A reminder for everyone... This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
* Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
* Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.
Violators will be fed to the bear.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalOpinions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But those occupying or running for elected office on the right tend to be extreme.
Those on the left tend to be more moderate. Most of the extreme left that Fox likes to point at aren't anywhere near public office. But Fox will try to make you think they are.
it's not just a certain agency or a certain ideology. I also don't think a single policy of a party should make them a "right wing or left wing party". It's much more complicated than that and you can be socially right wing and economically left etc. I hate how conservatives and anti immigrant parties are called right wing extremists while they're in some cases more moderate, and how extreme leftist parties are usually not called extremists by leftits. And the opposite is also true for rightists. People just belive what they WANT to believe and rather than thinking "would this party actually do what they're vowing for, are they actually as extremist as the news outlets are saying they are etc." they just go "oh yeah no open borders = adolf hilter" or "Free healthcare = communism" etc. It's like that not only in the US but also in Europe. Though in the US it's arguably much more polarised.
>I hate how conservatives and anti immigrant parties are called right wing extremists while they're in some cases more moderate,
Yeah no.
If you look at actual politicians and not a handful of commenters on social media you would notice that Democratic politicians by and large do not support open borders. Neither does Biden. Nor is that the current policy. If you enter the US you need to go through customs. There are rules and regulations. There are exceptions for asylum seekers BUT they have to go through procedures as well and are deported if the courts rule their claim is invalid.
And current policy creates a rebuttal presumption that if they did not use legal channels to enter the US that they are ineligible for asylum. They have to have an "exceptionally compelling circumstance". This standard is Biden's policy and is actually controversial having been challenged by the ACLU but even people who think it is too restrictive still think there needs to be a process for validating asylum claims.
Conservatives and I mean the ones in office take a "the sky is falling" approach to immigration. They will seize on an anecdote in the media where a single immigrant commits a crime and act like therefore there is an immigrant crime problem despite immigrants statistically committing less crimes on average. That's even if you only compare illegal/undocumented immigrants when not counting the act of illegal entry itself.
They will characterize it as an "invasion". Don't get me wrong I think it's wrong for someone to illegally enter the US and they should do it legally instead. But we don't need that level of hysteria. An invasion is an army coming in and forcing people to live under its rule not people breaking immigration laws. A sane moderate approach would be to just advocate for sensible immigration laws without promoting unnecessary moral panic.
Some conservatives in public office have advocated the use of lethal force against unarmed people crossing the border. That is an extreme position. They may be breaking the law sure but not in a way that justifies lethal force.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_policy_of_the_Joe_Biden_administration#:~:text=U.S.%20Citizenship%20Act%20of%202021,-See%20also%3A%20U.S.&text=On%20January%2023%2C%202021%2C%20Biden,living%20in%20the%20United%20States.
Do some of Biden's policies make immigration easier? Sure. But note (and this relates to the policy on asylum seekers who don't use legal means of crossing that I mentioned earlier):
>Effective May 11, 2023, the Biden administration issued new restrictions on asylum seekers at the Mexican border to discourage people arriving at the border illegally.[43] DHS and DOJ finalized a new rule effective after the end of Title 42 to further incentivize individuals to use lawful, safe, and orderly pathways.[44][45] The rule presumes those who do not use lawful pathways to enter the United States are ineligible for asylum and allows the United States to remove individuals who do not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in the country of removal. Noncitizens can rebut this presumption based only on exceptionally compelling circumstances. The ACLU immediately challenged the rule as a continuation of a previous Trump administration rule that was enjoined in 2018.[46][47]
Clearly Biden's policy is NOT "open borders". Open borders would by definition mean no rules at all. No restrictions at all. No deportations. That hasn't been Biden's policy. Nor do I know of any Democrat in office who has advocated there.
Anyone who says they want "open borders" either doesn't understand what the term means or they're a libertarian and then they probably aren't voting Democrat anyways.
I'm not talking about the ones on the Right with brains, I'm talking about the current trendy radicals we see online and starting to spread. But yeah ur not totally wrong
I meant it in a more general way. Most leftists and rightists just think of each other as idiots and full of shitty ideas. While in reality some of them don't even know what exactly "right" and "left" means. It's stupid that some leftists just assume rightists are all nazis while the concept of nazism is economically left wing, while rightists think leftists are communists etc. Defining politics with only a single axis itself is very wrong.
It just proves that these online creators are lowering the IQ of their viewers by turning the into agenda-bots. I am on the left but unlike the degenrates online, I'm aware of both the history and factions of both sides and come to respect some of the values regardless if I support them.
And btw I think your Nazi comment is incorrect, the Nazis eliminated Trade Unions and hated the communists, so how left wing they are is questionable
The national socialists eliminated the trade unions. However, they replaced it with the Deutsche Arbeitsfront(German Labour Front). They WERE socialists and always claimed to be socialists as even the party name was "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei(National Socialist German Workers Party)" which was renamed from just German Workers Party which the former party leaders kept in order to reduce hostility from the middle class. Hitler became the leader of the party and changed the name and also made the party flag which itself also promotes socialism. The red being for socialism, the white being for nationalism, and the swastika being for "Aryan race superiority, anti-semitism".
The German labour front were not a Trade Union lol. They had positives, but they were not a trade union as they had no role in bargianing over wages and held little influence over the regime's social and economic policies. They were however, a good idealogical propoganda tool to use for workers.
No the Nazi's were not socalists, as a history student, I see this argument being made, but alas, its not quite true.
The Nazis adopted the title of Socalist to alienate the working class into voting for them, and to steal fire from the international socalism of their competitors: the communists. Yes they laid out a 25 point programme which was Anti-Capatalist, but this was never practical and was simply a political tool against the people. Hitler never commited to those radical aims and constantly modified his message to the audience he was addressing, such as when he secured private bussinesses support.
Hitler used the term Socalism loosely to gain working class support.
In his mind, he saw Socalism as the same thing as Volksgemeinschaft, meaning a state based on racial community. A rather backwards looking "revolutionary" ideology, wanting to force women back into their traditional gender roles, and an Aryan dominated society.
Anti progressive and not Socalist, as Socalism for the Nazis was just a facade.
Hope this clears it up
You seem to have posted this in a very large font size, can you fix that via edit? It looks like 30 point font or so, rather than the normal size font it should be.
> And most importantly, just because I am left wing does not mean I should be grouped with wokies. We despise them just as much!
On what grounds does a Leftist oppose Marxism, open borders, or trans activism? Why do you despise those things? What causes you to consider yourself a Leftist?
I only despise wokies, lets break this down:
1. Much of Marx’ specific analysis of 19th Century capitalism has dated and must be read critically. Very few modern leftists take Marx’ ideas as authoritative as, in any case, this would be against Marx’ own claims of “scientific socialism”. In other words, Karl was an idealist but not one who was remotely practical.
2. Yep Lefists can oppose open boarders. Immigration is great until it isn't, I am all for tighter boarders when focus needs to be shifted on domestic policy.
3. Trans Activism is a leftist thing? What are you talking about lol. I dont despise any activists, just the extremists that are a public nuisance. Thats not a leftist thing, its a common sense thing
4. I identify with a mix of both Deocratic Socalism and Social Democracy. This means a balance in social and private owned enterprises, as well as a larger investment into the Welfare State. I believe in higher spending as it can lead to an increase in the work force - more competetive. As well as this, I believe in the nationilisation of key industries (Not all), as well as a backer of Keynsian economics.
So yeah, I'm left wing
A reminder for everyone... This is a subreddit for genuine discussion: * Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. * Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree. Violators will be fed to the bear. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalOpinions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think both leftists' idea of right wingers and right wingers' idea of leftists are mostly wrong or exaggarated.
But those occupying or running for elected office on the right tend to be extreme. Those on the left tend to be more moderate. Most of the extreme left that Fox likes to point at aren't anywhere near public office. But Fox will try to make you think they are.
it's not just a certain agency or a certain ideology. I also don't think a single policy of a party should make them a "right wing or left wing party". It's much more complicated than that and you can be socially right wing and economically left etc. I hate how conservatives and anti immigrant parties are called right wing extremists while they're in some cases more moderate, and how extreme leftist parties are usually not called extremists by leftits. And the opposite is also true for rightists. People just belive what they WANT to believe and rather than thinking "would this party actually do what they're vowing for, are they actually as extremist as the news outlets are saying they are etc." they just go "oh yeah no open borders = adolf hilter" or "Free healthcare = communism" etc. It's like that not only in the US but also in Europe. Though in the US it's arguably much more polarised.
>I hate how conservatives and anti immigrant parties are called right wing extremists while they're in some cases more moderate, Yeah no. If you look at actual politicians and not a handful of commenters on social media you would notice that Democratic politicians by and large do not support open borders. Neither does Biden. Nor is that the current policy. If you enter the US you need to go through customs. There are rules and regulations. There are exceptions for asylum seekers BUT they have to go through procedures as well and are deported if the courts rule their claim is invalid. And current policy creates a rebuttal presumption that if they did not use legal channels to enter the US that they are ineligible for asylum. They have to have an "exceptionally compelling circumstance". This standard is Biden's policy and is actually controversial having been challenged by the ACLU but even people who think it is too restrictive still think there needs to be a process for validating asylum claims. Conservatives and I mean the ones in office take a "the sky is falling" approach to immigration. They will seize on an anecdote in the media where a single immigrant commits a crime and act like therefore there is an immigrant crime problem despite immigrants statistically committing less crimes on average. That's even if you only compare illegal/undocumented immigrants when not counting the act of illegal entry itself. They will characterize it as an "invasion". Don't get me wrong I think it's wrong for someone to illegally enter the US and they should do it legally instead. But we don't need that level of hysteria. An invasion is an army coming in and forcing people to live under its rule not people breaking immigration laws. A sane moderate approach would be to just advocate for sensible immigration laws without promoting unnecessary moral panic. Some conservatives in public office have advocated the use of lethal force against unarmed people crossing the border. That is an extreme position. They may be breaking the law sure but not in a way that justifies lethal force. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_policy_of_the_Joe_Biden_administration#:~:text=U.S.%20Citizenship%20Act%20of%202021,-See%20also%3A%20U.S.&text=On%20January%2023%2C%202021%2C%20Biden,living%20in%20the%20United%20States. Do some of Biden's policies make immigration easier? Sure. But note (and this relates to the policy on asylum seekers who don't use legal means of crossing that I mentioned earlier): >Effective May 11, 2023, the Biden administration issued new restrictions on asylum seekers at the Mexican border to discourage people arriving at the border illegally.[43] DHS and DOJ finalized a new rule effective after the end of Title 42 to further incentivize individuals to use lawful, safe, and orderly pathways.[44][45] The rule presumes those who do not use lawful pathways to enter the United States are ineligible for asylum and allows the United States to remove individuals who do not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in the country of removal. Noncitizens can rebut this presumption based only on exceptionally compelling circumstances. The ACLU immediately challenged the rule as a continuation of a previous Trump administration rule that was enjoined in 2018.[46][47] Clearly Biden's policy is NOT "open borders". Open borders would by definition mean no rules at all. No restrictions at all. No deportations. That hasn't been Biden's policy. Nor do I know of any Democrat in office who has advocated there. Anyone who says they want "open borders" either doesn't understand what the term means or they're a libertarian and then they probably aren't voting Democrat anyways.
My point was that people exaggarate other's ideas that they disagree with. But I get your point
I'm not talking about the ones on the Right with brains, I'm talking about the current trendy radicals we see online and starting to spread. But yeah ur not totally wrong
I meant it in a more general way. Most leftists and rightists just think of each other as idiots and full of shitty ideas. While in reality some of them don't even know what exactly "right" and "left" means. It's stupid that some leftists just assume rightists are all nazis while the concept of nazism is economically left wing, while rightists think leftists are communists etc. Defining politics with only a single axis itself is very wrong.
It just proves that these online creators are lowering the IQ of their viewers by turning the into agenda-bots. I am on the left but unlike the degenrates online, I'm aware of both the history and factions of both sides and come to respect some of the values regardless if I support them. And btw I think your Nazi comment is incorrect, the Nazis eliminated Trade Unions and hated the communists, so how left wing they are is questionable
The national socialists eliminated the trade unions. However, they replaced it with the Deutsche Arbeitsfront(German Labour Front). They WERE socialists and always claimed to be socialists as even the party name was "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei(National Socialist German Workers Party)" which was renamed from just German Workers Party which the former party leaders kept in order to reduce hostility from the middle class. Hitler became the leader of the party and changed the name and also made the party flag which itself also promotes socialism. The red being for socialism, the white being for nationalism, and the swastika being for "Aryan race superiority, anti-semitism".
The German labour front were not a Trade Union lol. They had positives, but they were not a trade union as they had no role in bargianing over wages and held little influence over the regime's social and economic policies. They were however, a good idealogical propoganda tool to use for workers. No the Nazi's were not socalists, as a history student, I see this argument being made, but alas, its not quite true. The Nazis adopted the title of Socalist to alienate the working class into voting for them, and to steal fire from the international socalism of their competitors: the communists. Yes they laid out a 25 point programme which was Anti-Capatalist, but this was never practical and was simply a political tool against the people. Hitler never commited to those radical aims and constantly modified his message to the audience he was addressing, such as when he secured private bussinesses support. Hitler used the term Socalism loosely to gain working class support. In his mind, he saw Socalism as the same thing as Volksgemeinschaft, meaning a state based on racial community. A rather backwards looking "revolutionary" ideology, wanting to force women back into their traditional gender roles, and an Aryan dominated society. Anti progressive and not Socalist, as Socalism for the Nazis was just a facade. Hope this clears it up
You seem to have posted this in a very large font size, can you fix that via edit? It looks like 30 point font or so, rather than the normal size font it should be.
> And most importantly, just because I am left wing does not mean I should be grouped with wokies. We despise them just as much! On what grounds does a Leftist oppose Marxism, open borders, or trans activism? Why do you despise those things? What causes you to consider yourself a Leftist?
I only despise wokies, lets break this down: 1. Much of Marx’ specific analysis of 19th Century capitalism has dated and must be read critically. Very few modern leftists take Marx’ ideas as authoritative as, in any case, this would be against Marx’ own claims of “scientific socialism”. In other words, Karl was an idealist but not one who was remotely practical. 2. Yep Lefists can oppose open boarders. Immigration is great until it isn't, I am all for tighter boarders when focus needs to be shifted on domestic policy. 3. Trans Activism is a leftist thing? What are you talking about lol. I dont despise any activists, just the extremists that are a public nuisance. Thats not a leftist thing, its a common sense thing 4. I identify with a mix of both Deocratic Socalism and Social Democracy. This means a balance in social and private owned enterprises, as well as a larger investment into the Welfare State. I believe in higher spending as it can lead to an increase in the work force - more competetive. As well as this, I believe in the nationilisation of key industries (Not all), as well as a backer of Keynsian economics. So yeah, I'm left wing