why they're far less likely to go all the way and fulfill Orwell's nightmare scenario. The right wing is where you'll find people who embrace the idea that the purpose of power is to have power, and the purpose of torture is to torture.

 

[icanhelp1]

While you're not wrong that they are generic terms they are not terms meant for abuse. I refer to myself as part of the left. Are there some crazies I disagree with? I'm sure there are but they seem to be pretty quiet. The MAGA crowd is crazy BUT while they may not be all of the Republican party they are either the majority or the majority refuses to purge them. At some point silence is violence.

And yet it's the left parading their despicable asses through a Catholic mass, or protesting at the homes of supreme court justices to change an opinion. At least show a little self awareness, maybe try to camouflage some of your blatant biased hypocrisy.

 

[oggbashan]

I didn’t see the right destroy cities because they didn’t get there own way as did BLM and antifa who are the strong arm of the left

Neither BLM nor Antifa advocate or support violence. Prove your statement.

 

[oggbashan]

And yet it's the left parading their despicable asses through a Catholic mass, or protesting at the homes of supreme court justices to change an opinion. At least show a little self awareness, maybe try to camouflage some of your blatant biased hypocrisy.

Prove it is the 'left', and who are the 'left' except people you dislike?

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

Of course they don't activate and support violence,
but that alone does not imply that members of their
movement are prone to it in order to make their point.

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

Who would you say it is, because it is sacrament to the Left.

 

[ll74]

Of course they don't activate and support violence,
but that alone does not imply that members of their
movement are prone to it in order to make their point.

There are agitators in every group that are prone to violence. That's why they are agitators

Oath keepers beat capitol police with flag poles

Some guy ran over and killed a protestor

People loot and burn buildings

They does not mean the groups, themselves, are part of or support the actions

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

I would not say every group with confidence...

 

[oggbashan]

Neither the Republican Party nor the Democrat Party encourage, support or condone violence for political ends. They know it is counterproductive because it damages whatever cause is being protested.

The only case of a politician possibly encouraging violence is President trump on Jan 6th but he has not been charged nor proven to have done it.

Even in Nothern Ireland, the Sinn Fein party which was the acknowledged political wing of the IRA, has eschewed violence for over twenty years since the Good Friday agreement and they are now a mainstream and successful political party.

Violence can come from protests but the organisers do NOT arrange the violence.

 

[oggbashan]

Portland for one Baltimore for another

Evidence that those organisations arranged the violence?

 

[oggbashan]

Of course they don't activate and support violence,
but that alone does not imply that members of their
movement are prone to it in order to make their point.

Or others just there for the punch-up and looting who do not care for the cause.

 

[ll74]

I would not say every group with confidence...

I would

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

Well, you can say it, but it's not true.

 

[oggbashan]

There are violent groups but they do not belong to the main political parties. The Oath Keepers appear to be one in that they planned violence beforehand.

Some BLM 'supporting' organisations, NOT part of BLM, are willing to use violence. But they are minorities even among extremists.

 

[ll74]

Well, you can say it, but it's not true.

I can say it because that's my view based on what I've seen.

Just look through history.....people do stupid shit in the name of their group or hiding behind otherwise peaceful activities.

 

[Sh1ne0n67]

Yeah, we've had a real problem with the Girls Scouts and the Council of Churches...

I think they carry Molotoves and AK47s.

 

[icanhelp1]

Neither the Republican Party nor the Democrat Party encourage, support or condone violence for political ends. They know it is counterproductive because it damages whatever cause is being protested.

The only case of a politician possibly encouraging violence is President trump on Jan 6th but he has not been charged nor proven to have done it.

Even in Nothern Ireland, the Sinn Fein party which was the acknowledged political wing of the IRA, has eschewed violence for over twenty years since the Good Friday agreement and they are now a mainstream and successful political party.

Violence can come from protests but the organisers do NOT arrange the violence.

And yet Schumer bellowing from the steps of the capital building literally threatening Gorsuch and Kavanagh. The last time I looked, at the time OF THOSE VEILED THREATS Schumer was the minority leader of the senate and today is the senate majority leader, that's as democrat as democrat gets.

I understand you still suffer from TDS.

 

[oggbashan]

And yet Schumer bellowing from the steps of the capital building literally threatening Gorsuch and Kavanagh. The last time I looked, at the time OF THOSE VEILED THREATS Schumer was the minority leader of the senate and today is the senate majority leader, that's as democrat as democrat gets.

I understand you still suffer from TDS.

Did he advocate overthrowing the constitution by violence?

I understand you suffer from lack of comprehension.

 

[Rotadom]

I'm glad you were able to get that off your chest.

lmao

 

[icanhelp1]

Did he advocate overthrowing the constitution by violence?

I understand you suffer from lack of comprehension.

Threatening a supreme court justice is a direct threat to our republican form of government and the foundation of our judicial system. It is a violation of federal law and schumer should have been expelled from the senate and possibly prosecuted for obstruction of justice.

Tru