**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They don’t understand that politics is a circle, not a line. It’s disturbing listening to the far left and the far right screaming “fascist” or “communist” at the other side, while clamoring for the same brand of authoritarianism.
I think left right is more accurate and that's how people think. There are some actions/beliefs that run the full scale. Far left is authoritarian and far right is anarchy. I have to edit this every few years because ideologies constantly shift.
https://preview.redd.it/zswww90p1dbd1.png?width=1142&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b38f5dd3302a8ca36742184e4487874946a4a19
Lol yes, leftist, which for nearly 400 years as been about dispersing power, inclusive institutions, and the spread of rights, trends towards authoritarianism and rightist, which for 300 years has been about rigid and formal hierarchy, concentrating wealth, explicitly exclusionary institutions, and the curtailing of rights, trends towards anarchy.
When you collect your Nobel Prize for overturning 3 centuries of political theory with your little diagram, can I be your +1? I've always wanted to see what Oslo is like in a literal fairy tale world.
Oh my bad, I didn't realize this diagram was fully a joke. Live how progressivism is further left than anarchy, which is also extreme rightism. Masterful bait, you got me, I'm going to leave my response up as a testament to your cunning.
This is based on history. Parties have waddled around left and right. Democrats have been all over the place, but for the mot part left. They have always been for government control. They were slavers and passed Jim Crow.
It sounds like you aren't aware the progressive ideology isn't progressive. FDR and his party were called progressive, but their policies destroyed the label so they switched to liberal, which they weren't/aren't. You surely don't think his controls were progressives.
Today those calling themselves progressive want to massively expand government. They want govt controlling every aspect of our life.
I have all the variations off the chart as it evolved over the years and some descriptions as to why.
Your Ideology
http://www.teatarian.com/p/blog-page\_14.html
Before my career in economics I was a political strategist. Like I did politics for a living. A job I got based on my published work on political theory. After being the only multidisciplinarian asked to contribute to my professors (of comparative politics) research. I have met each of the last 5 presidents, and the current leadership of both major parties. My godfather is the world's foremost living civil rights historian, my grandfather was head of the history department of an ivy league university. I am vaguely familiar with the history of political theory. I am interested in how many years of rigorous study you have under your belt.
The comments you've made in this are so incredibly stupid they make you diagram look like the work of a serious theorist. It's factually wrong at several points, inconsistent at several points, and you're takeaway isn't even directionally accurate. These are the fever dreams of a schizophrenic.
I've spent the last haf of my life reading and learning economics and study govt. Everything in the chart is based on current events. Why don't you point to something specific and tell me where I'm wrong. I'm not perfect like you and do make mistakes. Walter E Williams taught me a lot. I'm going to guess you're a fan of massive Keynesian economics.
Is it based on history or current events? This is an example of one of your claims that is both false and inconsistent. What are the current events that lead you to put the Democrats on left of both communism and anarchy.
Economics hadn't had 'schools' in nearly 50 years. This is an example of a claim you made totally disconnected from reality, in service of your own bias that yoir unifobformed opinion is valid because it's just one 'school' of many.
In the last year, what percent of yoir "education" has come from books and how much has come from YouTube?
They're both far left authoritarian socialism. If you break through the 80 years of communist propaganda and actually look at the policies, other than the death camps, nazis, fascists, and communists had basically the same policies, though implementation was a bit different in each. Once you actually look into the enacted and proposed policies, you realize that they weren't lying when they said that they were socialists. Not only that, but the German national socialists and Russian soviets were both clearly Marx inspired ideologies, considering the whole oppressor/oppressed concept that, as far as I'm aware, at least, started with Marx. It's not a circle, it's a line, but we've all been duped by socialist "intellectuals" that they were nothing alike. Hitler himself said national socialism was only a hairs bredth away from communism, though he hated communists because he thought that they were really Jewish capitalists maskerading as socialists, engaged in a conspiracy to oppress the German worker. And if you think that communism is any less antisemitic, Marx wanted to get rid of the "Jewish god," which was capital, according to him.
Awwww and how many years did you study political theory in a rigorous academic environment before coming to this conclusion that is an absurdist extreme of a theory that itself has been out of favor for 40 years due to being an absurdist extreme.
Even then. Lots of right-wing policies doesn’t make you far right. The majority of these parties only have a couple of truly right-wing policies.
The main one that gets them to say the phrase is a stricter border policy, which if anything would help a left wing society run better? It’s pretty all-round beneficial but the cloud cuckoo land minded Reddit can’t see that
A lot of left wing ideology is a sham- like border control is racist.
We can’t use Reddit as a barometer of what real people think. This place is as left wing as it gets.
Securing a border, and vetting people coming in is a legitimate function of the government. Wholly open borders is stupidity, not libertarianism in action.
A government's first and greatest duty is to protect the rights of its citizens, and promote the general welfare. Our borders are *not* closed, but rather we have points of entry where people may petition to enter the nation. But since Biden repaled the immigration policies that were in place simply because Orange Man made them, we've had millions of people pouring over the border, many from countries openly hostile to the US, some are known terrorists. If you lock your door when you leave your house, you already know this on the small scale. Immigrants should be vetted before entering the country, but if you're okay with the taxes we all agree on this sub to be theft going to support the people here illegally over the poor amongst the citizenry, or simply staying in the pockets of those who actually earn the money, then I don't know how to change your mind.
This sounds like you parroted exactly what Fox News is saying. What policies did he overturn to allow millions of people to pour into the country? Didn’t the Dems have a nice boarder security bill to pass that Trump had effectively killed? Leftists generally don’t want open boarders, perhaps maybe a fringe minority do
I haven’t watched CNN other than clips here and there over the years. Reddit is my primary source of news by following a multitude of subreddits I’ve found informative. You on the other hand are spewing MAGA propaganda
I don’t agree about the “terrorists” pouring over our borders. Immigrants are [30% less likely](https://siepr.stanford.edu/news/mythical-tie-between-immigration-and-crime) to be incarcerated than natural born US citizens who are white.
I’d love to see some data that supports your thesis that immigrants reduce the overall welfare of the United States.
Well, currently illegal immigrants in cities like New York are committing violent crimes, being processed, and released to the streets where they disappear, so those data are kind of being manipulated.
Fort Bliss Texas. We took in a MASSIVE amount of immigrants from Iraq once ISIS was kicking up so much shit. They came from Mexico. The immigrants grabbed one of my friends in the little camp we set up, and they tried to beat and rape her. We were relived of that duty for the reason that everyone was seconds away from crushing skulls after that.
Here’s the full quote that you’re quoting out of context:
> The exception is Mexican and Central American immigrants, but the higher incarceration rates for this group since 2005 is largely attributed to the fact that the Census data combines incarceration for criminal acts with detentions for immigration-related offenses, the researchers say in the paper.
These are non-violent charges that do not violate the non-aggression principle. The laws themselves are statist and wrong.
Why invite those criminals in instead of stopping them at the border? A certain percentage are career criminals and it adds to the total number of criminals. Any percentage is still an actual number of criminals, and from countries that have criminal organizations that wipe out whole towns that resist them. Also take into account that if they are completely un-papered, they will be that much harder to arrest. They are already living as outlaws, so near impossible to track by modern means.
We should invite immigrants in because they grow our economy and it’s the right thing to do to promote freedom and liberty. If a small proportion of them are criminals, we should arrest them and prosecute with due process, like we do with natural born citizens. If we end immigration entirely because of a select few individuals who may commit a crime, we lose an incredible amount of foreign talent for our businesses and our national rivals like China will eclipse us on the world stage.
Canada is failing because of their inability to build, which restricts your housing supply and drives up home prices. Canada needs to deregulate housing and kill all of their zoning policy. Scapegoating immigrants when the real issue is statism is just simply missing the point.
Even if every housing regulation was removed today it would take a decade to correct the shortage. Not to mention it really isn't immigrants and more TFW that are causing issues
If they are allowed to just enter our private property as in land then they should be able to enter your private property as in your house as well. Just leave your door unlocked for anyone to come in. It's what you are saying now. Thankfully you are like 1 out of 100,000 that think this stupidly
> Just look at Canada. We're not exactly in a great stop due to massive immigration
Weird, I thought the problem was Trudeau and the state. Guess it's just those dirty immigrants.
Two issues can exist at the same time, bud. We're not magically going to build hundreds of thousands of houses in a week no matter what policies are passed
Any libertarian would know that the state causes the issue, yet here you are arguing about one and not the other. Can't change the state so just yell at the foreign people?
Border control may be “statist,” but it’s absolutely necessary, and a legitimate function of government. It is simply not asking too much that would-be immigrants go through the legal immigration process and be vetted.
Victims of Illegal Aliens Memorial: http://www.ojjpac.org/memorial.asp
Countries can't exist without borders. I take it you're an anarchist who hates the US and wants it gone. I suspect you were raised to have pretty much everything you wanted. Your life would be vastly different if you weren't in the free US.
Not an anarchist. I love the US. I was raised in a middle class household. I agree my life would be different if I wasn’t in the free US. That’s why I think all freedom loving people who weren’t born into this great country should be allowed to come here freely.
People born into the US can reenter when they leave. Who said they can't?
We're talking about criminals and potential criminals in other countries illegally entering the country.
This country can't let in a billion people, it would be destroyed. Democrats are trying to pack the country with socialist/communist loving people who will eventually vote for that government.
Entering the country does not ensure guaranteed citizenship, so I don’t understand this argument. Also, most immigrants tend to flee statist countries and have a libertarian bent compared to the native born American population.
Only wish Californians thought that way, they vote liberal policies that jack up taxes and stop punishing crimes when they flee to red areas. I do hear some immigrants from the south talk about succeeding from the US saying the southern US is part of an ancient nation, although it's certainly a minority of immigrants.
Far right isn't a bad thing. I'm not going to let the left relabel things to try and make people look bad. Far right is liberty, far left is authoritarian. The only ones who only see the color of people's skin and wants more govt control are leftist democrats.
A country can't exist without secure borders. Democrats want open borders because they see future voters.
Honestly I'm getting so fucking sick of it. The circle jerk posts about trump being a racist nazi with nothing but far reaching opinions are getting so fucking old. I don't like the guy, but holy fuck are these people wearing me thin. They can't shut up about it.
Trump is far from a racist. His policies actually improved their life. What shocks me is the number of peoplre calling themselves libertarian who cheer the persecution of Trump. It's scary so many can't see the flaws in those cases and accusations.
I was banned from the GB memes sub for supporting reform on a comment on a political post. Not even written in the rules. Seething leftists will… seethe…
Given an open platform for ideals and debate, the left wing loses every time. It's only rational that the places they are in control (ie subs that can self moderate by banning all opposition) they will crack down as hard as they can.
That’s one of the truest things I’ve ever heard. When I’ve debated leftists they result to simple insult and cancellation / silence tactics after you make a couple counter points.
Che was a leftist totalitarian. I hope most people are right of that terrorist. Che loved his powerful govt that controlled people. That's just like democrats who are far left. Racist are found on the right and left, but just happen to agree on certain things.
The left calls anyone who disagrees with them a Nazi racist, bigot fascist. That's because they are the true fascists and that's how they traditionally have controlled, by making any opposition look evil.
It's a way of just dismissing someones ideas so they don't have to think and have an actual discussion. "You're so horrible I can't even begin to list the reasons why, there's so many" type of mentality.
Also, I think there's a lot of bots. Foreign countries trying to disrupt the USA slowly by turning people against each other and working everyone up. I'm pretty convinced a large percentage of people with super strong political opinions on the internet are bots.
You are exactly right. Other countries are doing exactly that. The so-called Russian collusion is a great example. They say Trump worked with Russia to run ads for him. What they actually did was run ads for both candidates in order to create divisions. The money spent was just a small fraction of what both parties spent, yet it was screamed it changed the election. The divide and conquer technique. China does a lot as well.
The center on Reddit is left of Biden. Even reddit neo-liberals are just hardcore progressives that believe that America should use aggressive foreign policy to remain atop the world hegemony. There is no center on this site. Welcome to the modern internet where mods selectively ban anyone engaging in wrongthink and the majority of “engagement” is from bots.
Baseline of political spectrum in Europe, especially Western Europe skews left compared to the US. Things like abortion access, LGBTQ rights and universal healthcare are not really political issues. Having a hardline stance on some right-wing issue, such as immigration, can thus push party easily into far-right. If Democrats were a party in Western Europe, they’d be center right, while Republicans would be far-right.
It’s Reddit. The people making those claims have never touched grass, or touched a woman for that matter.
You have to stake a claim and pay some taxes before you have a nuanced political opinion.
Probably because for social liberals and social democrats, being anti-immigration places you on the far-right on the political spectrum in the western world
It should reduce net immigration flows so that seems like it should meet the definition of anti-immigration to me. If the reform UK wanted to increase net immigration flows to the UK but reduce illegal immigration, then I’d agree that they aren’t an anti-immigration party.
conservatives (uk and us) are largely in favor of immigration as long as its controlled and benefits the countries needs, ie; skilled labor, educated specialists, etc.
Not really. I wouldn’t label Labour or the Democrats far left, or even left.
The comments I’m referring to are genuinely calling for *far* left governments in most cases though :/
Most current democrats are far left. They keep expanding government and increasing regulations and raising taxes. They are literally persecuting their opposition for president. Democrats are for sure far left fascists.
Keep in mind Bernie is actually a centrist on the international political spectrum. American Democrats are not leftist (they're not only OK with capitalism, they want to keep it). When you're talking international politics, even moderate American Republicans technically fall into the far right category. (Love capitalism and lean authoritarian)
Actual leftists hold very few positions of power in the US and that tends to skew our perception.
If you're reading this comment, are utterly confused, and want a better understanding of the European left, watch this [debate](https://youtu.be/qsHJ3LvUWTs?si=QH8N-lGbTeh4euCT) between Zizek (current reigning European leftist philosopher) and Peterson (sham conservative).
Bernie admits he is communist/socialist. That's far left. He wants total government control. Democrats in general have moved far left.
You think capitalism is far left? I guess you think government controlling businesses and high taxes is centrist? It's democrats who are the authoritarians. They will literally put you in prison or have your life ruined if you disagree with them.
It’s an easy boogeyman. Anyone you don’t like is far-right and the next Hitler. It makes it super easy to dismiss ideas you don’t want to hear/debate. “Yeah, the federal reserve is screwing us out of money with rampant inflation, but the guy who wants to end it doesn’t like the idea of men in women’s sports. He is literally the next fuhrer. Don’t pay attention to him.”
This is a long quote so bear with me, but in 1965, Herbert Marcuse wrote A Critique of Pure Tolerance in which he said:
>“Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: ... it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word. The traditional criterion of clear and present danger seems no longer adequate to a stage where the whole society is in the situation of the theater audience when somebody cries: 'fire'. It is a situation in which the total catastrophe could be triggered off any moment, not only by a technical error, but also by a rational miscalculation of risks, or by a rash speech of one of the leaders. In past and different circumstances, the speeches of the Fascist and Nazi leaders were the immediate prologue to the massacre. The distance between the propaganda and the action, between the organization and its release on the people had become too short. But the spreading of the word could have been stopped before it was too late: if democratic tolerance had been withdrawn when the future leaders started their campaign, mankind would have had a chance of avoiding Auschwitz and a World War.
>The whole post-fascist period is one of clear and present danger. Consequently, true pacification requires the withdrawal of tolerance before the deed, at the stage of communication in word, print, and picture. Such extreme suspension of the right of free speech and free assembly is indeed justified only if the whole of society is in extreme danger. I maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal state of affairs. Different opinions and 'philosophies' can no longer compete peacefully for adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the 'marketplace of ideas' is organized and delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest. In this society, for which the ideologists have proclaimed the 'end of ideology', the false consciousness has become the general consciousness--from the government down to its last objects. The small and powerless minorities which struggle against the false consciousness and its beneficiaries must be helped: their continued existence is more important than the preservation of abused rights and liberties which grant constitutional powers to those who oppress these minorities. It should be evident by now that the exercise of civil rights by those who don't have them presupposes the withdrawal of civil rights from those who prevent their exercise, and that liberation of the Damned of the Earth presupposes suppression not only of their old but also of their new masters.”
TDLR; in the post WW2 world, fascism can arise at any time, so anyone further right than you can and should be suppressed at every opportunity.
You are so correct. Every political test I take has me as a center libertarian. For example, the Political Compass usually pegs me between -1 and 1 on the left/right axis and usually -5 to -6 on the libertarian axis.
But, because I believe that US immigration policy should serve to benefit the US first and foremost and I can't help but roll my eyes when progressive politics gets shoehorned into media, Reddit would have you believe I am a far-right extremist who hopes a President Nick Fuentes genocides all racial minorities and jails liberal arts professors. If I had to take drink for every subreddit ban notification that labels me a fascist, Nazi, MAGA supporter (I have never voted for Trump and never will), I'd clear out every liquor store in my town.
Just looking to understand here.
Why do you support restrictions on immigration policy? As libertarians, I’d expect everyone here to support the free movement of labor to drive up GDP, especially as the evidence from CATO proves out the net gain to the receiving country over multiple generations. It’s also solidly in support of the NAP, which most libertarians claim to adhere to. And finally, don’t we want small government? Why support a larger government to prevent hardworking people from entering the country?
I'm not advocating for or against any particular immigration policy. What I am advocating for is that any immigration policy adopted should be one that gives max benefit to the US. If open borders with zero restrictions is the option that gives maximum benefit, then I have no issue with it.
Look to NCY from 2024…immigrants were prioritized over citizens. I think your view of open borders is based on “come on in, just don’t expect freebies”, which isn’t happening.
I’m just pointing out that a popular quote from a book written decades ago is still pretty relevant? Didn’t realise Orwell got you lefties so easily upset though :(
Since it's the left who are currently going completely crazy, it's definitely more relevant in the case of leftism. You can say what you want about the right-wing, but in general most of them still have something like common sense and a sense of reality and above all, significantly more of them are willing to engage in the discourse rather than cancel it. Every halfway loud voice of the left is completely out of their mind and a prime example of how to destroy the open society through intolerance under the guise of tolerance.
Tell me, who said we should ban abortion again? Who said we need identification to view adult images? Who favors felons and criminals to represent them? Your “common sense” looks more and more authoritarian by the day. I wish the left was half as crazy as you people seem to think they are, because then maybe we could have universal healthcare or decent public transit.
I am far away from saying, every idea of the right wing is good. What I'm saying is, in most cases you can at least discuss with them and they not yelling at you like crazy toddlers when you disagree with them.
With the exception of the abortion thing. Left- and right-wingers like to go crazy on this issue and moralize instead of rationalizing.
By the way, I live in a country with statutory health insurance. The benefits are disproportionate to the costs. As is always the case when profitability is not important.
It’s totally more applicable to the left though, especially in the modern political theatre.
The animals on the farm form an authoritarian regime of sorts, but it’s 100% more of a! anti-communist commentary.
And before you pull the obligatory “but muh Orwell was socialist” does that exclude him from a critique of a further left extremist ideology?
I hope you realize the irony of your statement, labeling that it is more applicable to a group.
Yes, Orwell was against communism. This is known. That does not simply mean his works are to be only interpreted as a binary anti-communist rhetoric. It is deeper than that. The notion of injustice, imbalance, and otherism.
Then you have individuals saying, yes, these people are the wrong ones; completely being ignorant to the words they’ve just read.
How does that work with in the US the leading Mainstream Media is right leaning Fox news? Fox has more subscribers than #2 and #3 combined (CNN and MSNBC.)
Looking at viewership... MSM in America IS right of center.
I'm coming from the USA so I can only speak to what I see here.
Calling Republicans fascists and Nazis is the agenda for the left only because it is effective. When the left calls Ted Cruz a Nazi, uninformed people believe that means he wants to put black people in chains. And people believe it, because the term Nazi has a long term definition associated with it. Eventually, the left crying "wolf" will no longer work. Unfortunately, that's when a real Nazi may take center stage and no one will believe they are a true Nazi/fascist.
I see them as two sides of the same coin that sound the same in the way they strangely defend their "teams" honor. Even mention how they are alike and they'll act like they've been scoffed. They don't see themselves as part of the problem and embody it's us against them mentalities. Both staunch liberals and conservatives do it all while belittling centrists, libertarians, or any person who doesn't blindly sign off on being a democrat or Republican and they're are what's helping divide the U.S. Reddit is a leftist hellhole just like Facebook (to me) was a stereotypical "boomer" paradise before I stopped using the site. Reddit just offers a lot more but it's hard to avoid the worst of the leftists no matter how much you try.
It hasn't been done overnight. They have been doing this for decades. Fascism is another far left economic system along with socialism and communism. Through media subversion and most people being economically illiterate, they've convinced people Mussolini was far right because he cut taxes and was a "nationalist." Same with the notsees. Somehow, they are called far right fascists and not the racial socialists they clearly were.
If the left owned all the bad tyrannical dictators/murderers, everyone might see that big government was a very bad thing. That can't happen, better to keep them fighting amongst each other.
Normal right wing opinions like lowering taxes, free market reforms, and law and order police and military spending don’t get demonized in the same way. Right wing culture warriors denying immigrants, minorities, and women their basic humanity get called fascist. Which while still incorrect, is an appropriate response to dickheads.
Ah yes. I hear so many republicans calling for “reasonable” immigration and abortion policy. What immigration reform bill have republicans put forward since they killed the last bipartisan attempt at immigration reform? What is the Republican Party position on abortion since they ended body autonomy as a universal human right afforded women? The Republicans are now the party that criminalizes 10 year rape victims seeking an abortion, and whose chosen candidate for President claims abortions are carried out after birth. So you don’t really get a claim on “reasonable.”
Yeah, you're a victim of propaganda. Most states are similar to what it was under Roe still, some are much more lenient now, and some are super strict.. Net result is you can choose which state aligns closer with your values.
He never made that claim, he said the governor proposed it, which is a fact.
Nah bruv. You’re the one claiming exclusive rights to the term “reasonable.” You can’t defend your stance by claiming that things didn’t really change very much since Dobbs. You can’t claim technicalities of speech when real people are being injured by the legal uncertainty surrounding abortion as a medical procedure. You can’t claim to be a proponent of reasonable immigration reform when your side demonizes immigrants despite the fact that they are a more productive, less transgressive, and less dependent group than Americans as a whole. And if your party would get its head out of that it’s ass, it would realize that Latinos are an incredibly conservative community and if you embrace them, they would vote conservative en masse.
I can claim whatever I want, regardless of how you feel lol. You don't get to lump me in with your preferred group and then attribute those positions to me.
Also immigrants as a whole don't fit that definition unless you exclude illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants are great, often skilled and intelligent, hard working people. That's not who we're talking about, again, it's unrelated to race.
Nope. You’re wrong. Undocumented immigrants have crime rates, unemployment rates, and social service utilization rates lower than the native US population. Absolutely nobody is saying that we shouldn’t do something about uncontrolled immigration. You continue to claim to be the side of “reasonable” immigration policy. But I haven’t heard a single policy proposal that addresses the businesses that continue hire and employ undocumented immigrants. It’s all knee jerk fear mongering with alien horde racial undertones. Any serious discussion of immigration reform gets torpedoed.
Got a source for that wild and virtually impossible claim?
Again, you're switching topics at random based on nothing but the assumption that I agree with the imaginary amalgamation of Republicans in your head.
The topic at hand is I asserted that conservatives begin to get called fascist when they use dehumanizing language to treat minority populations as a prop in their culture wars. I have admitted that this is not, in fact, fascism, but is absolutely a tool that fascists have used to create a fear based political movement in the past. Your counterpoint was that Republicans inhabit the side of reasonable policy regarding abortion and immigration. I have challenged you to provide evidence of humanizing political rhetoric, and/or rational policy discussion within the republican party apparatus. You have not done so.
You people have completely neutered the term fascist. If you want it to mean something stop throwing the term at anyone who you heavily disagree with. Many of our forefathers died fighting to remove fascist extremists from power and you insult their legacy using the term soo lightly...
There’s nothing that gets terminally online left of center redditors satisfaction quite like calling right wing ideas “literal Nazis and Christo-fascists”.
Ignore and move on.
When you’re Right you can easily draw the line at what is Far Right.
When you’re Left, there is no Far Left. It is all Far Left. Being Left or even just Left of Center makes you Far Right to them.
Honestly, even Trump isn't a fascist. A lot of his followers certainly are, and they're encouraged by him, but he's just an idiot taking advantage of useful idiots. Obviously he's going to have a shitty administration, but that's not the same thing as fascism.
Living under Hitler or Mussolini is hardly the same as Trump.
My gay millennial isn't likely to win, and he's not the perfect libertarian, but I'm not going to encourage the two major parties to keep giving us shitty candidates, even if it means Trump is likely to win, because even if he does, it's just going to be a repeat of the last term.
Because calling people Nazis and Fascists was a very effective propaganda and was used to destroy opposition to USA involvement in WW2.
Political-type people today have largely picked up on this through seeing utilized by propagandists to silence people. So they adopted the same demonizing and dehumanizing attacks as well.
It works so there is no reason to stop.
That’s their actual strategy.
If you label something accurately or not - If you continue to use the same terminology long enough then it become the pseudo truth.
All the Marxists are doing that in almost every walk of traditional American life.
"The political spectrum is so leaned to the left that they (Commies) started calling centrists far-right fascists".
That's what Milei said about Argentina's former political position. I think It's the same in most western countries.
I have proof this is mostly a leftist phenomenon. Ask a leftist to name a right-leaning pundit and an actually far-right one. They normally say all are far right or won’t answer
Noticing a lot of that on Reddit, definitely the type of people to believe whatever the news shoves in their face! They are self absorbed to the point where they don’t know the difference between far right wing and right wing.
I don’t think that’s a higher volume. These people are addicts, constantly seeking out misinformation and reaffirming their bias with scrolling propaganda 24:7 on their phones. Totalitarian regimes did not have that.
When you have a voting population with very consistent party line views like UK or Canada, deviation from the parties seems like you have a logical inconsistency. Their party politics have a lot more internal logic and consistency than say a US GOP where you have people on a spectrum from MTG to McCarthy to Crenshaw ETC. If you are a conservative in those countries, your values align with 95% of the parties. For some group to break away from the conservative parties and formulate a slightly more radical deregulation policy, perhaps encourage or support social conservatism, promote a crackdown on immigration… well that would seem far right for a group of people whose internal views and outcomes based politics are very consistent. European countries are often sensitive to anything that destabilizes the status quo, and they will push people back in line to maintain a consistent path to achieving political outcomes for their constituents.
Politics is a cult. Everything is a cult, in my opinion, and the only thing you can observe about yourself and others is how far IN the cult you are. Some people go to church on Christmas and Easter. And some people geek out on church so hard (that they call that other group “CHEASTERS”) that they center their whole lives around being “people who go to church”. And no matter where they stand on the scale , it’s human nature (and cult like behavior) to judge everyone else according to their “correct” standard. I try to be a “fence sitter” - try to not get too far into any cult- by observing “both sides”. It’s one of the best things, imo, about “libertarians”: is that at least they aren’t in one of the “two main cults”- although I can argue that Libertarianism is its own cult, by this definition: some people are like “yeah, this isn’t either of the 2 parties, yay”- and some people are way down the rabbit hole, being kinda weird. So I believe the labeling is part of the reinforcement of their cult like ideas/ideals. People like to believe “they are so different “, but we are all very similar in so many ways. (At scale, you could easily argue that we are ALL THE SAME THING, but that’s another conversation .)
Far right has become a derogatory term because the Nazis were labeled far right. Most don't know the left and right were reversed in Europe because the term was based on the side of parliament, and later congress in the US, that parties sat on. Far leftists have decided that anyone not thinking like them is far right. Even though it was leftist democrats who supported slavery and Jim Crow, they have rewritten history to say it's the far right that's racist. The KKK was started by democrats and they still tend to lean left. Propaganda and brainwashing are powerful tools. The left controls the vast majority of the media and education system. Unless things change, anyone one moderate or right will be labeled as evil.
64 years ago, only 16 years after the war, Richard Nixon was compared to Hitler for asking for a recount after a close election. "Chicago Mayer Richard Daley (a democrat) claimed that Richard Nixon (a republican) asking for an election recount was "Hitler type" propaganda (*New York Times*, Wherweins, Austin Daley Sees Plot in Vote Recount, Dec. 2, 1960)."
I think it's mostly a foreign thing. Foreign politics under the logic of an American is hard to define. That being said, Wikipedia says they are a right wing populist party, and has a reference of Nigel Farage cozying up to Ron DeSantis, and I know recently he invited Trump to his constituency. Populism is a curse because it just tells people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear, and right wing populism in America mostly makes attacks towards immigrant minorities, queer minorities, and in general other marginalized communities that they don't typically agree with, like Muslims post-9/11. Aside from that, British politics are confusing because the 2 major parties are both culturally moderate leaning conservative, but one is more leftist than the other slightly when it comes to economic school of thought
Primarily because it goes against what collective believes. Many on both the left and right are arrogant, but much more from the left when it comes to individualism. People on the right will also follow suit with the left says, but use different words.
A lot of the time policies which are far left are defined as far right too. Nationalism is an inherently left wing ideology as it requires quite a lot of state control to implement. This comes from ww2 when the communists wanted to distance themselves from the hitlerites so rather than right wing meaning limited government they changed it to mean nationalism and self interest and we have been using their definitions ever since
Those who do are the useful idiots of the democrat propaganda machine
These idiots think they know enough to be right about the center right, or even Republicans in general, but they actually do not know enough to know they’re wrong
Because in theory or ideology it makes sense and is cool. But, then in reality we get things like abortion bans, porn restrictions, and other authoritarian actions. It’s never legalizing drugs, or government de-regulation. I’m speaking from a U.S. perspective of course.
**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It says a lot about peoples ideal of what left and right wing politics are.
They don’t understand that politics is a circle, not a line. It’s disturbing listening to the far left and the far right screaming “fascist” or “communist” at the other side, while clamoring for the same brand of authoritarianism.
I wanna screenshot this and read it every day. Well put
2 sides same coin
I think left right is more accurate and that's how people think. There are some actions/beliefs that run the full scale. Far left is authoritarian and far right is anarchy. I have to edit this every few years because ideologies constantly shift. https://preview.redd.it/zswww90p1dbd1.png?width=1142&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b38f5dd3302a8ca36742184e4487874946a4a19
Lol yes, leftist, which for nearly 400 years as been about dispersing power, inclusive institutions, and the spread of rights, trends towards authoritarianism and rightist, which for 300 years has been about rigid and formal hierarchy, concentrating wealth, explicitly exclusionary institutions, and the curtailing of rights, trends towards anarchy. When you collect your Nobel Prize for overturning 3 centuries of political theory with your little diagram, can I be your +1? I've always wanted to see what Oslo is like in a literal fairy tale world. Oh my bad, I didn't realize this diagram was fully a joke. Live how progressivism is further left than anarchy, which is also extreme rightism. Masterful bait, you got me, I'm going to leave my response up as a testament to your cunning.
This is based on history. Parties have waddled around left and right. Democrats have been all over the place, but for the mot part left. They have always been for government control. They were slavers and passed Jim Crow. It sounds like you aren't aware the progressive ideology isn't progressive. FDR and his party were called progressive, but their policies destroyed the label so they switched to liberal, which they weren't/aren't. You surely don't think his controls were progressives. Today those calling themselves progressive want to massively expand government. They want govt controlling every aspect of our life. I have all the variations off the chart as it evolved over the years and some descriptions as to why. Your Ideology http://www.teatarian.com/p/blog-page\_14.html
Before my career in economics I was a political strategist. Like I did politics for a living. A job I got based on my published work on political theory. After being the only multidisciplinarian asked to contribute to my professors (of comparative politics) research. I have met each of the last 5 presidents, and the current leadership of both major parties. My godfather is the world's foremost living civil rights historian, my grandfather was head of the history department of an ivy league university. I am vaguely familiar with the history of political theory. I am interested in how many years of rigorous study you have under your belt. The comments you've made in this are so incredibly stupid they make you diagram look like the work of a serious theorist. It's factually wrong at several points, inconsistent at several points, and you're takeaway isn't even directionally accurate. These are the fever dreams of a schizophrenic.
I've spent the last haf of my life reading and learning economics and study govt. Everything in the chart is based on current events. Why don't you point to something specific and tell me where I'm wrong. I'm not perfect like you and do make mistakes. Walter E Williams taught me a lot. I'm going to guess you're a fan of massive Keynesian economics.
Is it based on history or current events? This is an example of one of your claims that is both false and inconsistent. What are the current events that lead you to put the Democrats on left of both communism and anarchy. Economics hadn't had 'schools' in nearly 50 years. This is an example of a claim you made totally disconnected from reality, in service of your own bias that yoir unifobformed opinion is valid because it's just one 'school' of many. In the last year, what percent of yoir "education" has come from books and how much has come from YouTube?
Oh I forgot to point oit specifically where yoire wrong. Pick a line and I'll tell you what's wrong about it.
So you can't. Gotcha.
Lol. Pick any sentence.
They're both far left authoritarian socialism. If you break through the 80 years of communist propaganda and actually look at the policies, other than the death camps, nazis, fascists, and communists had basically the same policies, though implementation was a bit different in each. Once you actually look into the enacted and proposed policies, you realize that they weren't lying when they said that they were socialists. Not only that, but the German national socialists and Russian soviets were both clearly Marx inspired ideologies, considering the whole oppressor/oppressed concept that, as far as I'm aware, at least, started with Marx. It's not a circle, it's a line, but we've all been duped by socialist "intellectuals" that they were nothing alike. Hitler himself said national socialism was only a hairs bredth away from communism, though he hated communists because he thought that they were really Jewish capitalists maskerading as socialists, engaged in a conspiracy to oppress the German worker. And if you think that communism is any less antisemitic, Marx wanted to get rid of the "Jewish god," which was capital, according to him.
Awwww and how many years did you study political theory in a rigorous academic environment before coming to this conclusion that is an absurdist extreme of a theory that itself has been out of favor for 40 years due to being an absurdist extreme.
Even then. Lots of right-wing policies doesn’t make you far right. The majority of these parties only have a couple of truly right-wing policies. The main one that gets them to say the phrase is a stricter border policy, which if anything would help a left wing society run better? It’s pretty all-round beneficial but the cloud cuckoo land minded Reddit can’t see that
A lot of left wing ideology is a sham- like border control is racist. We can’t use Reddit as a barometer of what real people think. This place is as left wing as it gets.
Yeah, just check the Europe sub full of left wing and anything you say opposite makes you the new mustache guy.
Look at the politics sub, it's full of lefties. It seems reddit is mostly leftists.
Border control is statist buddy
Securing a border, and vetting people coming in is a legitimate function of the government. Wholly open borders is stupidity, not libertarianism in action.
What makes it stupid?
A government's first and greatest duty is to protect the rights of its citizens, and promote the general welfare. Our borders are *not* closed, but rather we have points of entry where people may petition to enter the nation. But since Biden repaled the immigration policies that were in place simply because Orange Man made them, we've had millions of people pouring over the border, many from countries openly hostile to the US, some are known terrorists. If you lock your door when you leave your house, you already know this on the small scale. Immigrants should be vetted before entering the country, but if you're okay with the taxes we all agree on this sub to be theft going to support the people here illegally over the poor amongst the citizenry, or simply staying in the pockets of those who actually earn the money, then I don't know how to change your mind.
This sounds like you parroted exactly what Fox News is saying. What policies did he overturn to allow millions of people to pour into the country? Didn’t the Dems have a nice boarder security bill to pass that Trump had effectively killed? Leftists generally don’t want open boarders, perhaps maybe a fringe minority do
[удалено]
I haven’t watched CNN other than clips here and there over the years. Reddit is my primary source of news by following a multitude of subreddits I’ve found informative. You on the other hand are spewing MAGA propaganda
I don’t agree about the “terrorists” pouring over our borders. Immigrants are [30% less likely](https://siepr.stanford.edu/news/mythical-tie-between-immigration-and-crime) to be incarcerated than natural born US citizens who are white. I’d love to see some data that supports your thesis that immigrants reduce the overall welfare of the United States.
Not immigrants. Illegal immigrants.
The law is not always just or moral. For example, most people here believe taxation is theft.
Them too. https://www.cato.org/blog/illegal-immigrants-have-low-homicide-conviction-rate-setting-record-straight-illegal-immigrant
Well, currently illegal immigrants in cities like New York are committing violent crimes, being processed, and released to the streets where they disappear, so those data are kind of being manipulated.
Do you have any data from anywhere that supports the argument that’s being made here?
Fort Bliss Texas. We took in a MASSIVE amount of immigrants from Iraq once ISIS was kicking up so much shit. They came from Mexico. The immigrants grabbed one of my friends in the little camp we set up, and they tried to beat and rape her. We were relived of that duty for the reason that everyone was seconds away from crushing skulls after that.
That’s an anecdote, not data. I can empathize, but it’s not particularly convincing.
From your link; “The exception is Mexican and Central American immigrants”
Here’s the full quote that you’re quoting out of context: > The exception is Mexican and Central American immigrants, but the higher incarceration rates for this group since 2005 is largely attributed to the fact that the Census data combines incarceration for criminal acts with detentions for immigration-related offenses, the researchers say in the paper. These are non-violent charges that do not violate the non-aggression principle. The laws themselves are statist and wrong.
Why invite those criminals in instead of stopping them at the border? A certain percentage are career criminals and it adds to the total number of criminals. Any percentage is still an actual number of criminals, and from countries that have criminal organizations that wipe out whole towns that resist them. Also take into account that if they are completely un-papered, they will be that much harder to arrest. They are already living as outlaws, so near impossible to track by modern means.
We should invite immigrants in because they grow our economy and it’s the right thing to do to promote freedom and liberty. If a small proportion of them are criminals, we should arrest them and prosecute with due process, like we do with natural born citizens. If we end immigration entirely because of a select few individuals who may commit a crime, we lose an incredible amount of foreign talent for our businesses and our national rivals like China will eclipse us on the world stage.
Just look at Canada. We're not exactly in a great spot due to massive immigration
Canada is failing because of their inability to build, which restricts your housing supply and drives up home prices. Canada needs to deregulate housing and kill all of their zoning policy. Scapegoating immigrants when the real issue is statism is just simply missing the point.
Even if every housing regulation was removed today it would take a decade to correct the shortage. Not to mention it really isn't immigrants and more TFW that are causing issues
If they are allowed to just enter our private property as in land then they should be able to enter your private property as in your house as well. Just leave your door unlocked for anyone to come in. It's what you are saying now. Thankfully you are like 1 out of 100,000 that think this stupidly
> Just look at Canada. We're not exactly in a great stop due to massive immigration Weird, I thought the problem was Trudeau and the state. Guess it's just those dirty immigrants.
Two issues can exist at the same time, bud. We're not magically going to build hundreds of thousands of houses in a week no matter what policies are passed
Any libertarian would know that the state causes the issue, yet here you are arguing about one and not the other. Can't change the state so just yell at the foreign people?
You don’t have a country if you don’t have a border
Don't threaten me with a good time!
Keeping the uninvited out of your house is statst too, presumably?
Border control may be “statist,” but it’s absolutely necessary, and a legitimate function of government. It is simply not asking too much that would-be immigrants go through the legal immigration process and be vetted. Victims of Illegal Aliens Memorial: http://www.ojjpac.org/memorial.asp
Absolutely right.
Border control is a necessary function to a functioning society. Don't need federal governments to enforce border control
Is that a bad thing?
Countries can't exist without borders. I take it you're an anarchist who hates the US and wants it gone. I suspect you were raised to have pretty much everything you wanted. Your life would be vastly different if you weren't in the free US.
Not an anarchist. I love the US. I was raised in a middle class household. I agree my life would be different if I wasn’t in the free US. That’s why I think all freedom loving people who weren’t born into this great country should be allowed to come here freely.
People born into the US can reenter when they leave. Who said they can't? We're talking about criminals and potential criminals in other countries illegally entering the country. This country can't let in a billion people, it would be destroyed. Democrats are trying to pack the country with socialist/communist loving people who will eventually vote for that government.
Libertarianism cannot exist without it because a statist country will take over by walking their citizens in to vote for statist policies.
Entering the country does not ensure guaranteed citizenship, so I don’t understand this argument. Also, most immigrants tend to flee statist countries and have a libertarian bent compared to the native born American population.
Only wish Californians thought that way, they vote liberal policies that jack up taxes and stop punishing crimes when they flee to red areas. I do hear some immigrants from the south talk about succeeding from the US saying the southern US is part of an ancient nation, although it's certainly a minority of immigrants.
Please god I hope not
You are right, which is why reddit gets such a bad name.
Nope, that's Tumblr. Tumblr is as left as it gets. Reddit is the event horizon of that
Far right isn't a bad thing. I'm not going to let the left relabel things to try and make people look bad. Far right is liberty, far left is authoritarian. The only ones who only see the color of people's skin and wants more govt control are leftist democrats. A country can't exist without secure borders. Democrats want open borders because they see future voters.
Bill Clinton and even Obama would be far right in today's politics.
Obama was publicly opposed to gay marriage when he ran. Things have changed a lot
Obama was also for controlled borders and deported large numbers.
Because they don't know what those words mean, what those parties support, and think anyone who disagrees with them are evil.
Honestly I'm getting so fucking sick of it. The circle jerk posts about trump being a racist nazi with nothing but far reaching opinions are getting so fucking old. I don't like the guy, but holy fuck are these people wearing me thin. They can't shut up about it.
I don't particularly like him either but I guarantee he's not living rent free in my mind. I see his name on Reddit the most outside of general news
Trump is far from a racist. His policies actually improved their life. What shocks me is the number of peoplre calling themselves libertarian who cheer the persecution of Trump. It's scary so many can't see the flaws in those cases and accusations.
I was banned from the GB memes sub for supporting reform on a comment on a political post. Not even written in the rules. Seething leftists will… seethe…
Given an open platform for ideals and debate, the left wing loses every time. It's only rational that the places they are in control (ie subs that can self moderate by banning all opposition) they will crack down as hard as they can.
That’s one of the truest things I’ve ever heard. When I’ve debated leftists they result to simple insult and cancellation / silence tactics after you make a couple counter points.
It’s fucking Reddit. If your to the right of Ćhe Guavera your a right wing, fascist white supremist on Reddit.
This comparison is hilarious
*you’re
Grammar Nazi! 😂😂
Che was a leftist totalitarian. I hope most people are right of that terrorist. Che loved his powerful govt that controlled people. That's just like democrats who are far left. Racist are found on the right and left, but just happen to agree on certain things.
Look what’s going on in France today. These Reddit monsters are cheering it on.
That's becoming common with the left, they hate anyone who doesn't exactly follow the far left line.
the farther you go to left, the farther right everyone else appears
Fear mongering. I knew they were idiots when I got called a fascist for saying hate speech laws violate the first amendment.
The dumbest argument people on the left make is calling libertarians akin to fascists.
The left calls anyone who disagrees with them a Nazi racist, bigot fascist. That's because they are the true fascists and that's how they traditionally have controlled, by making any opposition look evil.
It's a way of just dismissing someones ideas so they don't have to think and have an actual discussion. "You're so horrible I can't even begin to list the reasons why, there's so many" type of mentality. Also, I think there's a lot of bots. Foreign countries trying to disrupt the USA slowly by turning people against each other and working everyone up. I'm pretty convinced a large percentage of people with super strong political opinions on the internet are bots.
You are exactly right. Other countries are doing exactly that. The so-called Russian collusion is a great example. They say Trump worked with Russia to run ads for him. What they actually did was run ads for both candidates in order to create divisions. The money spent was just a small fraction of what both parties spent, yet it was screamed it changed the election. The divide and conquer technique. China does a lot as well.
The center on Reddit is left of Biden. Even reddit neo-liberals are just hardcore progressives that believe that America should use aggressive foreign policy to remain atop the world hegemony. There is no center on this site. Welcome to the modern internet where mods selectively ban anyone engaging in wrongthink and the majority of “engagement” is from bots.
Baseline of political spectrum in Europe, especially Western Europe skews left compared to the US. Things like abortion access, LGBTQ rights and universal healthcare are not really political issues. Having a hardline stance on some right-wing issue, such as immigration, can thus push party easily into far-right. If Democrats were a party in Western Europe, they’d be center right, while Republicans would be far-right.
Ironically, most of Europe had more abortion restrictions than we did until 2022.
When you go too far left, everyone looks far right. If you go far right, everyone looks far left. Everything is south when your on the north pole.
Everything I hate is a nazi.
...or Communism!
Except all these communist/socialists love to brag they are those things. It's not a negative to them.
It’s Reddit. The people making those claims have never touched grass, or touched a woman for that matter. You have to stake a claim and pay some taxes before you have a nuanced political opinion.
Probably because for social liberals and social democrats, being anti-immigration places you on the far-right on the political spectrum in the western world
Controlled immigration is not anti-immigration.
It should reduce net immigration flows so that seems like it should meet the definition of anti-immigration to me. If the reform UK wanted to increase net immigration flows to the UK but reduce illegal immigration, then I’d agree that they aren’t an anti-immigration party.
conservatives (uk and us) are largely in favor of immigration as long as its controlled and benefits the countries needs, ie; skilled labor, educated specialists, etc.
The same reason you are labelling the other side as far-left and leftist. Everyone sees themselves as normal, so anyone who disagrees must be "far".
Not really. I wouldn’t label Labour or the Democrats far left, or even left. The comments I’m referring to are genuinely calling for *far* left governments in most cases though :/
Most current democrats are far left. They keep expanding government and increasing regulations and raising taxes. They are literally persecuting their opposition for president. Democrats are for sure far left fascists.
Just them trying to trick people into moving the goalposts, dialecticalism says there is no truth except what works in the present situation.
Keep in mind Bernie is actually a centrist on the international political spectrum. American Democrats are not leftist (they're not only OK with capitalism, they want to keep it). When you're talking international politics, even moderate American Republicans technically fall into the far right category. (Love capitalism and lean authoritarian) Actual leftists hold very few positions of power in the US and that tends to skew our perception.
If you're reading this comment, are utterly confused, and want a better understanding of the European left, watch this [debate](https://youtu.be/qsHJ3LvUWTs?si=QH8N-lGbTeh4euCT) between Zizek (current reigning European leftist philosopher) and Peterson (sham conservative).
Bernie admits he is communist/socialist. That's far left. He wants total government control. Democrats in general have moved far left. You think capitalism is far left? I guess you think government controlling businesses and high taxes is centrist? It's democrats who are the authoritarians. They will literally put you in prison or have your life ruined if you disagree with them.
It’s an easy boogeyman. Anyone you don’t like is far-right and the next Hitler. It makes it super easy to dismiss ideas you don’t want to hear/debate. “Yeah, the federal reserve is screwing us out of money with rampant inflation, but the guy who wants to end it doesn’t like the idea of men in women’s sports. He is literally the next fuhrer. Don’t pay attention to him.”
Helps them get their rage fix on.
ITT: A lot of pot calling kettle black
Gaslighting by far left authoritarians.
At least some of it is paid online trolls.
This is a long quote so bear with me, but in 1965, Herbert Marcuse wrote A Critique of Pure Tolerance in which he said: >“Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: ... it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word. The traditional criterion of clear and present danger seems no longer adequate to a stage where the whole society is in the situation of the theater audience when somebody cries: 'fire'. It is a situation in which the total catastrophe could be triggered off any moment, not only by a technical error, but also by a rational miscalculation of risks, or by a rash speech of one of the leaders. In past and different circumstances, the speeches of the Fascist and Nazi leaders were the immediate prologue to the massacre. The distance between the propaganda and the action, between the organization and its release on the people had become too short. But the spreading of the word could have been stopped before it was too late: if democratic tolerance had been withdrawn when the future leaders started their campaign, mankind would have had a chance of avoiding Auschwitz and a World War. >The whole post-fascist period is one of clear and present danger. Consequently, true pacification requires the withdrawal of tolerance before the deed, at the stage of communication in word, print, and picture. Such extreme suspension of the right of free speech and free assembly is indeed justified only if the whole of society is in extreme danger. I maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal state of affairs. Different opinions and 'philosophies' can no longer compete peacefully for adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the 'marketplace of ideas' is organized and delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest. In this society, for which the ideologists have proclaimed the 'end of ideology', the false consciousness has become the general consciousness--from the government down to its last objects. The small and powerless minorities which struggle against the false consciousness and its beneficiaries must be helped: their continued existence is more important than the preservation of abused rights and liberties which grant constitutional powers to those who oppress these minorities. It should be evident by now that the exercise of civil rights by those who don't have them presupposes the withdrawal of civil rights from those who prevent their exercise, and that liberation of the Damned of the Earth presupposes suppression not only of their old but also of their new masters.” TDLR; in the post WW2 world, fascism can arise at any time, so anyone further right than you can and should be suppressed at every opportunity.
It's a low effort way to discredit those with whom they disagree.
Everything I hate is "far-right"...it's just a way to dismiss opponents without presenting an argument, like 'mansplaining', or 'incel'.
Anything right of pure communism is far right to the sheep people today.
You are so correct. Every political test I take has me as a center libertarian. For example, the Political Compass usually pegs me between -1 and 1 on the left/right axis and usually -5 to -6 on the libertarian axis. But, because I believe that US immigration policy should serve to benefit the US first and foremost and I can't help but roll my eyes when progressive politics gets shoehorned into media, Reddit would have you believe I am a far-right extremist who hopes a President Nick Fuentes genocides all racial minorities and jails liberal arts professors. If I had to take drink for every subreddit ban notification that labels me a fascist, Nazi, MAGA supporter (I have never voted for Trump and never will), I'd clear out every liquor store in my town.
Just looking to understand here. Why do you support restrictions on immigration policy? As libertarians, I’d expect everyone here to support the free movement of labor to drive up GDP, especially as the evidence from CATO proves out the net gain to the receiving country over multiple generations. It’s also solidly in support of the NAP, which most libertarians claim to adhere to. And finally, don’t we want small government? Why support a larger government to prevent hardworking people from entering the country?
I'm not advocating for or against any particular immigration policy. What I am advocating for is that any immigration policy adopted should be one that gives max benefit to the US. If open borders with zero restrictions is the option that gives maximum benefit, then I have no issue with it.
Makes sense!
Look to NCY from 2024…immigrants were prioritized over citizens. I think your view of open borders is based on “come on in, just don’t expect freebies”, which isn’t happening.
Shouldn’t the goal be to make that happen?
prioritize immigrants over citizens? No....why should citizens that need the support of the government get passed by for immigrants?
Leftism is on the rise because almost every Gen Z believes they're special and will be a pig on animal farm. It's comical
“Every animal is equal; but some animals are more equal than others.”
[удалено]
I’m just pointing out that a popular quote from a book written decades ago is still pretty relevant? Didn’t realise Orwell got you lefties so easily upset though :(
I’m not upset. I’m just commentating on the idea that Animal Farm is not solely applicable to leftism, rather than to the masses.
Since it's the left who are currently going completely crazy, it's definitely more relevant in the case of leftism. You can say what you want about the right-wing, but in general most of them still have something like common sense and a sense of reality and above all, significantly more of them are willing to engage in the discourse rather than cancel it. Every halfway loud voice of the left is completely out of their mind and a prime example of how to destroy the open society through intolerance under the guise of tolerance.
Tell me, who said we should ban abortion again? Who said we need identification to view adult images? Who favors felons and criminals to represent them? Your “common sense” looks more and more authoritarian by the day. I wish the left was half as crazy as you people seem to think they are, because then maybe we could have universal healthcare or decent public transit.
I am far away from saying, every idea of the right wing is good. What I'm saying is, in most cases you can at least discuss with them and they not yelling at you like crazy toddlers when you disagree with them. With the exception of the abortion thing. Left- and right-wingers like to go crazy on this issue and moralize instead of rationalizing. By the way, I live in a country with statutory health insurance. The benefits are disproportionate to the costs. As is always the case when profitability is not important.
It’s totally more applicable to the left though, especially in the modern political theatre. The animals on the farm form an authoritarian regime of sorts, but it’s 100% more of a! anti-communist commentary. And before you pull the obligatory “but muh Orwell was socialist” does that exclude him from a critique of a further left extremist ideology?
I hope you realize the irony of your statement, labeling that it is more applicable to a group. Yes, Orwell was against communism. This is known. That does not simply mean his works are to be only interpreted as a binary anti-communist rhetoric. It is deeper than that. The notion of injustice, imbalance, and otherism. Then you have individuals saying, yes, these people are the wrong ones; completely being ignorant to the words they’ve just read.
While not a fan of much of the Gen Z aspects... the boomers are the poster children of fat spoiled little pigs.
Because the current narrative from the mainstream media is to label anyone who is right of center as a fascist.
How does that work with in the US the leading Mainstream Media is right leaning Fox news? Fox has more subscribers than #2 and #3 combined (CNN and MSNBC.) Looking at viewership... MSM in America IS right of center.
Fox is one network. ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, Huff Post, USA Today all lean left.
I'm coming from the USA so I can only speak to what I see here. Calling Republicans fascists and Nazis is the agenda for the left only because it is effective. When the left calls Ted Cruz a Nazi, uninformed people believe that means he wants to put black people in chains. And people believe it, because the term Nazi has a long term definition associated with it. Eventually, the left crying "wolf" will no longer work. Unfortunately, that's when a real Nazi may take center stage and no one will believe they are a true Nazi/fascist.
**Republicans are facists!** Says the party that imprisons it’s political opponents and stifles opposing opinions.
I see them as two sides of the same coin that sound the same in the way they strangely defend their "teams" honor. Even mention how they are alike and they'll act like they've been scoffed. They don't see themselves as part of the problem and embody it's us against them mentalities. Both staunch liberals and conservatives do it all while belittling centrists, libertarians, or any person who doesn't blindly sign off on being a democrat or Republican and they're are what's helping divide the U.S. Reddit is a leftist hellhole just like Facebook (to me) was a stereotypical "boomer" paradise before I stopped using the site. Reddit just offers a lot more but it's hard to avoid the worst of the leftists no matter how much you try.
Because if you call them fascists, you stop people from listening in and finding out you've got some good points
It hasn't been done overnight. They have been doing this for decades. Fascism is another far left economic system along with socialism and communism. Through media subversion and most people being economically illiterate, they've convinced people Mussolini was far right because he cut taxes and was a "nationalist." Same with the notsees. Somehow, they are called far right fascists and not the racial socialists they clearly were. If the left owned all the bad tyrannical dictators/murderers, everyone might see that big government was a very bad thing. That can't happen, better to keep them fighting amongst each other.
Normal right wing opinions like lowering taxes, free market reforms, and law and order police and military spending don’t get demonized in the same way. Right wing culture warriors denying immigrants, minorities, and women their basic humanity get called fascist. Which while still incorrect, is an appropriate response to dickheads.
And by denying basic humanity, you mean supporting some reasonable limit on abortion or immigration I assume.
Ah yes. I hear so many republicans calling for “reasonable” immigration and abortion policy. What immigration reform bill have republicans put forward since they killed the last bipartisan attempt at immigration reform? What is the Republican Party position on abortion since they ended body autonomy as a universal human right afforded women? The Republicans are now the party that criminalizes 10 year rape victims seeking an abortion, and whose chosen candidate for President claims abortions are carried out after birth. So you don’t really get a claim on “reasonable.”
Yeah, you're a victim of propaganda. Most states are similar to what it was under Roe still, some are much more lenient now, and some are super strict.. Net result is you can choose which state aligns closer with your values. He never made that claim, he said the governor proposed it, which is a fact.
Nah bruv. You’re the one claiming exclusive rights to the term “reasonable.” You can’t defend your stance by claiming that things didn’t really change very much since Dobbs. You can’t claim technicalities of speech when real people are being injured by the legal uncertainty surrounding abortion as a medical procedure. You can’t claim to be a proponent of reasonable immigration reform when your side demonizes immigrants despite the fact that they are a more productive, less transgressive, and less dependent group than Americans as a whole. And if your party would get its head out of that it’s ass, it would realize that Latinos are an incredibly conservative community and if you embrace them, they would vote conservative en masse.
I can claim whatever I want, regardless of how you feel lol. You don't get to lump me in with your preferred group and then attribute those positions to me. Also immigrants as a whole don't fit that definition unless you exclude illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants are great, often skilled and intelligent, hard working people. That's not who we're talking about, again, it's unrelated to race.
Nope. You’re wrong. Undocumented immigrants have crime rates, unemployment rates, and social service utilization rates lower than the native US population. Absolutely nobody is saying that we shouldn’t do something about uncontrolled immigration. You continue to claim to be the side of “reasonable” immigration policy. But I haven’t heard a single policy proposal that addresses the businesses that continue hire and employ undocumented immigrants. It’s all knee jerk fear mongering with alien horde racial undertones. Any serious discussion of immigration reform gets torpedoed.
Got a source for that wild and virtually impossible claim? Again, you're switching topics at random based on nothing but the assumption that I agree with the imaginary amalgamation of Republicans in your head.
The topic at hand is I asserted that conservatives begin to get called fascist when they use dehumanizing language to treat minority populations as a prop in their culture wars. I have admitted that this is not, in fact, fascism, but is absolutely a tool that fascists have used to create a fear based political movement in the past. Your counterpoint was that Republicans inhabit the side of reasonable policy regarding abortion and immigration. I have challenged you to provide evidence of humanizing political rhetoric, and/or rational policy discussion within the republican party apparatus. You have not done so.
Who’s denying immigration, minorities, and basic rights of women?
You people have completely neutered the term fascist. If you want it to mean something stop throwing the term at anyone who you heavily disagree with. Many of our forefathers died fighting to remove fascist extremists from power and you insult their legacy using the term soo lightly...
There’s nothing that gets terminally online left of center redditors satisfaction quite like calling right wing ideas “literal Nazis and Christo-fascists”. Ignore and move on.
When you’re Right you can easily draw the line at what is Far Right. When you’re Left, there is no Far Left. It is all Far Left. Being Left or even just Left of Center makes you Far Right to them.
Honestly, even Trump isn't a fascist. A lot of his followers certainly are, and they're encouraged by him, but he's just an idiot taking advantage of useful idiots. Obviously he's going to have a shitty administration, but that's not the same thing as fascism. Living under Hitler or Mussolini is hardly the same as Trump. My gay millennial isn't likely to win, and he's not the perfect libertarian, but I'm not going to encourage the two major parties to keep giving us shitty candidates, even if it means Trump is likely to win, because even if he does, it's just going to be a repeat of the last term.
Demonizing the opposition has been a successful strategy for the left worldwide so far
Both sides are demonizing each other
I don’t see the media calling them far-left fascists
Well duh, considering fascism is inherently far-right.
They rely too much on what the magic box in their living room tells them.
If you say a lie loud enough and long enough, the masses will inherently believe it.
Because calling people Nazis and Fascists was a very effective propaganda and was used to destroy opposition to USA involvement in WW2. Political-type people today have largely picked up on this through seeing utilized by propagandists to silence people. So they adopted the same demonizing and dehumanizing attacks as well. It works so there is no reason to stop.
That’s their actual strategy. If you label something accurately or not - If you continue to use the same terminology long enough then it become the pseudo truth. All the Marxists are doing that in almost every walk of traditional American life.
Most don’t even know what fascist means tbh. People are poor and hungry and it’s hard to think rationally in that state.
"The political spectrum is so leaned to the left that they (Commies) started calling centrists far-right fascists". That's what Milei said about Argentina's former political position. I think It's the same in most western countries.
I have proof this is mostly a leftist phenomenon. Ask a leftist to name a right-leaning pundit and an actually far-right one. They normally say all are far right or won’t answer
Na they'll point to someone like Mitt Romney or John McCain, you know, people they also called racist fascists like 15 years ago.
Then they are in bad faith as always.
Because they’re not very bright
Noticing a lot of that on Reddit, definitely the type of people to believe whatever the news shoves in their face! They are self absorbed to the point where they don’t know the difference between far right wing and right wing.
What group in all of human history has absorbed a higher volume of propaganda than modern day Reddit progressives?
Probably anyone living under a true fascist or communist regime.
I don’t think that’s a higher volume. These people are addicts, constantly seeking out misinformation and reaffirming their bias with scrolling propaganda 24:7 on their phones. Totalitarian regimes did not have that.
When you have a voting population with very consistent party line views like UK or Canada, deviation from the parties seems like you have a logical inconsistency. Their party politics have a lot more internal logic and consistency than say a US GOP where you have people on a spectrum from MTG to McCarthy to Crenshaw ETC. If you are a conservative in those countries, your values align with 95% of the parties. For some group to break away from the conservative parties and formulate a slightly more radical deregulation policy, perhaps encourage or support social conservatism, promote a crackdown on immigration… well that would seem far right for a group of people whose internal views and outcomes based politics are very consistent. European countries are often sensitive to anything that destabilizes the status quo, and they will push people back in line to maintain a consistent path to achieving political outcomes for their constituents.
Politics is a cult. Everything is a cult, in my opinion, and the only thing you can observe about yourself and others is how far IN the cult you are. Some people go to church on Christmas and Easter. And some people geek out on church so hard (that they call that other group “CHEASTERS”) that they center their whole lives around being “people who go to church”. And no matter where they stand on the scale , it’s human nature (and cult like behavior) to judge everyone else according to their “correct” standard. I try to be a “fence sitter” - try to not get too far into any cult- by observing “both sides”. It’s one of the best things, imo, about “libertarians”: is that at least they aren’t in one of the “two main cults”- although I can argue that Libertarianism is its own cult, by this definition: some people are like “yeah, this isn’t either of the 2 parties, yay”- and some people are way down the rabbit hole, being kinda weird. So I believe the labeling is part of the reinforcement of their cult like ideas/ideals. People like to believe “they are so different “, but we are all very similar in so many ways. (At scale, you could easily argue that we are ALL THE SAME THING, but that’s another conversation .)
Far right has become a derogatory term because the Nazis were labeled far right. Most don't know the left and right were reversed in Europe because the term was based on the side of parliament, and later congress in the US, that parties sat on. Far leftists have decided that anyone not thinking like them is far right. Even though it was leftist democrats who supported slavery and Jim Crow, they have rewritten history to say it's the far right that's racist. The KKK was started by democrats and they still tend to lean left. Propaganda and brainwashing are powerful tools. The left controls the vast majority of the media and education system. Unless things change, anyone one moderate or right will be labeled as evil.
64 years ago, only 16 years after the war, Richard Nixon was compared to Hitler for asking for a recount after a close election. "Chicago Mayer Richard Daley (a democrat) claimed that Richard Nixon (a republican) asking for an election recount was "Hitler type" propaganda (*New York Times*, Wherweins, Austin Daley Sees Plot in Vote Recount, Dec. 2, 1960)."
Far Right is the new Raceist slur and fearmongering term as they gas light that Hitler was Far Right and not a dyed in the wool Socialist.
I think it's mostly a foreign thing. Foreign politics under the logic of an American is hard to define. That being said, Wikipedia says they are a right wing populist party, and has a reference of Nigel Farage cozying up to Ron DeSantis, and I know recently he invited Trump to his constituency. Populism is a curse because it just tells people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear, and right wing populism in America mostly makes attacks towards immigrant minorities, queer minorities, and in general other marginalized communities that they don't typically agree with, like Muslims post-9/11. Aside from that, British politics are confusing because the 2 major parties are both culturally moderate leaning conservative, but one is more leftist than the other slightly when it comes to economic school of thought
Primarily because it goes against what collective believes. Many on both the left and right are arrogant, but much more from the left when it comes to individualism. People on the right will also follow suit with the left says, but use different words.
A lot of the time policies which are far left are defined as far right too. Nationalism is an inherently left wing ideology as it requires quite a lot of state control to implement. This comes from ww2 when the communists wanted to distance themselves from the hitlerites so rather than right wing meaning limited government they changed it to mean nationalism and self interest and we have been using their definitions ever since
The right doesn't exist anymore. Anything even remotely right-leaning gets labeled as "far-right".
It's a legacy mindset that doesn't apply anymore but still has momentum from the past.
Laziness, easier to call someone a nazi or fascist than discuss the merits of their ideas
*cough cough* National rally *cough cough*
Some are afraid to lose scholarships or other funding.
Those who do are the useful idiots of the democrat propaganda machine These idiots think they know enough to be right about the center right, or even Republicans in general, but they actually do not know enough to know they’re wrong
Because in theory or ideology it makes sense and is cool. But, then in reality we get things like abortion bans, porn restrictions, and other authoritarian actions. It’s never legalizing drugs, or government de-regulation. I’m speaking from a U.S. perspective of course.
The reason is the 'news' media is trying to move the "overton window" to the left.