ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

Scottie believe in Left wanted to help people lol. Then how many homeless do hollywood stars move in their homes? Zero. In fact democratic/liberal mecca LA has more homeless than anyplace on earth.

Left is looking to absolution for their ill gotten gains at your expense, not to help. (aka virtue signaling - noble savage signaling)

Most leftist are trust fund kids like Kennedy's. Hardy any work honest living. Lawyers - leech it. Gov workers - steal it. Or have jobs that could be called hobbies - actors, sportsmen, etc.

Let's put it like this - liberals are most selfish people I've ever met IME. I deal with very rich people all stripes of politics in my business I build pools and landscaping in one of the wealthiest counties in the state. Slow to pay are liberals. Ones with biggest superiority attitudes are liberals.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Arnt Jehovah witnesses and Catholics conservatives? He put them in camps in large numbers. Pacifists like Libertarian ayn rand would say are most noble because they would never give life for the state because then they can take whatever they want after that - were also interned. Agree to disagree - he was a socialist on all levels. His party was even named such.

True socialism -- that is, a command economy that holds to the motto "from each according to their ability, to each according to their potential" -- is extreme right. Leftwing "socialism" isn't socialism at all, it is protocommunism under the flag of a misnomer, popularized due to either Marx being an idiot or a misinterpretation of his work.

Horseshoe theory is mostly correct. Once the machinery of extreme government tyranny is in place, all it takes is a simple coup -- or a change in the whims of the dictatorship -- to go from a society that takes from all and gives to the needy, to a society that takes from all and gives to the least needy, or vice versa. In this sense and this sense only is it possible that Marx may have been correct in predicting that socialism comes before communism, but the way I see it the whole mess is very chicken-and-egg where either one can easily be the precursor to the other (thus Marx is still an idiot).

The only caveat is that it's not a horseshoe, it's a ring. The place where the far right and the far left meet is full equality -- that is, the presumption that we are all of equal potential and all of equal need. Such equality can only be achieved one way: when all are rendered corpses.

These systems never work as we are seeing in Venezuela and soviet Russia before that. humans have skew able emotions like ambition and sloth and everything between so best system is chaos called capitalism to make ambition come out moreso. High evolutionary tract and great prosperity results. My only grip with it is when gov steps in and removes charity. They take a huge rake like mafia, most of it and the large populous thinks gov is there so I don't have to do anything which is false.

Is anyone a lawyer here? How can gov give immunity or conversely threaten a witness with prosecution but a defendant can't "bribe" or "Threaten" a witness?

Seems unequal system.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-manafort-trial-delay-20180723-story.html

Anyway 5 corrupted democrats who did same swamp shit as manafort will testify against him with immunity.

He probably going down.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

True socialism -- that is, a command economy that holds to the motto "from each according to their ability, to each according to their potential" -- is extreme right.

And pure communism is extreme right, and pure leftism is extreme right? Taking from each according to his ability and giving to each according to his needs is what socialism/communism are.

If you truly want to get beyond the Overton window on what socialism is, you need to go back before Nazism soiled the good name.

Socialism as a formal idea didn't come into use until the first half of the 19th century (circa 1830)and was then associated with the writings of Robert Owen in England or those of Fourier and Saint Simon in France. Elements of what could be considered socialist thought are found in much earlier writings such as some Mosaic law, Plato's Republic, More's Utopia, Campanella's City of the Sun, and socialism of the Gospels. Although specific characteristics shift, Socialism is essentially a doctrine or movement aiming at the collective organization of the community in the interests of the mass of the people by means of the common ownership and collective control of the means of production and exchange.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Leftwing "socialism" isn't socialism at all

It is. Socialism light is still socialism, it is only the time table for events, not the goals that have changed. Even back in the 1930's people were saying "We are all Socialists now" in the sense of Government being granted more power, citizens less autonomy and the government doing more for the people." The goals are the same - the people work and the government decides how best to split the results of their work.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

it is protocommunism under the flag of a misnomer, popularized due to either Marx being an idiot or a misinterpretation of his work.

You got this portion correct. Marxism failed badly in Europe and many groups liked the idea but didn't want to be associated with past failings. The revolutions by the Mensheviks and then the Bolsheviks further divided political thought on what socialism should be and communism became an offshoot. The Socialist movement was highly fractured - a good example is Italy, in which the socialists split into three branches communists, semi-communists and anti-communists - a portion of whom became the Syndicalist Wing that became the Milan Fascio and the origin of Fascism under Benito Mussolini.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Horseshoe theory is mostly correct.

It is an oversimplification. Think about how convergent evolution produces similar characteristics in an animal or plant. That does not mean a bird and a bat are on a closely related spectrum even though both fly and eat insects. The lineage matters because there is an underlying philosophy and goal. Whether and to what degree the year to year practitioners/officials adhere to the "ism" doesn't change what it is, anymore than a person born without a limb means that humans only have three limbs now. Think of Socialism as the DNA of the political group and you will be closer to the truth. It doesn't determine its path completely, but it has a major influence.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Once the machinery of extreme government tyranny is in place

With Socialism or Communism the end goal is for government tyranny to be in place - they just imagine it will be a benevolent tyranny.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

The only caveat is that it's not a horseshoe, it's a ring. The place where the far right and the far left meet is full equality -- that is, the presumption that we are all of equal potential and all of equal need. Such equality can only be achieved one way: when all are rendered corpses.

There is no ring. Far right results in full sink or swim mode. Far left results in govt determined portions of food. (16 oz, or 24 oz soda, but no 32+ oz soda for you!) https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwaters/2013/06/11/nyc-health-commissioner-limiting-soda-size-is-the-right-way-to-protect-the-health-of-new-yorkers/#2427d51f8ee3

Dalai, that's one long post that basically disagrees with my central point several posts ago:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Remember that flute question from my other thread? The far Left is defined by its desire to help out child C -- the one who historically has underperformed for whatever reasons -- using the force of government. The opposite of that is NOT libertarian minarchism or anarchism. The opposite of the far Left is using the force of government to give further advantages to those who are "not C" -- that is, have historically performed well -- and/or using government force to further disadvantage or even purge those who are "C" and/or advocate on their behalf. One way of looking at it is that the far Right wants to use the powers of an authoritarian state to crush the Left.

That's what makes Hitler a far-right figure: he was more than willing to use the tools and methods you associate with the far Left in order to crush the German far Left, especially the wealthy types who were funding Leftist causes.

So no, far right is not some kind of anarchocapitalist wet dream. That isn't full sink or swim mode. Full sink or swim mode is those who first reach the water's surface holding down the heads of those who are slower to ensure the "subhumans" drown, shooting (with flare guns) all those "traitors" who are trying to rescue others, then giving away any floatation devices the recently departed happened to own to people who are swimming comfortably without need of assistance.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Scottie believe in Left wanted to help people lol. Then how many homeless do hollywood stars move in their homes? Zero. In fact democratic/liberal mecca LA has more homeless than anyplace on earth.

Left is looking to absolution for their ill gotten gains at your expense, not to help. (aka virtue signaling - noble savage signaling)

Most leftist are trust fund kids like Kennedy's. Hardy any work honest living. Lawyers - leech it. Gov workers - steal it. Or have jobs that could be called hobbies - actors, sportsmen, etc.

Let's put it like this - liberals are most selfish people I've ever met IME. I deal with very rich people all stripes of politics in my business I build pools and landscaping in one of the wealthiest counties in the state. Slow to pay are liberals. Ones with biggest superiority attitudes are liberals.

Show us on the doll where the bad liberal touched you...

The hyperbole in all of these statements is ridiculous. Add in a little bit of Anecdote and you have the perfect recipe to straw man the entire left.

Hollywood stars moving people into their homes? Is this really the de facto metric used to determine whether the left is altruistic? How many people does Donald Trump keep in the trump hotels? Nonsensical false equivalencies are so annoying because there is no valid position to even argue from.

To be fair, I would rather be homeless in LA then in Florida. If I were to be homeless, the title would assume that I would be sleeping outside most days, yes? Weather is an important factor to homeless congregation. The problem is that California simultaneously has a housing problem. It is simply too expensive for the average resident to live there. These two factors alone accounts for the majority of homeless people in most of California.

Your anecdotes to paint entire swaths of people as a certain way is pretty disingenuous.

"

Prizy wrote:

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Scottie believe in Left wanted to help people lol. Then how many homeless do hollywood stars move in their homes? Zero. In fact democratic/liberal mecca LA has more homeless than anyplace on earth.

Left is looking to absolution for their ill gotten gains at your expense, not to help. (aka virtue signaling - noble savage signaling)

Most leftist are trust fund kids like Kennedy's. Hardy any work honest living. Lawyers - leech it. Gov workers - steal it. Or have jobs that could be called hobbies - actors, sportsmen, etc.

Let's put it like this - liberals are most selfish people I've ever met IME. I deal with very rich people all stripes of politics in my business I build pools and landscaping in one of the wealthiest counties in the state. Slow to pay are liberals. Ones with biggest superiority attitudes are liberals.

Show us on the doll where the bad liberal touched you...

The hyperbole in all of these statements is ridiculous. Add in a little bit of Anecdote and you have the perfect recipe to straw man the entire left.

Hollywood stars moving people into their homes? Is this really the de facto metric used to determine whether the left is altruistic? How many people does Donald Trump keep in the trump hotels? Nonsensical false equivalencies are so annoying because there is no valid position to even argue from.

To be fair, I would rather be homeless in LA then in Florida. If I were to be homeless, the title would assume that I would be sleeping outside most days, yes? Weather is an important factor to homeless congregation. The problem is that California simultaneously has a housing problem. It is simply too expensive for the average resident to live there. These two factors alone accounts for the majority of homeless people in most of California.

Your anecdotes to paint entire swaths of people as a certain way is pretty disingenuous.

They have housing problems because rich liberals conduct gentrification everywhere they go, screwing over working class people and turning them into poor, homeless people.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Dalai, that's one long post that basically disagrees with my central point several posts ago: Remember that flute question from my other thread? The far Left is defined by its desire to help out child C

Charlie Gard would disagree with you. The far left doesn't give a rat's whisker about what happens to individual child C, D or E. They care about managing the collective whole.

That's it. Anything else that people are reading into it is wrong.

The far right is not defined as the opposite of the far left - anymore than a bird must be the opposite of a fish. The far right and far left are two different things, but it is the imagined pairing of the two as opposites that has caused so much misunderstanding. Left and Right are not Yin and Yang. They aren't exact opposites and they don't harmonize when combined. Each has some good ideas, and each has a lot of ideological baggage that may not work for a given society. The two groups do oppose each other, but then so do factions within groups. That is just political gamesmanship.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

The opposite of the far Left is using the force of government to give further advantages to those who are "not C" -- that is, have historically performed well --

The further you move right from center, the less giving from government is present. Once again, the actual practice of politicians claiming to be conservative does not change the ideology.

It has nothing to do with purging people, unless those people are an actual threat. It has nothing to do with an authoritarian state. Consolidation of power, with less accountability for those making decisions lends itself to authoritarian abuse, but this mechanism is something that anyone of any political belief can and does exploit. The foray towards totalitarianism by the EPA over the last dozen years is a good example.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

One way of looking at it is that the far Right wants to use the powers of an authoritarian state to crush the Left.

While far right may want to weaken or even crush their opponents, their is no inherent desire to have an authoritarian state to accomplish this. Thinking that is just the result of seeing too much of the brainwashing by our socialistic utopia educational and media system over the last 35+ years.

The collective wealth management of the far left contrasted with the hands off let people get rich or starve of the far right dovetails with the Equality vs Liberty perspective.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

That isn't full sink or swim mode. Full sink or swim mode is those who first reach the water's surface holding down the heads of those who are slower to ensure the "subhumans" drown

There is no group of "subhumans" in the far right ideology. Eugenics is a product and cause of the far left. It is the left that believes certain groups need to be eliminated - they just change the names of the groups, and aren't as public about it since WW2.


Sink or Swim means you toss someone in the water, and they either sink or they swim. It has zero to do with holding them down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqqC1uk8KJI

"

Prizy wrote:

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Scottie believe in Left wanted to help people lol. Then how many homeless do hollywood stars move in their homes? Zero. In fact democratic/liberal mecca LA has more homeless than anyplace on earth.

Left is looking to absolution for their ill gotten gains at your expense, not to help. (aka virtue signaling - noble savage signaling)

Most leftist are trust fund kids like Kennedy's. Hardy any work honest living. Lawyers - leech it. Gov workers - steal it. Or have jobs that could be called hobbies - actors, sportsmen, etc.

Let's put it like this - liberals are most selfish people I've ever met IME. I deal with very rich people all stripes of politics in my business I build pools and landscaping in one of the wealthiest counties in the state. Slow to pay are liberals. Ones with biggest superiority attitudes are liberals.

Show us on the doll where the bad liberal touched you...

The hyperbole in all of these statements is ridiculous. Add in a little bit of Anecdote and you have the perfect recipe to straw man the entire left.

Hollywood stars moving people into their homes? Is this really the de facto metric used to determine whether the left is altruistic? How many people does Donald Trump keep in the trump hotels? Nonsensical false equivalencies are so annoying because there is no valid position to even argue from.

To be fair, I would rather be homeless in LA then in Florida. If I were to be homeless, the title would assume that I would be sleeping outside most days, yes? Weather is an important factor to homeless congregation. The problem is that California simultaneously has a housing problem. It is simply too expensive for the average resident to live there. These two factors alone accounts for the majority of homeless people in most of California.

Your anecdotes to paint entire swaths of people as a certain way is pretty disingenuous.

Liberals "touch me" for about 1/3 of my working hours they take it.

But thats not all, thats not enough for them.

They also "touch me" for $600 a onth in property taxes.

Gas tax
Utilities tax
vehicle registarion taxes
Sales tax
Franchise board tax
Contractors license tax
Hunting and finishing license tax
and so on

Basically you cant take a shit without liberal "touching you"

The real question is where on doll didnt they touch

Thats just taxes. My professional work deal with municipalities and those fucks couldnt be fry cooks yet have gov jobs with power over you. Thats what will make anyone "right wing"