Meshugger
Members
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Meshugger
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Meanwhile in the real world liberals are blaming the "Berniebros" for Trump's win and are dismissing class rhetoric as the concern of "single-issue voters" who don't care about PoC, women, LBGTQ people etc. Since the term "BernieBro" is a manufactured one by a think-tank employed by the Clintons to smear voters for Bernie as misogynists, i prefer not to use it. But, anyways, the BernieBros are the Trotskies to them and are treated as traitors since they have to gall to claim that the system is ****ed on a broader scope. They will be first against the wall before the enemy.
-
-
-
-
I am a member of Amnesty and i donate monthly, even if i don't always agree with the their views, but i find the overarching goal of freedom of expression and thought to be paramount. I also donate to the Red Cross on a regular basis.
-
-
-
-
-
Well, maybe look harder then. The common element is their longing for a return to a past they see as better, characterized by blind discipline, nationalism (with or without racialist tints), little tolerance for deviation from the social norms, political authoritarianism in diverse forms, etc. It's important to note that this representation of the past may or may not be accurate, but accuracy is less important than the feels from romantizicing the past. In short: reactionarism. The necessary and sufficient condition to be considered part of the alt-right. Conservatism in general is like that. You want to preserve a past that possibly didn't even existed to begin with. Preserving something that has never existed sounds like an oxymoron to me. Well, we are all dreamers after all, no matter the political inclination. Some other people are dreaming of futures that will never exist either.
-
wait, what? You lost me there... Are you seriously saying that Marx and Mussolini both followed the same ideology only in different times? No. As the etymology of the word describes, it is the voicing of an opinion that goes against the current political dogma. In the 80's and 90's it was fit to call it a form of fascism because of the conservatives in the US enforcing moral purity everywhere. Today it is political incorrect to go against equality. Isn't going against equality against the very foundation of the US? "That all men are created equal, that they have been endowed by their creator with with certain unalienable rights" and so on.... Going against equality is a much more serious issue than the overuse of political correctness What you think qualifies for equality has nothing to do with what political correctness is.
-
wait, what? You lost me there... Are you seriously saying that Marx and Mussolini both followed the same ideology only in different times? No. As the etymology of the word describes, it is the voicing of an opinion that goes against the current political dogma. In the 80's and 90's it was fit to call it a form of fascism because of the conservatives in the US enforcing moral purity everywhere. Today it is political incorrect to go against equality.
-
It's origins is different, it has been switched back and forth during the years: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/287100.html Roger Ebert describes it as fascism since it promotes self-censorship: First it is inspired by Marx, now by Mussolini? I recommend you set your mind on what it is Wasn't i clear? It changes, and has historically changed, depending what the current political standards are at place.
-
-
Well, maybe look harder then. The common element is their longing for a return to a past they see as better, characterized by blind discipline, nationalism (with or without racialist tints), little tolerance for deviation from the social norms, political authoritarianism in diverse forms, etc. It's important to note that this representation of the past may or may not be accurate, but accuracy is less important than the feels from romantizicing the past. In short: reactionarism. The necessary and sufficient condition to be considered part of the alt-right. Conservatism in general is like that. You want to preserve a past that possibly didn't even existed to begin with. What that past exactly is up to debate, but it is too broad as i would see these subgroups be quickly in war with each other if they were big enough. Well then they got beaten to it by someone else a long time ago. It's shorter than "reactionaries who spend too much time on twitter and are obssesed with cuckolding". As social interaction has pretty much moved from every day life into social media on the 'net, i would have to admit that they have been quite succesful on that platform. But as soon as they have created their own sacred cows that cannot be made fun of, the pendelum will turn back. Authority that cannot be satirized will fall on its very head. When something can be satirized is more interesting in itself. Case in point from the other side a while back:
-
Makes me wonder if the Internet was worth it. The ability to order food without talking to people and have access to free porn is definitely worth it. I see Cultural-Marxism not as a plot to destroy Capitalism, but rather to destroy culture, directly and indirectly as it forces unity from the top through inclusivety. The Alt-Right is just another lazy attempt to categorize anyone outside the mainstream rightwing as i see very little in common between catholic monarchists and american neo-nazis.
-
-
-
