What's new

Rule Clarification; Trolling

There are two different approaches to the definition of left and right ideologies. One focuses on the role of the individual, and the second on the authority. In the first, the right sees the individual as the primary unit in a society that all rights and obligations must be built around. The left views the individual as a sub-unit of a larger society with rules that advance those larger interests. In that individualism versus collectivism definition, anarcho-capitalism would be on the far right, while Marxism is on the far left.

Another way to look at it is through the nature of authority. This is liberty versus order kind of perspective. The left is all about maximizing the freedom of a society, while the right is about enforcing order or harmony. In this definition, autonomism would be at the far left, while fascism is on the far right. Other examples are social libertarianism for the left, and theocracy for the right.

Keep in mind that real-world systems usually combine elements from both, like communism's combination of collectivism and authoritarianism. But philosophically speaking, leftist ideals from both branches will appeal to American liberals, while rightist ideas to conservatives.
 
I certainly wouldn't call him far left. He might appear that way in a political context which is careening to the right, but he's classic left.

I wish he was still around. Thanks a lot, hotttnickkk
It's interesting how no matter where someone is on the political spectrum they always believe that it is careening in the opposite direction.
 
There are two different approaches to the definition of left and right ideologies. One focuses on the role of the individual, and the second on the authority. In the first, the right sees the individual as the primary unit in a society that all rights and obligations must be built around. The left views the individual as a sub-unit of a larger society with rules that advance those larger interests. In that individualism versus collectivism definition, anarcho-capitalism would be on the far right, while Marxism is on the far left.

Another way to look at it is through the nature of authority. This is liberty versus order kind of perspective. The left is all about maximizing the freedom of a society, while the right is about enforcing order or harmony. In this definition, autonomism would be at the far left, while fascism is on the far right. Other examples are social libertarianism for the left, and theocracy for the right.

Keep in mind that real-world systems usually combine elements from both, like communism's combination of collectivism and authoritarianism. But philosophically speaking, leftist ideals from both branches will appeal to American liberals, while rightist ideas to conservatives.

Nice take.

To bad compromise is currently dead in politics and we cannot find a nice trust worthy candidate somewhere in the middle.
 
I think one of the threads you both have in mind dealt with the matter of white privilege - and a broad generalization would be that those who have the privilege tend to deny they have it, or they minimize the benefits of it
 
I read your post because Stoked quoted it, and I read this one because you quoted me.

and you respond when you have something important to add to the discussion? or... srs, what's the standard for when you allow yourself to breakdown, read the posts, AND THEN RESPOND.
 
and you respond when you have something important to add to the discussion? or... srs, what's the standard for when you allow yourself to breakdown, read the posts, AND THEN RESPOND.
The standard is that I click view post whenever I decide that I want to, and after that I reply if I feel like it.
 
I don't understand people who put others on ignore. They can still see they said something, and they stew over whether to see what they posted or not. Kind of funny.
 
I don't understand people who put others on ignore. They can still see they said something, and they stew over whether to see what they posted or not. Kind of funny.
I've got a pretty robust ignore list, but you're not on it because I think your posts are intelligent... except for this one. And I never stew over this stuff.
 
I've got a pretty robust ignore list, but you're not on it because I think your posts are intelligent... except for this one. And I never stew over this stuff.

Eh, to each his own I suppose. It really wouldn't work for me. Wondering what someone said, regardless of how certain I am that it'll be idiotic, would drive me crazy.
 
Eh, to each his own I suppose. It really wouldn't work for me. Wondering what someone said, regardless of how certain I am that it'll be idiotic, would drive me crazy.

Thanks bro. I for sure want u to see my posts.
 
I don't understand people who put others on ignore. They can still see they said something, and they stew over whether to see what they posted or not. Kind of funny.

Eh, I ignored some people but never stew over it because someone always quoted them and there is no way to ignore that.
 
Top