Society/Culture Those who identify as left wing, what would you consider to be Extreme Left?

[kickazz]

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

It most certainly is not. It sounds like you don't actually know what liberalism is, I highly recommend reading The Economist's article earlier this year on "rebooting liberalism" to find out more.

 

[its free real estate]

It most certainly is not. It sounds like you don't actually know what liberalism is, I highly recommend reading The Economist's article earlier this year on "rebooting liberalism" to find out more.

He is talking about left-liberalism which is different to the classical kind, not so much in rhetoric but means. The classical kind believes in maximal freedom for all so long as it doesn’t harm anyone, with harm meaning serious physical or material harm.

The left-liberal kind redefines harm to be whatever it wants. It does this not because it believes that celebrating Father’s Day, using the wrong pronouns or wearing Spider-Man outfits to primary school causes harm, but because by arbitrarily shifting the definition it can maintain and wield power over people.

Freedom then becomes instituted by an administrative apparatus, which can make superficial claims on maximising freedom for previously ignored groups. But the apparatus can take it away at a moment’s notice for anyone who transgresses, even if you transgress rules you never knew existed.

Think of the multitude of HR departments celebrating regular diversity days like a liturgical saints calendar while attempting to keep their employees under strict monitoring and discipline.

 

[Mofra]

Extreme = willing to ignore science and/or the law to push a particular ideology.

E.g.anti-vaxxers and anti-5G movements within communities who identify as left, and to me that's where things start to get extreme.

 

[Deadpool]

anti-5G movements.

These are a small group of nutters that transcend left-right nutterism I think.

 

[Deadpool]

Feel sorry for the kids who're going to miss out on fun activities because of leftist teachers and administrators who abuse their powers to push diversity agendas. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Would probably prefer that you didn't post that s**t here, plenty of threads where you can do that.

 

[its free real estate]

Another example

The hearing was told he would refuse to refer to "any 6ft-tall bearded man" as "madam" following a conversation with a manager at an assessment centre and later left his role.​

David Mackereth: Christian doctor loses trans beliefs case

The doctor refused to use transgender pronouns which a tribunal found was "incompatible with human dignity".

www.bbc.com

In this case no harm was done, no one was offended. It was a hypothetical discussed with, you guessed it, the management.

 

[Mofra]

These are a small group of nutters that transcend left-right nutterism I think.

Yeah, sadly there is a strong anti-science movement with disparate groups of people from the left or right. The link between tobacco and cancer was a huge one in the 60s and 70s for conservatives.
We have a modern day flat earth society FFS. Some off-grid hippies still believe in chemtrails.

 

[kickazz]

He is talking about left-liberalism which is different to the classical kind, not so much in rhetoric but means. The classical kind believes in maximal freedom for all so long as it doesn’t harm anyone, with harm meaning serious physical or material harm.

The left-liberal kind redefines harm to be whatever it wants. It does this not because it believes that celebrating Father’s Day, using the wrong pronouns or wearing Spider-Man outfits to primary school causes harm, but because by arbitrarily shifting the definition it can maintain and wield power over people.

Freedom then becomes instituted by an administrative apparatus, which can make superficial claims on maximising freedom for previously ignored groups. But the apparatus can take it away at a moment’s notice for anyone who transgresses, even if you transgress rules you never knew existed.

There is indeed a difference between classical and left liberalism.

But if you read the Economist's article, they basically conceded that liberalism can mean many different things to different people.

I think the left liberal ideas you quote regarding redefining harm to be salient to this discussion. Indeed some of them are rather illiberal.

I would point out though that there are some things within left liberalism that are not quite so kooky. Genuine equal opportunity (as opposed to equal outcomes or indeed special treatment) via welfare or removal of barriers, encouragement of wealth creation over wealth hoarding and protection via taxation reform, and a sustainable approach to use of natural resources; all of these I would say fall into the category of reasonable measures that a left liberal society would want, and that require some level of government intervention/coercion.

 

[Deadpool]

He is talking about left-liberalism which is different to the classical kind, not so much in rhetoric but means. The classical kind believes in maximal freedom for all so long as it doesn’t harm anyone, with harm meaning serious physical or material harm.

The left-liberal kind redefines harm to be whatever it wants. It does this not because it believes that celebrating Father’s Day, using the wrong pronouns or wearing Spider-Man outfits to primary school causes harm, but because by arbitrarily shifting the definition it can maintain and wield power over people.

Freedom then becomes instituted by an administrative apparatus, which can make superficial claims on maximising freedom for previously ignored groups. But the apparatus can take it away at a moment’s notice for anyone who transgresses, even if you transgress rules you never knew existed.

Think of the multitude of HR departments celebrating regular diversity days like a liturgical saints calendar while attempting to keep their employees under strict monitoring and discipline.

Did you not read the OP?

This isn't a random thread for you to go off in, just cool your jets.

I legit just want to hear from left wing people, not conservatives posting about why liberalism is bad.

EDIT: Probably shouldnt derail a genuine line of debate though, my bad, carry on.

 

[its free real estate]

Did you not read the OP?

This isn't a random thread for you to go off in, just cool your jets.

I legit just want to hear from left wing people, not conservatives posting about why liberalism is bad.

EDIT: Probably should derail a genuine line of debate though, my bad, carry on.

There are plenty of legit left wing people alienated from modern leftism, this is apparent in the terminal decline in vote for what were once strong left wing parties.

 

[its free real estate]

I would point out though that there are some things within left liberalism that are not quite so kooky. Genuine equal opportunity (as opposed to equal outcomes or indeed special treatment) via welfare or removal of barriers, encouragement of wealth creation over wealth hoarding and protection via taxation reform, and a sustainable approach to use of natural resources; all of these I would say fall into the category of reasonable measures that a left liberal society would want, and that require some level of government intervention/coercion.

I distinguish materialist leftism, eg the historical Labor party, what Bernie Sanders represents, from the liberal-leftism that is preferred by the self-actualised individualists who only view the world through their own narcissism.

 

[Deadpool]

There are plenty of legit left wing people alienated from modern leftism, this is apparent in the terminal decline in vote for what were once strong left wing parties.

I was once one of those lefties.

 

[Sainteric]

Did you read the post you're quoting?

Consider yourself far left, do you?

Also, did you even consider what you've written before you wrote it? Exclusion and segregation have been hallmarks of right wing politics, given their inherent fear of change and denigration of the other that comes alongside conservatism and nationalism. As for the left only playing the man, I'd hardly say that is solely a feature of left wing politics.

As

Did you read the post you're quoting?

Consider yourself far left, do you?

Also, did you even consider what you've written before you wrote it? Exclusion and segregation have been hallmarks of right wing politics, given their inherent fear of change and denigration of the other that comes alongside conservatism and nationalism. As for the left only playing the man, I'd hardly say that is solely a feature of left wing politics.

(Conservative types, please refrain from posting until there is something to post about)

It always pays to read to the end

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Communism

 

[Deadpool]

Communism

What about it?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I distinguish materialist leftism, eg the historical Labor party, what Bernie Sanders represents, from the liberal-leftism that is preferred by the self-actualised individualists who only view the world through their own narcissism.

Civil rights for all has always been a cause championed by the left. Nobody get preferential treatment but nobody gets segregated or excluded either. And yet at each and every societal turning point, those arguing for the rights of all (to vote, to work, etc) are always despised by the other side, by the conservatives of that particular point in time.

We think of a greater good and we're the narcissists. Feeding our egos with do-gooder vibes and all that guff.

Yet society keeps closing the gaps. And the world does not end.

 

[Deadpool]

Civil rights for all has always been a cause championed by the left. Nobody get preferential treatment but nobody gets segregated or excluded either. And yet at each and every societal turning point, those arguing for the rights of all (to vote, to work, etc) are always despised by the other side, by the conservatives of that particular point in time.

We think of a greater good and we're the narcissists. Feeding our egos with do-gooder vibes and all that guff.

Yet society keeps closing the gaps. And the world does not end.

Evergreen College students back at it with ‘no white people’ day

Evergreen State College, the Olympia, Washington, place of higher learning that made mid-2017 national news for its black students’ demands for all whites to leave campus for a much-needed day of time-out on Caucasians is at it again. The so-called “Day of Absence” has resurfaced.

www.washingtontimes.com

 

[Mofra]

Civil rights for all has always been a cause championed by the left. Nobody get preferential treatment but nobody gets segregated or excluded either. And yet at each and every societal turning point, those arguing for the rights of all (to vote, to work, etc) are always despised by the other side, by the conservatives of that particular point in time.

We think of a greater good and we're the narcissists. Feeding our egos with do-gooder vibes and all that guff.

Yet society keeps closing the gaps. And the world does not end.

Economically and philosophically, utilising the productive capacity of everyone in society would normally be seen as rational. It is somehow being framed as radical by some social commentators.

 

[Deadpool]

Economically and philosophically, utilising the productive capacity of everyone in society would normally be seen as rational. It is somehow being framed as radical by some social commentators.

That has to be the most uber-capitalist statement I've ever heard.

Love how you are in quick to prevent Geelong_Sicko from having to respond to the unsavoury post above though. Nice work.

 

[its free real estate]

We think of a greater good and we're the narcissists. Feeding our egos with do-gooder vibes and all that guff.

The “greater good” you think about is in the abstract. It only serves to stroke your ego, there is nothing serious at stake for you.

You’re the epitome of the atomised man.

 

[Mofra]

That has to be the most uber-capitalist statement I've ever heard.

You musn't hear very much then.

Love how you are in quick to prevent Geelong_Sicko from having to respond to the unsavoury post above though. Nice work.

It was posted at the same time, I didn't see it before my post. No tin foil hat necessary.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Evergreen College students back at it with ‘no white people’ day

Evergreen State College, the Olympia, Washington, place of higher learning that made mid-2017 national news for its black students’ demands for all whites to leave campus for a much-needed day of time-out on Caucasians is at it again. The so-called “Day of Absence” has resurfaced.

www.washingtontimes.com

Yeah, I'd actually heard of that. Here's different angle on the story and the origin of the day. This, from 2018;

Evergreen State cancels 'Day of Absence' that set off series of protests and controversies

Annual event, seen as way to highlight needs of minority groups, set off major controversy last year.

www.insidehighered.com

The annual Day of Absence at Evergreen State College took place for years without much notice outside the campus. That changed last year, when controversy over the event led to protests, counterprotests, threats and national debate. And that may be the last such day at Evergreen State.

A spokesman for the college confirmed that the institution will not hold the event this year.

The spokesman provided this statement: "With the fall 2017 arrival of the college’s first-ever vice president/vice provost [for equity and inclusion], Dr. Chassity Holliman-Douglas, the college is moving forward in the planning of a new equity symposium to be held this year. The symposium is not a replacement of Day of Absence/Day of Presence, but rather an opportunity for the Evergreen community to design a robust new equity event from the ground up." Asked to confirm that there would be no Day of Absence in addition to the symposium, he said that there would be no Day of Absence.

The Play and the 2017 Controversy

The Day of Absence was based on a 1965 play of the same name by Douglas Turner Ward. The play is about an imaginary Southern town in which all the black people disappear one day. The idea behind the play is that societies with deeply racist ideas in fact depend on the very people they subjugate.

For many years at Evergreen State, minority students and faculty members have observed a Day of Absence in which they met off campus to discuss campus issues and how to make the college more supportive of all students. Later a Day of Presence reunites various campus groups. While some have objected to the way the Day of Absence worked previously, it was the 2017 version that brought scrutiny on campus and national attention.

Last year, organizers said that on the Day of Absence, they wanted white people to stay off campus.

Bret Weinstein, a biology professor, posted a message on a campus email list in which he objected to the proposal to ask white people to avoid campus.

"There is a huge difference between a group or coalition deciding to voluntarily absent themselves from a shared space in order to highlight their vital and underappreciated roles (the theme of the Douglas Turner Ward play Day of Absence, as well as the recent Women's Day walkout), and a group encouraging another group to go away," Weinstein wrote. "The first is a forceful call to consciousness, which is, of course, crippling to the logic of oppression. The second is a show of force, and an act of oppression in and of itself."

Weinstein went on to say he would be on campus on the Day of Absence and would encourage a similar stance by white people being asked to stay away. People should "put phenotype aside," he said. "On a college campus, one's right to speak -- or to be -- must never be based on skin color..."

Me myself, I'm unsure on how productive this day really was. To me it seems counter-productive. Highlighting prejudice by being prejudiced? Not sure if I could ever go along with this.

EDIT: Messed-up quote.

 

[Deadpool]

You musn't hear very much then.


It was posted at the same time, I didn't see it before my post. No tin foil hat necessary.

Someone has clearly been dragooned into these debates by some "mods" that quickly realised they were out of their depth.

edit "Slowly" is actually probably more appropriate.

 

[Deadpool]

Yeah, I'd actually heard of that. Here's different angle on the story and the origin of the day. This, from 2018;

Doesn't change the context of the original point.

You say the Left doesn't try to exclude people. I proved you wrong.

 

[Mofra]

Someone has clearly been dragooned into these debates by some "mods" that quickly realised they were out of their depth.

Now you're not even making sense.

That's a big problem on these boards - people avoid an issue after receiving a response, then try and play the victim.