d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > My Views Have Moved A Bit To The Left
Prev1234519Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Retired Moderator
Posts: 115,464
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 33,791.94
Trader: Trusted
Jul 13 2020 06:02pm
Quote (IceMage @ Jul 13 2020 07:55pm)
I've moved left on some things, but let's pretend John Kasich got elected. Would people constantly be harping on my shift? It looks that way because America no longer has a legitimate right-wing political party. We have a mostly center-left party and a personality cult of nutjobs and/or racists.

Plus the left-right paradigm is kind of irrelevant on some issues. I'll take Hillary's hawkish multilateralism over Trump's isolationist unilateralism. Neither is a cookie-cutter right-wing or left-wing position.



The middle road is Democratic-led governance. It's not a choice between Trump vs the author of White Fragility. It's Trump vs Biden. A president who intentionally stokes racial divisions vs. one who will try to unite the country.


it's far right or far left these days with a handful of rich old guys who like to say they're democrats (howard schultz, biden, bloomberg, etc.) it's really fucking stupid actually. nothing will get done because in the social media age you're either left or your right wing and that's that.

biden might be a creep, he's probably an idiot, but i do think he genuinely wants to do right by people. the 40+ years in the game means he owes a lot of people a lot of favors, but that's common. trump owed no one favors but paid them all out anyways LOL
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 13 2020 06:04pm
Quote (IceMage @ Jul 13 2020 06:55pm)
I've moved left on some things, but let's pretend John Kasich got elected. Would people constantly be harping on my shift? It looks that way because America no longer has a legitimate right-wing political party. We have a mostly center-left party and a personality cult of nutjobs and/or racists.

Plus the left-right paradigm is kind of irrelevant on some issues. I'll take Hillary's hawkish multilateralism over Trump's isolationist unilateralism. Neither is a cookie-cutter right-wing or left-wing position.

The middle road is Democratic-led governance. It's not a choice between Trump vs the author of White Fragility. It's Trump vs Biden. A president who intentionally stokes racial divisions vs. one who will try to unite the country.


As always I disagree in calling the Democrats center-left. They're center-right with a few left leaning individuals. Even Bernie isn't that far left. His "Democratic Socialism" is largely common sense stuff, like making education accessible and creating a public option for healthcare. He's not trying to fundamentally reshape the economic system like a real leftist would. America in general has a supremely small political spectrum, so even if we agree that the Democrats are "on the left" they're so close to Republicans on most issues that there's not much value in a left right divide.

Quote (AspenSniper @ Jul 13 2020 07:02pm)
it's far right or far left these days with a handful of rich old guys who like to say they're democrats (howard schultz, biden, bloomberg, etc.) it's really fucking stupid actually. nothing will get done because in the social media age you're either left or your right wing and that's that.

biden might be a creep, he's probably an idiot, but i do think he genuinely wants to do right by people. the 40+ years in the game means he owes a lot of people a lot of favors, but that's common. trump owed no one favors but paid them all out anyways LOL


I don't think you realize how far left the political spectrum actually goes. Biden is still firmly on the right anywhere except America, where we occupy such a small space that "left and right" doesn't mean much when you cross the middle.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 13 2020 06:05pm
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Jul 13 2020 06:10pm
Quote (AspenSniper @ 13 Jul 2020 22:06)
I pride myself on my individual, moderate, pragmatic views. I guess if I'm in a bucket, it'd be libertarian like a lot of white guys around 30 years old. Pro gay, pro abortion, pro liberty, don't f with my money but i'm not an idiot that doesnt understand that collectivism money can produce a positive social good.

The BLM movement caused me to think a bit. I've been quick to think, I really didnt come from anything with a firefighter dad and a retail store clerk minimum wage earning mom, so if I can do it so can everyone. I do still think that and I do still think increasing money on social welfare is a stupid idea because it's usually just a bailout for people who dont make good decisions. I don't believe in inequity in the workplace as most managers would kill to be able to hire more women/POC, etc., but often times there just isnt a huge talent pool and the best candidates just are white guys, especially in areas like tech. Even at the corporate executive level, companies often strive to add female and minority board members/executive leaders. However, I've come to really understand white privilege and there's a piece we don't really think about.

Inheritance and family money is seldom talked about and white people don't give it much thought. More of a class issue than a race issue, but they often go hand-in-hand. For most, if they lose their job they have a family member even if not a direct parent that could support them financially or let them live in a room in their house, etc. That isn't nearly as common in minority families. Also, why i feel class/race go hand-in-hand dates back to housing laws for many past decades. Levittown is an easy example. Those houses were sold for about $10k per, sometimes less, which would be maybe $100k or so in today's money. Those houses are about half a mil now, meaning they made 5x in investment equity value after adjusting for inflation. Those houses, as was the case for many other communities, weren't available to blacks. Outside of just the law, many areas refused to sell homes to blacks, pushing them to historic black areas. Surely most of us know the historic "black neighborhoods" that still exist today even in more wealthy cities. Those home values didnt rise at anywhere near the same rate.

This isn't broad brush and I get that, but the amount of inheritance money about to flow to millenials i believe is somewhere in the neighborhood of $60 trillion. Not a lot of that is going to minorities because of what happened in the past. So when my white friends say "hey i didnt do anything to you, don't blame me" I kinda get the anger/annoyance/attitude from minorities as we're going to benefit off of the racist actions of our grandparents' and great grandparents' era and minorities won't.

Anyways, I haven't posted here in a while and wanted to share this.


I think the bolded part really gets at the core of the economic and social problem facing America today, but not in the straightforward way:


The real issue, in my opinion, is that people's economic situation (and subsequently their fate in life) is increasingly determined by their assets/wealth rather than their income from work. Returns on capital investment (including real estate property!) have outpaced wage growth for decades, and to add insult to injury, the effective tax rate on capital gains is lower than the actual tax burden on working- and middle-class families (when we include inevitable sales taxes and such). Capitalism has always favored capital over labor to some degree, but in recent decades, our system has degenerated to the point where this advantage has become nearly insurmountable.

Only for this reason does accumulated family net worth play such a big role, only for this reason does it seem as if minority families will never be able to make up the headstart white families inherited due to discrimination and exploitation from several generations ago. If society eliminated systemic discrimination in the present, like redlining or police violence, then these different economic starting points for whites and minorities should quickly fade over time and be made up for after 2 generations max, no reparations needed. Imho, the fact that this vision seems unrealistic today does not point to even more hidden and nefarious forms of racial discrimination - it is the result of the systemic classism I described above.

Simply put, a lot of the aspects discussed today under the umbrella of the 'race question' actually belong to the 'social question'.*
Solving the social question/the woes caused by economic inequality would do more for minorities than any quotas, symbolism or virtue signalling could ever achieve.

Side note: this is also the reason why "Labor Bernie" from 2016 was so intriguing, and why "Woke Bernie" from 2020 was a dud by comparison.




* This is no coincidence. The billionaire overlords are very deliberately stoking racial tensions from both sides of the political aisle in order to distract from the economic dimension of all of this. By polarizing the political sphere around (seemingly) non-economic issues, they redirect political energy away from the fields where action would really hurt their bottom line, and they additionally manage to lock the executive and legislative down in a perpetual state of partisan gridlock where nothing truly meaningful ever gets passed.


----


Quote (AspenSniper @ 13 Jul 2020 22:31)
A bigger fear of mine is a tax on the “kinda wealthy” like increasing taxes on people making $200-300k a year. 200k a year in DC, San Fran, NYC, etc., is NOT rich. That’ll maybe get a kid or two through college and yourself in a 3 bed 2 bath old house often times. The left not knowing where to draw that line is dangerous to me. Tax the overpaid and family money rich, not the hard working who just kick ass with their MBA/law degree/MD/working 60+ hours a week in a challenging space and get compensated well for doing so.


100% agreed, well said indeed!

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 13 2020 06:21pm
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Jul 13 2020 06:14pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 13 2020 08:04pm)
As always I disagree in calling the Democrats center-left. They're center-right with a few left leaning individuals. Even Bernie isn't that far left. His "Democratic Socialism" is largely common sense stuff, like making education accessible and creating a public option for healthcare. He's not trying to fundamentally reshape the economic system like a real leftist would. America in general has a supremely small political spectrum, so even if we agree that the Democrats are "on the left" they're so close to Republicans on most issues that there's not much value in a left right divide.


This debate seems boring but my guess is Paul Ryan would be at the end of the right spectrum, even though he supports significantly more social spending and federal control than any libertarian. I'm sure Cambo(whose bootlicking opinion means nothing here) would accuse the Republicans of being basically part of the left on spending, and it's a fair argument.

This post was edited by IceMage on Jul 13 2020 06:15pm
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Jul 13 2020 06:19pm
Quote (IceMage @ 13 Jul 2020 19:55)
I've moved left on some things, but let's pretend John Kasich got elected. Would people constantly be harping on my shift? It looks that way because America no longer has a legitimate right-wing political party. We have a mostly center-left party and a personality cult of nutjobs and/or racists.

Plus the left-right paradigm is kind of irrelevant on some issues. I'll take Hillary's hawkish multilateralism over Trump's isolationist unilateralism. Neither is a cookie-cutter left-wing or right-wing position.



The middle road is Democratic-led governance. It's not a choice between Trump vs the author of White Fragility. It's Trump vs Biden. A president who intentionally stokes racial divisions vs. one who will try to unite the country.

This is false. Biden was Senator when he “wrote” the crime bill that ruthlessly locked up black males for minor crimes and permanently separated thousands of minority families. He was VP when he helped push the border cages policy. Then as presumptive candidate he said directly to “any black person” who had yet to make up their mind on voting for him: “you ain’t black”. All of Biden’s stokings of racial divisions came from his prior 40+ years in politics as an elected swamp demon

President Trump passed the First Step Act aimed at undoing some of the damage caused by Biden’s horrific abuse of legislative power against minority males. Undoing some of this damage caused by Biden is something we (except you, because you fear minority men being that you’re a virulent racist, among other reprehensible traits) Americans are all united behind.

This post was edited by excellence on Jul 13 2020 06:21pm
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Jul 13 2020 06:23pm
Quote (excellence @ Jul 13 2020 08:19pm)
This is false. Biden was Senator when he “wrote” the crime bill that ruthlessly locked up black males for minor crimes and permanently separated thousands of minority families. He was VP when he helped push the border cages policy. Then as presumptive candidate he said directly to “any black person” who had yet to make up their mind on voting for him: “you ain’t black”. All of Biden’s stokings of racial divisions came from his prior 40+ years in politics as an elected swamp demon

President Trump passed the First Step Act aimed at undoing some of the damage caused by Biden’s horrific abuse of legislative power against minority males. Undoing some of this damage caused by Biden is something we (except you, because you fear minority men being that you’re a virulent racist, among other reprehensible traits) Americans are all united behind.


You forgot to post a pic of Rick Wilson's cooler.
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Jul 13 2020 06:27pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 14 Jul 2020 02:04)
As always I disagree in calling the Democrats center-left. They're center-right with a few left leaning individuals. Even Bernie isn't that far left. His "Democratic Socialism" is largely common sense stuff, like making education accessible and creating a public option for healthcare. He's not trying to fundamentally reshape the economic system like a real leftist would. America in general has a supremely small political spectrum, so even if we agree that the Democrats are "on the left" they're so close to Republicans on most issues that there's not much value in a left right divide.

I don't think you realize how far left the political spectrum actually goes. Biden is still firmly on the right anywhere except America, where we occupy such a small space that "left and right" doesn't mean much when you cross the middle.


I dont know... imho, Bernie's ideas do go further to the left than what you have, for example, in Scandinavia. But yeah, he's not a real communist.

If we quantified the American political spectrum on economics on a scale from -10 (Leo Trotzki) to +10 (Manchester Capitalism), its mainstream would imho fall into the [0,+5] interval. AOC would perhaps be a -3 and Rand Paul a +8 or so.
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Jul 13 2020 06:28pm
Quote (IceMage @ 13 Jul 2020 20:23)
You forgot to post a pic of Rick Wilson's cooler.

the confederate flag one? feel free to look material that gets you hot and bothered on your own time
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 13 2020 06:31pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jul 13 2020 07:27pm)
I dont know... imho, Bernie's ideas do go further to the left than what you have, for example, in Scandinavia. But yeah, he's not a real communist.

If we quantified the American political spectrum on economics on a scale from -10 (Leo Trotzki) to +10 (Manchester Capitalism), its mainstream would imho fall into the [0,+5] interval. AOC would perhaps be a -3 and Rand Paul a +8 or so.


AOC being a -3 to the left is pretty fair. That's about as far as we go. Anything more left leaning isn't represented enough to really be considered. The Democratic party goes from something like -3 to +6, with Biden sitting at like a +4 when he's not campaigning, and a +2 when he is.
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Jul 13 2020 06:41pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 13 2020 08:31pm)
AOC being a -3 to the left is pretty fair. That's about as far as we go. Anything more left leaning isn't represented enough to really be considered. The Democratic party goes from something like -3 to +6, with Biden sitting at like a +4 when he's not campaigning, and a +2 when he is.


How is this measured? Obviously it's subjective. If Western governments all hand over certain industries to the state, that means anyone to the right of Bernie is a moderate? Is Karl Marx as radical as Paul Ryan on this scale? Seems like it's just weighted to the left, pretending that anti-market policies aren't as radically destructive as history and science has shown.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1234519Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll