USA Politics

[Magnus]

Unpleasant surprises like voting for fascists in the US?

And everywhere else, I'm afraid.

 

[Vaenyr]

And everywhere else, I'm afraid.

And you think leftism is to blame for the global rise of fascism? Or did I misunderstand your previous post?

 

[Magnus]

No, you understood it perfectly well. I think what is currently labeled leftism has a lot to do with the global rise of what you call fascism, yes.

 

[Magnus]

I don't like it at all, mind you.

 

[____no5]

To quote you: "I don't have the time for that".

Except that I replied after I said the above. Unlike you.

You can look at 1) things he campaigned on, 2) policies he proposed, 3) things he explicitly promised to do and 4) his Agenda 47.

So I presume you are just parroting. I didn't expect that or I wouldn't have bothered to ask. No worries, next time I won't.

 

[Vaenyr]

No, you understood it perfectly well. I think what is currently labeled leftism has a lot to do with the global rise of what you call fascism, yes.

Go on then, which important or relevant politicians that are currently globally active are leftist? This will be fun.

Except that I replied after I said the above. Unlike you.

So I presume you are just parroting. I didn't expect that or I wouldn't have bothered to ask. No worries, next time I won't.

I literally gave you 4 sources you can look into at your own leisure and 2 examples. And it's precious that you of all people accuse people of "parroting". Educate yourself instead of these bullshit games.

 

[Diesel 11]

Go on then, which important or relevant politicians that are currently globally active are leftist? This will be fun.

I think you're misinterpreting what Magnus is saying. Now I don't want to speak for Magnus per se (and keep in mind that I am with you 99% of the time in this thread), but what I don't think he's saying is "leftists are the reason people are turning to fascism". I think what he means is that "people who call themselves leftists give off the impression that they are better than people who are not leftists and talk down to them, which pushes those people away from their cause and towards hungry fascists ready to swallow them up into their political movement."

I think in a broad sense this is true. I was listening to a podcast today that made the case that the Democrats are seen as the party of elites (no matter how backwards that may be given the Republican nominee who won is a literal billionaire), and this has continually made them lose ground with rural voters (which is not the whole of why the Dems lost the election but certainly does not help them year after year). Certainly the "Twitter leftists" do not leave centrists and right-wingers with a positive taste in their mouths, although I would argue that this has more to do with the fact that the right has taken control of the narrative on "cancel culture" and spun it for use towards their own agendas. But that narrative is out there and it's up to us to change that.

I think Magnus is saying that the way you post gives the impression of a hound dog who knows better than everyone else and chases after people for having opinions different to yours. I'm not saying I necessarily agree - I think you do a really good job of combating the batshit stuff posted in this thread in general - however I can understand that some of the things you say in your posts can come across to those not already on the left as being 'holier than thou'. I also can't really see myself doing any better though. The political landscape is fucking frustrating and I hate that people's rights are on the ballet every single year and that does not lead me to make good judgement calls on my own part. It's maddening.

But saying stuff like "this will be fun" definitely makes it feel like you're ready to bite at any chance you get when I don't think Magnus came for you with nearly the same tone. Magnus can be a jokester from time to time but I think his comments are serious concerns that we on the left need to start taking to heart in order to sway people's minds, as difficult as that truly is.

 

[Jer]

I think Magnus is saying that the way [Vaenyr posts] gives the impression of a hound dog who knows better than everyone else and chases after people for having opinions different to [his]

I would agree. I find Vaenyr’s approach to be completely insufferable even when I’m on the same page with his core opinion.

 

[Vaenyr]

I think you're misinterpreting what Magnus is saying. Now I don't want to speak for Magnus per se (and keep in mind that I am with you 99% of the time in this thread), but what I don't think he's saying is "leftists are the reason people are turning to fascism". I think what he means is that "people who call themselves leftists give off the impression that they are better than people who are not leftists and talk down to them, which pushes those people away from their cause and towards hungry fascists ready to swallow them up into their political movement."

First of all, thank you for the thorough response. I appreciate it. I actually agree with quite a few of the raised points and will detail any points of disagreement further down.

I think in a broad sense this is true. I was listening to a podcast today that made the case that the Democrats are seen as the party of elites (no matter how backwards that may be given the Republican nominee who won is a literal billionaire), and this has continually made them lose ground with rural voters (which is not the whole of why the Dems lost the election but certainly does not help them year after year). Certainly the "Twitter leftists" do not leave centrists and right-wingers with a positive taste in their mouths, although I would argue that this has more to do with the fact that the right has taken control of the narrative on "cancel culture" and spun it for use towards their own agendas. But that narrative is out there and it's up to us to change that.

Maybe it's a difference in how the word "leftist" is used, but that's one of those words, just like communist or socialist, that are thrown around without care even when they don't apply. Not everyone on the left is a leftist; the latter requires socialist and anti-capitalist beliefs. So, while I understand that the Dems are seen as the party of the elites (and as you said, that's quite the hypocritical assessment nowadays), the Dems don't have any leftists among their rangs. There's a reason why they are seen as a center right party globally, despite being attacked as "radical far left communists" by the MAGA movement. I obviously won't defend the "Twitter leftists", which are a special kind of unhinged (enter Jer's "that's you Vaenyr" jabs and jokes ). Furthermore, I would argue given the small amount of leftists both in the US and globally, that I don't think they meaningfully affect the numbers. It's a tiny minority compared to conservatives, moderates and liberals. As we've seen with this election, the majority of people voted with the economy in mind. I'm sure there are examples of people being pushed to the right by folks on the left, but I can't imagine this is a meaningful number overall. Contrarians exists, but most people don't choose their political affiliation to spite groups they find annoying. That's my perception at least.

As for smugness, I would argue that this isn't unique to any political affiliation. Yes, leftists can be overly smug and annoying. So can liberals. But as we've seen in the last week with how sore winners the right wing is, so can conservatives and moderates as well. Not to mention centrists who bash in both directions (though interestingly enough in many cases they mostly attack the left).
(Edit: Forgot to add, in my opinion there's a bit of double standards at play. Most people will happily shit on far right loonies; same with left wing loonies. The far left is characterized as attacking everyone right, while the right wing and center keep attacking the far left as well. I get the mud slinging, but this perception of the left being responsible is misguided in my opinion. A common argument, also seen in this thread at times, it's that it is "common sense" to be against the far right and the far left. While that can be arguable, I see constant hostility and attacks on the left from the center and the right, yet mostly the left is held accountable and called out.
To summarize, in my experience different groups are held to different standards and the criticisms aren't dished out in equal measure.)

I think Magnus is saying that the way you post gives the impression of a hound dog who knows better than everyone else and chases after people for having opinions different to yours. I'm not saying I necessarily agree - I think you do a really good job of combating the batshit stuff posted in this thread in general - however I can understand that some of the things you say in your posts can come across to those not already on the left as being 'holier than thou'. I also can't really see myself doing any better though. The political landscape is fucking frustrating and I hate that people's rights are on the ballet every single year and that does not lead me to make good judgement calls on my own part. It's maddening.

I can understand the impression, but I don't really care if people have the same opinion with me or not - otherwise Virtual XI wouldn't be my favorite Maiden album Jokes aside, opinions are subjective, while the things I mostly take issue with in this thread are either obvious falsehoods presented as facts or glaring hypocrisy after being told and shown the opposite and yet still doubling down. @Detective Beauregard was going on a weird rant about how Pride month unnecessary and "insane" and why there isn't a Veteran's month, when in reality the latter exists. I, as a foreigner (and other users of course too), had to explain to an American citizen things about his country that he should know better if he has such a strong opinion on the matter. How are you supposed to talk about that stuff and correct obviously wrong information without sounding as if you're talking down? Or how we were talking about the Harris and Biden campaigns, how the former is objectively more right-wing than the latter's in many instances (constantly promising positions to Republicans, bragging about the most lethal army, parading the Cheneys around, constantly trying to appeal to moderates), how it did not focus on identity politics even though Biden's did, yet we have @Jer ranting and bashing the trans community, who felt it was so important to take the opportunity to "bite at the chance" to go after me (to steal your wording) that he completely ignored the actual subject and context we were talking about to raise irrelevant grievances. Such unwarranted attacks, based on a faulty premise, which attack a marginalized community I care about need to be called out, in my opinion. Maybe it's insufferable, but so is transphobia.

As for me in particular, I am aware of my flaws. I can be a difficult person to deal with. I can be petty and vindictive. I am definitely stubborn. I am sure many users here roll with their eyes the moment they see that I wrote another lengthy post in the thread. At the end of the day I am who I am though. People are free to put me on ignore if they think I don't contribute anything to the thread. They can scroll on by, or they can call me out if they want. As I mentioned before, if we're talking about objective statements I will stand my ground when those are falsified. I get that my positions and the way I express them can be polarizing and I am trying to reign in my worst impulses. For many that's not nearly enough and that's a valid stance as well. You can't please everyone and if I come across as a "holier than thou" obnoxious and insufferable leftist, then so be it.

But saying stuff like "this will be fun" definitely makes it feel like you're ready to bite at any chance you get when I don't think Magnus came for you with nearly the same tone. Magnus can be a jokester from time to time but I think his comments are serious concerns that we on the left need to start taking to heart in order to sway people's minds, as difficult as that truly is.

Then I must've misjudged and misread his tone. I'm not as familiar with him as other members here, since we haven't interacted that much so far. Maybe the "#IgnoranceIsNoExcuse" joke and a couple of posts flew over my head , maybe I saw hostility where there was none. Maybe I interpreted obvious jokes as "poking the bear". If I misjudged your tone and position @Magnus, then I sincerely apologize. I'll cut out the snark.

 

[Azas]

One can label me 'meme man' as much as they want but this image certainly rings a bell. I formed my own opinion on the issue by myself, not by looking at this picture. And I am by no means pro Trump.

Also current situation in USA and Europe regarding leaders is very bad. Latest call of Scholz to Putin is despicable. Scholz is trying to remain above water but at what cost... Even Biden is not 'true' leader. If Democrats will continue in this direction they will not win any foreseeable elections. Of course, Trump must not fuck up so bad that people will abandon him.
Biden administration wanted to avoid escalation but escalation is going on (North Korea joining the war and now I've seen reports that China have sent weapons to russia for the first time). Escalation is only deterred by strong stance not by half measures.

 

[Vaenyr]

One can label me 'meme man' as much as they want but this image certainly rings a bell. I formed my own opinion on the issue by myself, not by looking at this picture. And I am by no means pro Trump.
View attachment 39832
Also current situation in USA and Europe regarding leaders is very bad. Latest call of Scholz to Putin is despicable. Scholz is trying to remain above water but at what cost... Even Biden is not 'true' leader. If Democrats will continue in this direction they will not win any foreseeable elections. Of course, Trump must not fuck up so bad that people will abandon him.
Biden administration wanted to avoid escalation but escalation is going on (North Korea joining the war and now I've seen reports that China have sent weapons to russia for the first time). Escalation is only deterred by strong stance not by half measures.

I knew that we'd see this picture sooner or later. I believe it is a massive misrepresentation of social issues. As we've discussed in this thread before, hate crimes against LGBTQ minorities have increased in the last few years. Both times Trump got elected there was a noticeable bump in racist attacks and harassment against Black and Hispanic people. We see more and more literal Neo-Nazi protests and rallies in the United States. These aren't fantasies or delusions; there is plenty of bigotry of all forms out there.

At the same time the right wing has shifted the overton window massively to the right. The image above suggest they stayed the same, which couldn't be further from the truth. Nowadays there are MAGA politicians in the House spreading antisemetic conspiracies. Trump's pick for Defense Secretary has ties with white supremacists. The Republicans of 2008 or 2012 like Mitt Romney are seen as RINOs by many Trump supporters.

In other words: Memes have often no basis in reality and this particular one is a prime example. The left wants equality and people to be able to live their lives in peace; the right is actively taking away people's rights. The sides are not even close to being the same. Furthermore, the majority of Americans are in favor of social safety nets (something the left advocates for), that's important to keep in mind as well.

 

[Yax]

That meme has been created just because the opposite is true (that is, if you equate right wing with being conservative. The right wing has turned extreme). Gaslighting at its finest.

 

[Azas]

Regarding meme, I agree with you both that "the right did not stayed the same", but as far as "the center" relationships with "the left" is it's pretty much accurate. Imo.

 

[Yax]

Regarding meme, I agree with you both that "the right did not stayed the same", but regarding "the center" relationships with "the left" is pretty much accurate. Imo.

In terms of some issues, sure, that is being magnified and used as a lightning rod by the right wing. The liberal wing stands for freedom of choice in different forms and shape, which, in the supposed land of the free, is considered extreme by the right.

 

[Jer]

Not to mention centrists who bash in both directions (though interestingly enough in many cases they mostly attack the left).

You just notice attacks on the far left more because you’re hypersensitive to them. The center left bashes the right plenty, but when they see the left flank abandoning the principle of free speech and calling their own moderates “-ists” and “-phobes” with gleeful abandon, the centrists tend to take it personally.

yet we have @Jer ranting and bashing the trans community, who felt it was so important to take the opportunity to "bite at the chance" to go after me (to steal your wording) that he completely ignored the actual subject and context we were talking about to raise irrelevant grievances.

This is a rabid mischaracterization, one of your specialties. I have a trans nephew and know full well what I’m talking about, but I’m unable to hold a non-dogmatic point of view without being labeled a transphobe by deplatforming die-hards like you, who without any irony fully embody the 2024 far left caricature in the meme pic @Azas shared. And at least one of the moderators here will delete just about any non-dogmatic comment on transgenderism, so legitimate discussion of the topic is literally impossible on this forum.

I have never intentionally ignored the subject or put up a straw man against you, yet you have repeatedly accused me of this before strutting around like a peacock and proclaiming that you’ve put me on ignore (again), as if that’s something to be proud of. As I said before, insufferable. But you are what you are, just like no5 is what he is, and neither of you are likely to abandon your frankly shameful rhetorical tactics.

 

[Vaenyr]

You just notice attacks on the far left more because you’re hypersensitive to them. The center left bashes the right plenty, but when they see the left flank abandoning the principle of free speech and calling their own moderates “-ists” and “-phobes” with gleeful abandon, the centrists tend to take it personally.

No, I'm talking about the phenomenon that mostly happens online, where people claim to be centrists while almost exclusively attacking the left while tolerating or even outright defending the right. This has nothing to do with hypersensitivity.

Accurately describing someone who wants to enact fascistic ideals as a fascist is also a form of free speech. Calling someone out who makes transphobic remarks as a transphobe is as well. It's descriptive language.

This is a rabid mischaracterization, one of your specialties. I have a trans nephew and know full well what I’m talking about, but I’m unable to hold a non-dogmatic point of view without being labeled a transphobe by deplatforming die-hards like you, who without any irony fully embody the 2024 far left caricature in the meme pic @Azas shared. And at least one of the moderators here will delete just about any non-dogmatic comment on transgenderism, so legitimate discussion of the topic is literally impossible on this forum.

First of all, having a trans family member isn't a shield, just like "I have Black friends" isn't a shield against racism. The fact that you call it "transgenderism", which isn't a thing, already speaks volumes. You made a thread about trans issues after you posted multiple wildly misinformed and objectively incorrect statements on the matter. You were warned by moderators to quit bashing the trans community, yet you go out of your way playing little games along the lines of "oh, I can't say what I actually want to say because I'll get censored!". The fact that you talk about dogma betrays your biases as well. In every comment I've made about trans issues, I always refer to the scientific and medical consensus, to the current research we have on the matters and to actual evidence in the form of studies. I don't just share my opinion, I share what the actual experts on the topic have to say. I'm afraid the dogmatic one between us is you.

I have never intentionally ignored the subject or put up a straw man against you, yet you have repeatedly accused me of this before strutting around like a peacock and proclaiming that you’ve put me on ignore (again), as if that’s something to be proud of.

Well, you've made multiple objectively incorrect statements that are not supported by studies or the evidence we have at the moment, were called out on it and corrected, and you decided to double down because apparently there's no way you could be wrong on the matter.

Also, I'm not peacocking, it's a simple fact that I have you on my ignore list. Apparently you haven't used that feature, but it doesn't completely block the other users. It hides their content but at the bottom of the page there's a button to reveal hidden content, as well as when someone quotes them you can click on it to reveal the message. I mostly ignore what you have to say, because I simply don't care enough, but from time to time I get curious and click on it, especially when others quote it too.

As I said before, insufferable. But you are what you are, just like no5 is what he is, and neither of you are likely to abandon your frankly shameful rhetorical tactics.

As for insufferable, you used to have a different opinion on the matter. Once I realized the unpleasantness with which you approach this topic, I started to reflect the behavior. It's probably valid to call it insufferable, it's definitely petty. But I have no interest in being all too charitable to someone who continues to call trans issues "dogma" while being the one who is dogmatic.

Feel free to use the aforementioned ignore function then.

 

[Azas]

No, I'm talking about the phenomenon that mostly happens online, where people claim to be centrists while almost exclusively attacking the left while tolerating or even outright defending the right. This has nothing to do with hypersensitivity.

Factually wrong. Happened offline. Trump won elections (even some moderate voters chose him) And in Europe similar movements. If you do not think that this is somewhat correlated with the way 'left' acts then you are ignoring reality. And if you are triggered by the word "left", call it what you personally want.
And by saying that, it does not mean that i am defending far right. You'd wish. I just look at the whole picture trying to stay in the relative center.

 

[Vaenyr]

Factually wrong. Happened offline. Trump won elections (even some moderate voters chose him) And in Europe similar movements. If you do not think that this is somewhat correlated with the way 'left' acts then you are ignoring reality. And if you are triggered by the word "left", call it what you personally want.
And by saying that, it does not mean that i am defending far right. You'd wish. I just look at the whole picture trying to stay in the relative center.

You can't call something "factually wrong" and then talk about something entirely different lol

You chose to respond to part of a sentence, without reading the rest of it that explains exactly what I said. There is a mostly online phenomenon, where self-proclaimed "centrists" attack the left almost exclusively and even outright defend the right. That is what I was talking about.

As for the rest of your comment: Looking at the actual data that's not a supported position. Trump got basically the same amount of voters (he got a small bump), while Harris lost millions of Biden voters. Harris in 2024 ran an objectively more right wing campaign than Biden in 2020 (most lethal army, parading around the Cheneys, vowing to appoint Republicans, no identity politics, focusing on her career as a prosecutor). She tried everything to court moderates and conservatives and was met with a crushing defeat. Not only didn't she cater to the left, she kept making decisions that disenfranchised potential voters (the things I mentioned before, plus not doing enough to promise changes in Gaza).

Her campaign was already Republican-lite in many respects. If you think she's supposed to go even further right, then what's the point of even having the Democratic party exist anymore?

Edit: forgot to mention, that Trump campaigned on populist lies and promises policies that will the exact opposite of what his campaign claims. That's something we cannot understate.

 

[Azas]

No, I'm talking about the phenomenon that mostly happens online, where people claim to be centrists while almost exclusively attacking the left while tolerating or even outright defending the right. This has nothing to do with hypersensitivity.

I agree that the right seems to be somewhat ignored in this equation. But it's just us reacting to "why Trump rose to power". Because the left overreached. (We may disagree on that).
Also, I think average US voters chose to ignore "far right danger" as being somewhat abstract? They chose to vote AGAINST current political party and current handling of things. To vote "against" is not wise thing to do but that's reality.

 

[Jer]

This has nothing to do with hypersensitivity.

Except for the fact that you flip the fuck out whenever you think it’s occurring, apparently.

Accurately describing someone who wants to enact fascistic ideals as a fascist is also a form of free speech.

I never commented on this, so I’m not sure why you’re bringing it up, or implying that somehow I’m not on the side of free speech.

Calling someone out who makes transphobic remarks as a transphobe is as well. It's descriptive language.

To be transphobic is to demonstrate a strong dislike of, or strong prejudice against, transgender people. Please feel free to point out any time I have actually done this — but oops, you can’t, because I haven’t. My nephew would be both surprised and amused to hear that some fool on the internet was labeling me this way, since it’s so obviously false.

When someone deviates from progressive dogma, you label them in this way whether the word applies or not, because you get off on “othering” them (an activity you theoretically should despise), even though your use of the word is objectively wrong.

You made a thread about trans issues after you posted multiple wildly misinformed and objectively incorrect statements on the matter.

False.

You were warned by moderators to quit bashing the trans community

I never bashed the trans community, but a couple of people with loose screws on this particular forum sure like to throw those sorts of accusations around.

yet you go out of your way playing little games along the lines of "oh, I can't say what I actually want to say because I'll get censored!".

It’s not a game, it’s the established (and frankly pathetic) reality of this particular forum, and it’s led to multiple long-term members leaving.

The fact that you talk about dogma betrays your biases as well.

No, it’s just accurate shorthand for your approach to your social and political beliefs.

You have a set of inviolable core beliefs that are a litmus test for whether a person is a worthwhile member of society or not. These beliefs are like a religious absolute truth for you, and being part of the group that’s “in the right” is an empowering feeling that makes your endless condescension feel righteous and valid.

When you enter a conversation, your first goal, subconscious or otherwise, is to figure out if the person you’re talking to is in the “in” group or not by seeing if they’ve blasphemed against your dogma. If they haven’t, then you engage with the conversation normally — but the moment they tip their hand that they might not be fully on your team, then you abandon the actual conversation and switch to trying to discredit and deplatform the blasphemer, because they’re obviously a bad person with nothing valuable to say if they’re already wrong on what you consider to be the fundamentals. From that point on, your only function in the conversation is to condescend and try to apply labels to the person and their arguments, looking for any possible chink in the armor to exaggerate, anything you can try to twist into a supposed display of hypocrisy, or anyplace where you can cherry-pick a third party study that sounds like it might cast doubt on what they say, whether it represents an actual counterargument or not. After you flood the field with enough of that nonsense, you do a little strut, proclaim them to be beneath your notice, and announce that you’ve put them on ignore. Rinse and repeat. It’s exhausting, and it’s intellectually dishonest.

I'm afraid the dogmatic one between us is you.

Please, explain what my supposed dogma is, then. Or is this just another performative line? (Oops!)

Well, you’ve made multiple objectively incorrect statements that are not supported by studies or the evidence we have at the moment, were called out on it and corrected, and you decided to double down because apparently there's no way you could be wrong on the matter.

Hilarious how you phrase this as if I were roundly criticized and debunked, but you’re only referring to your own comments. I’ve never been allowed to have an actual conversation about this topic on here and likely never will be, so you’re really not in any position to assess my views, other than knowing that they deviate from your own to some degree. But apparently that’s all you need to know to start calling someone a -phobe and a bigot.

Also, I'm not peacocking, it's a simple fact that I have you on my ignore list.

Then there’s no need for you to ever bring that up with someone again, is there? But you just can’t help yourself, because you are peacocking. Save it for someone who cares, if anyone like that actually exists.