this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2024
786 points (98.8% liked)
The Onion
3930 readers
706 users here now
The Onion
A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.
Great Satire Writing:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I know this is the Onion but the left is inherently anti-authoritarian and advocate of horizontal structure of society with no top-down leadership. Of course we'd be disorganised π Case in point, this and the hodge podge of left wingers in the Spanish Civil War ranging from communist, social democrats, democratic socialists to anarcho-syndicalists. Spanish leftists even attacked each other. The Democrats also don't even get along and this is why Republicans under Trump is gaining more headway.
I'm proud that we're maverick, but this also leads to our characteristic factionalism and thus easier to be disrupted and destroy.
No, it isn't, You're describing some forms of social libertarianism or rational anarchism, and calling them left. The philosophy i hear out of left identifying people these days is people desperate for lack of responsibility and wanting to be controlled by some parental government takes care of everything.
Oops your bias leaked a little
A little?
I quit respecting people who's whole idea of political intellectualism iswhatever makes them feel good (usually couched in fancy talk and circular logic, with a side of disguising selfishness in false altruism) regardless of anything else, when i started to see the consequences of that philosophy. Anyways, for some reason he wanted to pretend things that fall right are left for some reason.
Self-aware much?
Very. It's why my username is part of a well known phrase.
Iβve never heard anybody John McMurray something up so hard.
Honestly I donβt get it. Never heard that phrase before.
https://youtu.be/BKibzW_ORGE?t=39
If you ever, ever want to have any rational discussions you have to understand the opposition. You can't just base the opposite view in childish one sided ass demonisations
Didn't I just say I've come to understand them?
No, you again just vomited your bias over us. Nobody takes anything you say to heart because all it is is vile expressions of how little you actually have learned and to offer to the debate
It feels like you probably somewhere understand this and I'm trying to help you understand why your approach is met with such disgust
Behind the statements and arguments is usually some intention
But all you do is expose utterly insane delusions lodged in your own internal battlefield. Nobody wants to engage with because it's just nonsense.
I'm just trying to offer some explanation should you ever wish to be met with more respect
Try to have ideas then qualify them, instead of having lodged traumas and forming ideas from that. It's a backward feedback system that happens beyond certain horizons of delusion and it's very very sad to read
Sometimes we are so hurt that we dehumanise others to make sense of the world. Nobody is a stranger to this and that is why it is so transparent when you offer these opinions
This is exactly what I was talking about.
Huh?
For American sensibilities born from classical liberal values, you're correct.
The political "left" is a big umbrella term, like the "right" is. Generally speaking, the left broadly wants distribution of resources and management to be more horizontal. The debate is how to achieve that. Some want total worker control, others believe a democratically elected government should be empowered to distribute wealth equitably. The most extreme and dystopian form is a parental centralised authority enforcing equality should do it, as you mentioned.
On the right, they may believe in personal freedom but still uphold that human society still thrives in hierarchy. "You're homeless? It is your fault and not my problem." Many on the right believe you have to work hard to achieve your goals but through your own blood, sweat and tears. You have to keep up or you will be out competed. Some on the right still believe that government still has some role to help others, while some disagree. The most extreme form on the right is fascism, which advocates for total control of everything and order and hierarchy are utmost importance.
You never notice how the crazy old men hiding up alone in the mountains wanting to be left alone by the government and everyone are somehow always called right wing when the government comes for them, often in a very fascist manner?
You're talking about a cult leader.
Sometimes. Sometimes not, Anyways, there's something very fishy or inconsistent with all these definitions. Rational anarchism still falls right, not left tho
"Rational anarchism" isn't the only type of anarchism.
Yes, not really the point though.
Anarcho-syndicalism to left. Anarcho-capitalism to the right.
As others mentioned, you need to learn more about the topic.
did i mention anarcho syndicalism? FFS genius, the intial post described a right wing stance as left. All you mother fuckers need to read a book
I mentioned anarcho-syndicalism.
"Rational anarchism" isn't a thing. I Googled it, and you just read it from a sci-fi novel, which is not an authoritative and academic source on the topic.
READ an actual authoritative and academic book on the topic.
"I googled it and" clearly an expert. I mean you don't even seem to know what conversation you've joined
"Rational anarchism" is coined by a sci-fi novelist for his fictional story, and no respectable scholars have ever used it.
Horseshit
BTW, "rational anarchism" is an occasionally used synonym for "social libertarianism".
Says who? Social libertarians identify themselves as left.
...Jesus you people are painful. Libertarianism, Randian or not (this type is not), is a right leaning philosophy even if self identifiers bought into the false "right bad left good" dichotomy so many push. FFS half the people who identify as either type don't even know what they are ( or who John Galt was), they think it means do what you want whenever you want because the name resembles liberty, another term they barely understand.
Have you heard or seen Yanous Varoufakis rub shoulders with Trump, Orban, or Putin? Have you even heard of Yanous Varoufakis? He'd be offended if you describe him as being on right..
Which social libertarians call themselves "rational anarchist" synonymously?
Damn that's a tall strawman.
So, which social libertarians call themselves "rational anarchist"? And why are they politically right according to you?
Hillel Steiner comes to mind. You might be confusing "left libertarianism" with being left wing. It's still right, just not Randian right.
Left libertarianism is another term for social libertarianism, the latter in which you mentioned as "right".
And when did Steiner called himself "rational anarchist"?
Actually, where did you hear "rational anarchist" to begin with?
Yes, and rational anarchism is yet another synonym. Like I said, you people are fucking painful, full of fire and pedantry, signifying nothing
Who said rational anarchism is a thing? Where did you hear it? And why is it considered right wing?
"who said words have meaning?" "Why is English a thing?"
Who said social libertarianism is right wing? And what precisely is rational anarchism?
Its funny bc you have no clue what you're talking about.
Someone doesn't.
Have you figured out who that was yet? It's not hard
You, genius.
Yes, clearly everyone else here must be wrong. Thats the logical answer. Mighty parsimonious.
You'd be surprised how often that happens, especially when words sound more like an obvious meaning than the real definition,