The Left wing and Right wing both belong to the same bird.

[Dirty_habiT]

I don't hate freedom and I consider myself to be part of "the Right" @Mercer.  In fact, quite the opposite.

[misteraven]

40 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

I don't hate freedom and I consider myself to be part of "the Right" @Mercer.  In fact, quite the opposite.

 

I suppose we'd first have to define what is right or left as neither really uphold or conduct themselves by the ideologies that are supposed to define their respective party. I think if you were to start really drilling down you'll reach the realization that neither camp really fully reflects your point of view or position.

 

Honestly, the sooner people wake up to that fact, the sooner we can get past partisan bickering. Maybe start actually holding the politicos to account and start being a lot smarter about the caliber of individual we send off to DC to represent us our interests.

 

Just sayin'.

[Dirty_habiT]

I don't hold the belief that our government is "all fucked up".  Everything in life is "all fucked up" and very far from perfect if you want to look at it through that lens.  I, maybe, feel this way because I deal with stuff that is "all fucked up" constantly and the best attitude and quickest path to victory is to know it can be fixed with time and effort.

 

In fact, I think that there are a lot of REALLY good people in our government that are very frustrated with this nepotism and shade tree dealings that have been going on.  I'm not excluding people that consider themselves republicans/conservatives..... but here's the thing. 

 

The fact that people are actually "waking up" to all this shit, and that is far from "woke" btw that the left uses, is a good thing.  That is the "effort" part that I mentioned above.  The rest will come in time as we slowly but surely douche out every last person in the government that doesn't appreciate our country, love freedom, and adhere to our Constitution.

 

 

[Mercer]

@misteraventhat’s not really how I view the subject. I literally look at right wing beliefs as “socialist” as in using the government to enforce an impossible utopia that can never exist.

 

A true libertarian gives zero fucks about his neighbor as long as his neighbor isn’t aggressing against others, as in violating NAP (theft, fraud, physical harm etc. AKA crimes with actual victims).

freedom has little to do with the rules one sets for themselves, and has everything to do with the rules one sets for others. Both the left, and the right have long lists of traits disqualifying other individuals from enjoying freedom. For the left winger, making/keeping too much money is offensive. They want to use the government to restrict that. For the right winger, not having the proper immigration paperwork is also something they want to use force to restrict that.

 

Those two are only two, in a long list of examples showing both sides do not value freedom over their vision on how to shape the world around them for the better. You’re only truly libertarian when you’re content in everyone’s freedom to do whatever they want outside of violating your freedom, property, or safety rights etc.

 

Progressives don’t have this same view on freedom, and think there are  disqualifiers like “making more money than me”, or “not having the same beliefs/culture” as me that disqualify other people, and for some die hard believers even themselves from enjoying freedom. There are literally people clapping every time the IRS conducts an audit/raid, and people clapping every time ICE arrests verifies the paperwork of, or arrests   “an illegal”.
 

It’s not that people like me thing things will get better if we just open our borders, I know wages will go down in some labor markets, it will get more crowded etc. These consequences are facts. I just have problems with it for a couple of very reasons, mainly the massive harm enforcement tends to have on society as a whole, and how it outweighs any benefit enforcement produces. All in all, the same exact view I have on Socialism, the unintended consequences far outweigh and positives you can attribute to this encroachment on freedom. 

[Mercer]

Sorry for all the typos, I’m using my phone because I’m too lazy to find batteries for my keyboard.

[misteraven]

@MercerI was just quoting @Dirty_habiTwho had quoted you.

 

@Dirty_habiTAgain you'd have to define "all fucked up" as that is a subjective term. I'm looking at it based upon context... How do politics now compare historically against the long term... Going back across the last several decades and spanning across many administrations and then looking at the real world consequences, I think its a reasonable statement that things are more "fucked up" than usual. There's no way anyone can watch the presidential debate and not see it for the dumpster fire it was.

 

But that being said, I'll point to shit like the party dues system as an example how things are inherently flawed from jump street. Its not to say it cannot be fixed, but it is akin to asking someone to investigate themselves and then to sit back and believe you might get a true audit and the accountability it merits. Government has no incentive to give up the power it has consolidated... Thigh democracy is supposed to be rooted in the idea of the peaceful transition of power, government itself is unlikely to ever check itself and give up the power it has managed to consolidate. Hard to fix a dynamic like that.

 

What are Party Dues?

http://www.definingthemachine.com/party_dues.html

 

*The link above should either freak you out, make you angry or scare you.

[misteraven]

Just now, misteraven said:

@MercerI was just quoting @Dirty_habiTwho had quoted you.

 

@Dirty_habiTAgain you'd have to define "all fucked up" as that is a subjective term. I'm looking at it based upon context... How do politics now compare historically against the long term... Going back across the last several decades and spanning across many administrations and then looking at the real world consequences, I think its a reasonable statement that things are more "fucked up" than usual. There's no way anyone can watch the presidential debate and not see it for the dumpster fire it was.

 

But that being said, I'll point to shit like the party dues system as an example how things are inherently flawed from jump street. Its not to say it cannot be fixed, but it is akin to asking someone to investigate themselves and then to sit back and believe you might get a true audit and the accountability it merits. Government has no incentive to give up the power it has consolidated... Thigh democracy is supposed to be rooted in the idea of the peaceful transition of power, government itself is unlikely to ever check itself and give up the power it has managed to consolidate. Hard to fix a dynamic like that.

 

What are Party Dues?

http://www.definingthemachine.com/party_dues.html

 

*The link above should either freak you out, make you angry or scare you.

 

When people talk about money in politics... This concept, and how it also paves the way for shit like lobbying, is at the very heart of it.

[abrasivesaint]

1 hour ago, misteraven said:

 

I suppose we'd first have to define what is right or left as neither really uphold or conduct themselves by the ideologies that are supposed to define their respective party.

I was just thinking earlier this morning about how the terms Democrat and Republican really hold no meaning in what the actual parties stand for. Registering as “Left” or “Right” would really make more sense these days than registering as a Democrat or Republican. 

[Dirty_habiT]

Maybe there should "be no money in politics".  I think that could solve a lot of the BS.  I agree with you btw @Mercerin what you explained above.  Many people think that America's Freedoms should be afforded to only those that are citizens of our country, including myself.  I just cannot find any justification for allowing, either willfully or through negligence, the porousness of our borders.

[Dirty_habiT]

If you want to GIVE things to other people.  Give your things to other people, and if those other people live in other countries that aren't the country that you live in, then go there and give to them.  We also have a great mailing system.... where you can give things to people in other places, without opening the door for them to come here and TAKE from all of us that haven't made the same choice, via freedom, to GIVE to outsiders that you have.

 

I say you as the hypothetical you, not directed at anyone here.

[ndv]

53 minutes ago, abrasivesaint said:

I was just thinking earlier this morning about how the terms Democrat and Republican really hold no meaning in what the actual parties stand for. Registering as “Left” or “Right” would really make more sense these days than registering as a Democrat or Republican. 

 

Left Wing, Right Wing still belongs to the same bird.
 

[Mercer]

10 minutes ago, ndv said:

 

Left Wing, Right Wing still belongs to the same bird.
 

 

Exactly, and the birds name is progressivism. What’s considered left, and what’s considered right changes With the times, and the whims of the public. The only thing that doesn’t change are both wings are used to restrict personal freedoms in an effort to shape the world.

People often confuse libertarian values with conservative/right wing values as both claim to hold 2A, and free market principals as core beliefs. In fact, many conservatives misdiagnose their beliefs as libertarian and think the two are interchangeable.

 

A conservative is willing to bargain on things like a free market driving competition, and look the other way at trade tariffs, and other anti free market actions. Even bump stock bans, barrel length restrictions, etc. are nearly meaningless to most who consider themselves right wing unless the specific issue effects them personally. I mean most of the worst 2A restrictions of our lifetimes were passed by Regan. Think of all the criminalization of homosexuality, drug wars, etc passed by So called “Republicans”.

 

Libertarians don’t compromise on these values because they’re at the very core of their beliefs. By comparison these values are acknowledged, but always negotiable to “the right wing” because freedom is literally the opposite of what both wings are trying to achieve (utopia).

 

Right wingers see no problem in using the government to not just prevent/prosecute crimes (actual crime with a victim) and defend the country from foreign threats, there’s always this push to use government as a means to progress closer towards an imagined utopian society that has/will never exist, exactly like the other wing. Both doing the exact same thing just seeing it from different perspectives.

[ndv]

52 minutes ago, Mercer said:

 

Exactly, and the birds name is progressivism. What’s considered left, and what’s considered right changes With the times, and the whims of the public. The only thing that doesn’t change are both wings are used to restrict personal freedoms in an effort to shape the world.

People often confuse libertarian values with conservative/right wing values as both claim to hold 2A, and free market principals as core beliefs. In fact, many conservatives misdiagnose their beliefs as libertarian and think the two are interchangeable.

 

A conservative is willing to bargain on things like a free market driving competition, and look the other way at trade tariffs, and other anti free market actions. Even bump stock bans, barrel length restrictions, etc. are nearly meaningless to most who consider themselves right wing unless the specific issue effects them personally. I mean most of the worst 2A restrictions of our lifetimes were passed by Regan. Think of all the criminalization of homosexuality, drug wars, etc passed by So called “Republicans”.

 

Libertarians don’t compromise on these values because they’re at the very core of their beliefs. By comparison these values are acknowledged, but always negotiable to “the right wing” because freedom is literally the opposite of what both wings are trying to achieve (utopia).

 

Right wingers see no problem in using the government to not just prevent/prosecute crimes (actual crime with a victim) and defend the country from foreign threats, there’s always this push to use government as a means to progress closer towards an imagined utopian society that has/will never exist, exactly like the other wing. Both doing the exact same thing just seeing it from different perspectives.

 

 

You basically nailed it on the head.   For me,  one of the things I noticed being around friends and family for so long, is some of their decision making on lifestyle or everyday choices in some cases are the opposite of their political beliefs.  Its kinda funny in a way how you can take an individual and present a problem or scenario were the individual has to use their moral cognitive skills or just basic decision making to figure out the right solution which at times the right solution may either be a conservative or liberal approach depending on the situation and whats the better outcome.  

 

Whats bad for democracy is the ones who prefer to cram a square peg through a round hole.

 

 

[misteraven]

Since this sub conversation of the political memes thread is persisting, I figured I'd split it into its own topic to keep the political memes thread clean.

 

Continue...

[Mercer]

@misteravenI kind of like random discussions, debates popping up in that thread and feel like the real substance in that thread is often times found on pages with more walls of text than images. In reality, this topic does deserve it's very own subject, and is an interesting conversation from my perspective as a voluntaryist during the progressive era.

 

If I had to pick my favorite book on this subject I'd go with Rothbard's "The Progressive Era" which is a collection of individual articles he's written on this subject. He's def in my top ten writers and this book is an easy digest compared to his much more academic writing. Rothbard was a straight up G in his younger years, and was able to formulate most Voluntaryist/Libertarian philosophy building on Mises's work. Ironically enough, Rothbard himself turned little "right wing" in his old age, mostly as a reaction to the left's domination of higher education and media.

 

Long story short, America once had a culture of voluntaryist moral values, and agreed upon social codes before the Civil War. The thought of the government telling people which bathroom they should use, healthcare regulations, and all the minuscule detail legislation shapes our lives would be considered outlandish. Those decisions were made by the communities we chose for ourselves voluntarily. Drugs were legal, prostitution was commonplace, and people mostly minded their own business. Our first insurrection was a war against the taxation of whiskey, not because whiskey was considered a vice and they wanted to curb it's consumption, but because whiskey was so universally valued it functioned as currency in many communities. Voluntaryist values held on for a while longer after the civil war out in frontier country, where there was little to no law enforcement, and most settlers were settling into their own voluntary individual communities to live by the rules they had voluntarily chosen for themselves. 

 

Today, there is only one single mined view, force utopia by all means necessary, both left and right want to apply a one size fits all solution on everyone, with little regard for what these individuals being imposed upon think. For example, if you wanted socialized healthcare, why not just join/start a health care co-op yourself. It's totally legal, cheaper than purchasing insurance as an individual, and gives you an opportunity to directly vote/decide on which benefits the co-op pays for. Why is there a mandate that everyone has to participate in the same scheme? Seems as stupid to me as someone who randomly decides to pool together all their net worth with random strangers, and then split the total evenly. Nobody would ever do that shit voluntarily IRL, but most people would vote for it to be imposed on themselves.

 

I'm not picking on Socialist values here. In fact, when it comes down to it I hold a lot of the same values they do. I just want to voluntarily enter into a relationship where I decide who I share resources with. Like in my house, I make all the money or have since February at least, but I don't get to decide how it's spent, that's a community decision. Same rules apply if I'm not working for whatever reason, we're all in this shit together as far as I'm concerned and if things get too unequal, we'd probably both voluntarily find another community to be a part of if you know what I'm saying. Not trying to flex, but work (hard) 9 to 10 hour days, then come home and work on the house. She takes a pilates class in the morning, and cooks a couple of meals. I have zero issues with this, in-fact that's how I've voluntarily chosen to live and wouldn't have it any other way. 

 

Same applies if me and some homies decided to settle our own community, I'd have no problem sharing everything in my house (except wifey of course) with my community. In fact, I'd prefer to live like that, and would be right now if I could afford it. Small voluntary community, maybe a health co-op, or if you're lucky maybe even healthcare providers in the community. That's my utopia, it's just as achievable to me, as a Socialist's, or MAGA's vision for utopia is to them.  Better yet, I don't need to force that vision on anyone else or interfere with them achieving theirs. I'd have no problem with little democracy communities where people vote on everything individually, democratic socialist communities, pure corporate golf club type communities, a Nation of Islam nation, hippy communes, tribal communities, even exclusive inbreeding communities for Nazi's etc. No problem at all, the only thing I ask for is that everyone else let's me live mine. I value the concept of consent so much I can't compromise, and think we should have the ability to consent to the system we live by, it's a superior method compared to applying a one size fits all. For me, as long as participation is voluntary, and you're not harming others as an individual, or as a community I'm literally down for whatever, and think decentralization is critical to our prosperity, and even survival moving forward.

 

Our biggest collective philosophical flaw (and easiest to correct) when it comes to modern governance is flaw is this mistaken assumption that one size fits all. As if we're even smart enough to know what size that would even be even if we were all 100% identical. Anyone who's old enough to remember when being gay was barely legal, or invading Iraq was a good idea knows values change so rapidly, there's literally no way we've got it all figured out at this moment right now. Funny thing is everyone who's caught up in left vs right politics acts as if I've got serious mental health issues thinking square pegs don't belong in round holes. People are literally walking around so fucking sure of their beliefs, oblivious to the fact that 50 years from now anyone who's intelligent enough to read a book, or actually learn something from a debate would ever look back and think "yep, I (we) had everything all figured out back then".  The truth is, there's no such thing as "the truth" IMO, but that's another discussion altogether.