USA Politics

Suppose a case where there's absolutely no doubt someone did what I described above, would you still be against eliminating them just because killing is wrong?
Yes, I would be. I think it is important to be ethically consistent on it. I think executing people is always wrong.

I would have less of a problem if it *happened*, I guess. Just like while I don't think Mussolini should have been lynched, I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.
 
Suppose a case where there's absolutely no doubt someone did what I described above, would you still be against eliminating them just because killing is wrong?

Lock him up and throw away the key, but don't give anyone the power of life and death over anyone.

There is always the risk of mistrial and wrong judgement, and I'd rather keep a person like that alive than risk than an(other) innocent person dies because of them or someone like them.
 
But it wouldn’t if those found guilty of murder were executed no more than one year after being found guilty.
Reality is different. In real life the death sentence is more expensive. Period.

One thing done right, thousands done wrong. I hope the crooked old ass enjoys his remaining years lounging around on the beautiful beaches of Delaware.
We aren't talking about the thousand wrongs. We are talking about a very specific topic you brought up to criticize Biden, despite him doing the "right" thing for the cause you seem to care about (namely lowering the spending of taxpayer money).

In some cases perhaps, but with advances in forensic technology this is almost impossible in today’s age.
Once again a hilariously and objectively wrong statement. Not only is it not "impossible", it happens quite frequently. Life is not a CSI show. Forensics are a messy and difficult field. And that's before we start talking about corruption and framing specific people.

I disagree. Someone who kills innocent people in cold blood should not have the chance to be rehabilitated; they offered their victims no choice and therefore they should be allowed no choice. Removing these killers from the world ensures that they can never reoffend, while imprisoning them could lead to the murder of other prisoners or, in rare cases, even escape.
Funnily enough in Germany it is not against the law to try to escape from prison. You will not get a punishment for the attempt (though you're obviously imprisoned again) because we believe that yearning for freedom is part of the human existence. Having said that: It's about false positives and false negatives once again. Yes, executing a convicted criminal means they won't be able to reoffend. Executing an innocent person who got wrongfully imprisoned removes someone from society as well; someone who did nothing wrong but the state and the legal system failed them.

I agree that the legal system must be airtight. Thankfully with the Trump Reunion Tour in full swing, many of the progressive hack prosecutors will be removed and it is my belief that law and order will prevail. Dun dun.
I see you haven't changed your media diet lmao

It’s about protecting the free people by removing murderers from society. Removing them from the earth provides a 100% chance that they will not reoffend, thus it is the safer option than prison. A murderer should not have any rights, yet alone more than law-abiding citizens.
As others have said: Every human has the same rights. Murderers in particular do not have more rights than law-abiding citizens. Where did you even hear this ludicrous idea? Or are you simply throwing around phrases hoping no one will notice the inconsistencies?

I am against death penalty. For the sake of the Humanity to move forward. Even one wrongful execution is too much. I mean, wtf. That being said, first degree murderers must serve life sentence, without any of the "he was characterised very good, so we going to release him after he served 15 years" or so.
I'm much more puzzled when unfortunate turn of events occur. A pal with his friends goes to a bar, after a few drinks becomes tipsy, some brawl begins with other company of guys, they punch one another, that other guy fells down and smashes his head to the edge of the table, dead. Those cases are so out of the blue, in that case convict must have a chance to return to society. Scary things.
Fully agreed on all points.

Suppose a case where there's absolutely no doubt someone did what I described above, would you still be against eliminating them just because killing is wrong?
Let's rephrase that: Do you believe the government, the state and possibly corrupt courts should get to decide which citizens live and which don't?
Either killing is wrong or it's not. If someone is unfit to live in society and is a danger to the people around them, lock 'em up for the rest of their lives. I will never support the state killing people, no matter their crimes.

So you can post whatever you want, again and again, educating, explaining, etc., ad nauseam.
Suppose I was politically far right - which I'm definitely not, but suppose I was.
How long do you think I'd survive here, pushing my agenda the way you do?
Would I deserve "the same rights and respect"?
Just curious, no bitching.
No worries, those are fair questions. Especially if you believe the far left and far right to be equally dangerous or bad.
But those question are also very easily answered with the paradox of tolerance. Far right ideals are exclusionary by design. Being too tolerant to such views ultimately leads to intolerance taking over.

Look at the topics I'm talking about when discussing my politics: I'm talking about people being treated equal, no matter their status, their gender, their sex, their religion, their views, their nationality or ethnicity. I'm not shy about criticizing capitalism, but I'm not talking about starting a violent revolution (for example). I don't know, maybe me championing trans rights goes too far for some, but I don't think that's on the same level as advocating for segregation based on nationality (to give an example of far right talking points).

Lord knows I'm not the easiest member on this forum to interact with. I'm aware. And you could argue that the admins have been rather lenient so far. But I don't think that's because of my politics; I think they are willing to give most folks here multiple chances. I'm after all far more to the left than most people on this board. We also have folks here who are staunch conservatives and they haven't been kicked off either. If someone were far right and started openly discriminating on the basis of ethnicity for example, they'd probably be banned; not because they are right wing, but because functioning in a society is a social contract and when you go against that contract (namely, respecting others) you're likely to see consequences to those actions.

As to not talk in too many hypotheticals: Which parts of the "agenda" I'm pushing do you think goes too far and would deserve a warning or banning? I'm not talking about the way I'm interacting with others and my aggressive and hostile tone at times; I'd like to know about the content of my comments that might seem too inappropriate for an open forum. And I'm not looking for or setting up any gotchas, I genuinely would like to hear your perspective on that because I find that to be a very interesting conversation.
 
Last edited:
Hot takes with Diesel!

I could name a whole list of people who add no value to this world and who I think deserve death.

That being said, I also think the death penalty is a dangerous tool that should be outlawed. So while rapists and serial killers IMO deserve to die, the more logical part of my brain recognizes that executing people is often weaponized and misused and thus we should not give the justice system that power. There are countless examples in America where a person is sentenced to death and despite later being cleared based on evidence the execution is still carried out because of appeal issues. That’s fucked up. I value human life to much to trust the state with how they operate this.
 
My idea for far left is completely different. First and foremost lifestyle should be there. Activism & leading by example. People are living in squats completely immersed in the communal life, with regular assemblies and political activism they don't even bother to label themselves as "left" let alone far left any more.
Then it's the political views. Far left is completely anti-systemic in my perception, but some of the "left" agenda is now pushed by the Globalist status quo which makes me doubt about its "leftiness" in the first place. Redistribution of wealth is left, global warming is not.

I'm talking about people being treated equal, no matter their status, their gender, their sex, their religion, their views, their nationality or ethnicity.

This is not far left. In 2025, this is, or should be, the perfectly normal stance, thank god.

I'm not shy about criticizing capitalism,

This is still quite unusual -unfortunately- but more and more people are doing it without shame. Hopefully more will do in the future. But again this is not enough to qualify as far left, or even left. This is, or should be, common sense. Capitalism equals not Democracy, we should never confuse those two.

but I'm not talking about starting a violent revolution (for example).

That would be far left.
 
Last edited:
A rare misfire on his part. Contrary to popular belief, I don’t worship at the altar of Trump; he is human like all of us. If those Blackwater guys truly opened fire on civilians unprovoked, then I believe they should be sentenced to death.
On this subject: I would highly encourage you to watch this video:


It goes into detail not only about how the Blackwater travesty took place but also how media like Fox News led to their being pardoned. Full-disclosure, the dude who made the video is a leftist, but he does a great job at showcasing how media can brush over atrocities to push their own agendas. I would really like your thoughts and takeaways from the video, whatever they may be. It’s only a half hour long.
 
So you can post whatever you want, again and again, educating, explaining, etc., ad nauseam.
Suppose I was politically far right - which I'm definitely not, but suppose I was.
How long do you think I'd survive here, pushing my agenda the way you do?
Would I deserve "the same rights and respect"?
Just curious, no bitching.
No, because it's not a fair comparison. Conservatives will post some obviously racist/sexist/transphobic stuff on Twitter or whatever and then act surprised when they get banned. Getting kicked off a social media site for being an asshole is not infringing upon your 1st amendment rights. The whole "I'm being censored for having conservative opinions" thing is always disingenuous. It's never about politics. It's never "I support trickle down economics" and more like "I believe trans people shouldn't have rights".
 
Funnily enough in Germany it is not against the law to try to escape from prison. You will not get a punishment for the attempt (though you're obviously imprisoned again) because we believe that yearning for freedom is part of the human existence.

That’s one of the most beautiful law-relating things I’ve ever heard!
 
Hot takes with Diesel!

I could name a whole list of people who add no value to this world and who I think deserve death.

That being said, I also think the death penalty is a dangerous tool that should be outlawed. So while rapists and serial killers IMO deserve to die, the more logical part of my brain recognizes that executing people is often weaponized and misused and thus we should not give the justice system that power. There are countless examples in America where a person is sentenced to death and despite later being cleared based on evidence the execution is still carried out because of appeal issues. That’s fucked up. I value human life to much to trust the state with how they operate this.
There are definitely people who I think deserve to die. There are people where I'll be glad once they finally kick the bucket (Putin being one example). What I'm against is the state being the one to decide if a citizen should live or die. The final sentence of your comment summarizes this beautifully.

So, to make some sort of closure, i stumbled on this (links):

Regarding trans people in military and athletes

Gallup polls

Download Yougov polls in Pdf format

If those sources are reliable, then to say that there's no issues amongst US citizens, regarding this topic is not true. And if i'm not misreading those, then my dear @Vaenyr, what the actual f*k? And i'm saying this in a friendly tone.
I'll just post one of those:
View attachment 40859
What do you mean "what the actual fuck"? What exactly do you think you've discovered here? Your first two links show that the majority of Americans (apparently almost 3/4!) support trans people in the military. Is that an issue for you?
As for sports, I've already addressed this topic in detail in this thread in the past but I can summarize this:

The amount of trans people is low. The amount of trans athletes is miniscule. Depending on the sport trans athletes have been competing with cis athletes for decades and there is absolutely no evidence of them "dominating" the fields. Not only that, if we look at actual examples we'll see that there are cis athletes who absolutely dominate everything, but they are always praised. No one cares that it is "unfair" that people like Usain Bolt or Michael Phelps have literal biological advantages that no amount of training will ever be able to overcome, but a trans athlete wins a single time and everyone loses their minds.
The swimmer Lia Thomas is one of the most popular examples by people who are against trans women competing with cis women. She won a single time, placed 5th in another race and 8th in a third race. She didn't place in the other races she competed. She didn't break a single record during the competition. Meanwhile a CIS athlete, Kate Douglass, broke 18 out of the 27 records that were set during this competition all by herself. So, not only did Lia not dominate or come close to it, Kate literally did but everyone only cares about attacking Lia.

So, yeah, many people are against trans people in sports, but many people are not aware of the numbers. They are deciding on feelings and vibes. Your third link shows quite clearly that the majority of people asked in the poll don't know a single transgender person, yet they still feel strongly about the topic because it is shoved down their throats by the right wing. So, I ask again: What do you mean by "what the actual fuck"? I never said people have no issues with the trans community. Quite the opposite, I've explained to you time and time again that they are literally harassed and attacked on a daily basis, that the number of hate crimes has risen sharply in the last few years. What I've been telling you is that on polls where people listed what their top reasons for the election were, the trans topic has consistenly been on the bottom. Your links do not address things that I have brought up, so I'm not sure what exactly you are expecting from me here.

On a similar note:
This shows how Americans felt about the Civil Rights movement and Act back then. Look at the numbers and how many disapproved. Are you going to argue that this change should not have happened because many were against it? Or are we going to acknowledge that deep-seated bigotry and ignorance is wrong but also difficult to change and that it takes work and time to overcome this?

No, because it's not a fair comparison. Conservatives will post some obviously racist/sexist/transphobic stuff on Twitter or whatever and then act surprised when they get banned. Getting kicked off a social media site for being an asshole is not infringing upon your 1st amendment rights. The whole "I'm being censored for having conservative opinions" thing is always disingenuous. It's never about politics. It's never "I support trickle down economics" and more like "I believe trans people shouldn't have rights".
Precisely, beautifully said. I still would love to hear the thoughts of @Magnus on the questions I raised in my previous comment though.

I don't know why this toilets thing is a big issue. Just accept trans people exist, and also accept Women are entitled to women only spaces, and start building public toilets as single occupant fully contained units, and let anyone use them.
The toilet thing is manufactured outrage. Everyone has unisex toilets at home. I've known quite a few restaurants in Greece that had unisex toilets. No one ever cared about that, because normal people just want to go to the bathroom, do their thing and go on with their day. Conservatives on the other hand obsess about the genitals of people who go to the bathroom and end up "transvestigating" and harassing people.

This is not far left. In 2025, this is, or should be, the perfectly normal stance, thank god.
I'm not far left because of those things. Those are left wing ideals. I suppose those and I am far left; two separate statements. I'm far left because I'm an anti-capitalist and socialist.

This is still quite unusual -unfortunately- but more and more people are doing it without shame. Hopefully more will do in the future. But again this is not enough to qualify as far left, or even left. This is, or should be, common sense. Capitalism equals not Democracy, we should never confuse those two.
Being anti-capitalist is a main pillar of the far left. It is an intrinsic part of it. Most people are still in favor of capitalism; see various center-left and green parties throughout the world. Most are neoliberal, very few are anti-capitalist and from the latter none are in power in the West.

That would be far left.
And I do not advocate for that on the forum, so that's why I'm interested in hearing from @Magnus which of my arguments and which parts of my "agenda" are not suitable for this forum.
 
What do you mean "what the actual fuck"? What exactly do you think you've discovered here? Your first two links show that the majority of Americans (apparently almost 3/4!) support trans people in the military. Is that an issue for you?
As for sports, I've already addressed this topic in detail in this thread in the past but I can summarize this:
By that I mean that I was not speaking out of my ass. I was not misleading and not spreading disinformation. My understanding of general infosphere is actually pretty good and my "impressions and feelings" serves me pretty good also. This topic very well may had influenced elections at some level. All I was saying that there was some division and doubt amongst US citizens. There are variety of opinions and etc. You again starting to teach me about trans people, my whole point is not about that. I have no problems with trans people. All I am saying, US wide masses are not homogenous (regarding this topic). The other opinions do exist and those are fully legitimate as long as you do not want actively to harm different people than you.
And You certainly owe and apology to Joanne Rowling, because she was spot on. The far left or whatever they are, certainly may have pushed too hard and overreached.
All I can say, please consider to abandoning Your "far" left and be just "left".
 
Last edited:
This topic very well may had influenced elections at some level.
Yeah it influenced the elections, Trump was running anti-trans ads saying “Kamala is for they/them, Donald Trump is for YOU.” Notably he also stole this content because one of the biggest clips in the ads was from a comedian who was not a Trump supporter and merely discussing Trump’s campaign on his podcast. So the man stole the content for his ad and made the dude look like a bigot on national TV, and it helped him win. This had nothing to do with the far left and all to do with the far right, who are still pushing this hatred even though the majority of Americans just want to buy eggs and pump gas at a normal price.

And You certainly owe and apology to Joanne Rowling, because she was spot on. The far left or whatever they are, certainly may have pushed too hard and overreached.
Fact is, one of the (many) reasons Kamala lost is because the left did not see positives of the previous four years of Dems in office, felt on a moral level that voting for some who supported and funded the mass killing of innocent civilians was unethical, and just stayed the hell home. And before someone comes at me, I specifically said “one of many”. These leftists were a fraction of reasons but still part of the loss.

And no one has to apologize to Rowling except the black mold in her house that’s giving her brainrot.

@Vaenyr please don’t respond. It ain’t going anywhere and y’all are tiring me out.
 
@Diesel 11 I'll let it be, out of respect to you and the other members who had to endure my temperament. And to let the room temperature drop a bit after the last few heated exchanges.

Gotta say though, it is pretty frustrating that I have to be the one taking the high road (ironic, considering that's one of the reasons for the downfall of the Dems, heh), especially when my arguments are completely mischaracterized over and over again and when I'm not the one who keeps bringing up these topics and restarts already "settled" discussions. I'm tired of the strawmen, but I suppose the ignore function is the better choice.
 
Last edited:
I'm far left because I'm an anti-capitalist and socialist.

Ok I am no authority by any means, but from what I've seen, I'd qualify the above as just left. Saying I'm anti-capitalist is just a word and I believe your good intentions but far left requires a level of activism that I'm not sure you have reached.

I know people who live in communes that could qualify as far left in my book, some completely out of the system, some they do work, some they don't listen to commercial "capitalistic' music, or spend their times in forums like this one. They take their news from completely independent sources and I don't mean YouTube.
They are super active politically and very often on the streets they know what happens in their city they have the network to act against injustices etc.
No offence but those people would never defend Biden (or Trump for that matter) and sure as hell no EU, or NATO or anything like this.

Being anti-capitalist is a main pillar of the far left. It is an intrinsic part of it. Most people are still in favor of capitalism; see various center-left and green parties throughout the world. Most are neoliberal, very few are anti-capitalist and from the latter none are in power in the West.

Whoever is in favour of capitalism I cannot see him as left at all. But again, that's me, in US once it was seen as left to drive a Tesla what do I know.
In any case I'm surprised that you classify yourself so far in the spectrum and same time you are aligned with the Globalist agenda in so many matters.
In any case, the words have little importance. Whatever I say, it's just words, I'm not politically active in my life (and I don't mean voting) actions is all that matters in the first place. But again, I don't claim to be left.
I hope you are active in yours.
 
Ok I am no authority by any means, but from what I've seen, I'd qualify the above as just left. Saying I'm anti-capitalist is just a word and I believe your good intentions but far left requires a level of activism that I'm not sure you have reached.
According to you. I don't really care about your own definition of what is and what isn't far left. I'm a socialist, socialists are far-left. It's that simple. Furthermore, you don't know me, you have no idea what levels of activism I'm engaging in, so you have no basis to judge that.

I know people who live in communes that could qualify as far left in my book, some completely out of the system, some they do work, some they don't listen to commercial "capitalistic' music, or spend their times in forums like this one. They take their news from completely independent sources and I don't mean YouTube.
They are super active politically and very often on the streets they know what happens in their city they have the network to act against injustices etc.
No offence but those people would never defend Biden (or Trump for that matter) and sure as hell no EU, or NATO or anything like this.
Again, it doesn't matter who you consider far left. A person of integrity can give props to people they disagree with. They can give credit where credit is due. I'm not a fan of Biden and have criticized him plenty. When the opposition consists of literal fascists you bet your ass I'll support the neoliberals instead, even if they don't align with my politically.

Whoever is in favour of capitalism I cannot see him as left at all. But again, that's me
And that's the point: Your personal definition is not really relevant. The center-left is characterized by trying to compomise left wing ideals with the system of capitalism.

In any case I'm surprised that you classify yourself so far in the spectrum and same time you are aligned with the Globalist agenda in so many matters.
Oooh, is the gLoBaLiSt aGeNdA with us in this room? :D

In any case, the words have little importance. Whatever I say, it's just words, I'm not politically active in my life (and I don't mean voting) actions is all that matters in the first place. But again, I don't claim to be left.
I hope you are active in yours.
I am. I'm not boasting about it here, because that's not the point of the thread. Again: You don't know me, you only get to see a limited part of my stances and opinions. I don't care if others classify me as truly being "far left" or not and I certainly couldn't care less about the opinion of someone who so clearly champions Russia and Putin. I hope this settles this little sidebar.
 
Back
Top