• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Leftism Makes Us Stupid

LowDown said:
Andrew Klaven:

Left wingers think that they are showing high moral character by "understanding" people who want to kill us all. It's a cheap way to build their own self esteem. Hate on America and hate on your own fellow citizens, puff out your chest and imagine how you are morally superior to all of them. Because "Allahu Akbar" isn't always a term shouted by losers in the middle of some act of nihilistic violence. That's just the way it turns out when those people shout it at US.

Meanwhile, understanding for the people who voted for Trump? Naw, there's nothing but hate in your heart for them. You'd rather lie about them and slander them all day long than spend a fraction of a second asking in good faith about the truth. Because for you them being fellow Americans isn't a good thing and no wise makes them good in the least.
Click to expand...

You insult yourself here.

- First of all, understanding your enemy places you at an advantage. It was not a "left winger" thing to understand what made the Nazis or Japanese tick during World War II. It was not a "left winger" thing for the hundreds of thousands of troop in Vietnam to understand the culture they were dropped into. It was not a "left winger" thing to understand Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War. And it certainly is not a "left winger" thing to try to understand why Islamists have exponentially turned towards extremism over the last four decades. Your assertion accuses the Pentagon, the Intelligence community, and the scholars of merely being Leftism as all continues to seek practical resolutions in a MENA region that has imploded under the weight of totalitarianism and indignity. Do you even know what Leftism is? The worn out "us-versus- them" shtick does you no favors.

- Second of all, Allahu Akbar does mean God is great. It is the most common phrase in Islam and has nothing to do with violence. It is used in prayer across the world. Therefore, when someone like a suicide terrorist expresses the phrase before his deed, he is merely seeking to open his own door to heaven as he gives God the glory of his senseless murder. Of course, if he understood his religion and Muhammad's written laws of war, he would only find God slamming it shut.

- Third of all, Trump fans can't even explain why they continue to cheer for a man who, not only betrayed the tenets of the "wholesome" conservative mind on the campaign trail but, has betrayed every mindless campaign slogan since achieving Office. But we, on the outside, are supposed to understand what has happened to your minds for you? It's not hate. That's what you people used to elect a man who rallied the frenzied mob. It's more about confusion and pity that you can't seem to break your leashes. Even Limbaugh and Ann Coulter broke theirs. I mean, damn!
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
Easily a general argument can be made based on science to show that Rightism makes us stupid. Many policies that are generally accepted by those on the right are anti-science and anti-intelligence.
Click to expand...

You act as if that is purely one sided.
 
Nap said:
You act as if that is purely one sided.
Click to expand...

No, YOU act as if it is purely one sided. I am just countering your lack of logic with opposing lack of logic.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I wouldn't call it interesting. I'd call it ironic.
Click to expand...

I'd call it spot-on.

What I see of left agendas, is they look at the here and now, without thinking of the future ramifications.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I'd call it spot-on.

What I see of left agendas, is they look at the here and now, without thinking of the future ramifications.
Click to expand...

And I'd call THAT ironic. I see the exact same thing of right wing agendas.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
And I'd call THAT ironic. I see the exact same thing of right wing agendas.
Click to expand...

I would disagree, but that's what debate is about.

Do you think it wrong to want to stop the illegal immigration?

Do you think it wrong to want to bring manufacturing jobs back to the USA?

What agenda am I missing?
 
Lord of Planar said:
I would disagree, but that's what debate is about.

Do you think it wrong to want to stop the illegal immigration?

Do you think it wrong to want to bring manufacturing jobs back to the USA?

What agenda am I missing?
Click to expand...

Do you think it's wrong to prevent two people in love from getting married? Do you think it's wrong to prevent discrimination?

Btw, do you realize that leftwingers do not believe the things you claim? The difference isn't what. it's how.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Do you think it's wrong to prevent two people in love from getting married? Do you think it's wrong to prevent discrimination?

Btw, do you realize that leftwingers do not believe the things you claim? The difference isn't what. it's how.
Click to expand...

I think government should get out of our lives in so many ways, including marriage. Preventing discrimination just allows for other types of discrimination. There is seldom a solution that doesn't cause other problems.

Why is there such a resistance from the left to insure we have sound voting practices, reduce illegal aliens, and reduce what is called free trade?

What is the solution from the left to stop illegal immigration?

What is the solution from the left to return living wage jobs to the USA?

What is the solution from the left to insure we don't have vote tampering?

What are the solutions, that are not causing other problems...
 
Back to what I responded to, I think "leftism" does make us stupid as a nation! I don't think the right sided people calling it out is ironic at all. Again, I see it as spot-on.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I think government should get out of our lives in so many ways, including marriage. Preventing discrimination just allows for other types of discrimination. There is seldom a solution that doesn't cause other problems.
Click to expand...

Then you are not supporting the positions that many righties do.

Why is there such a resistance from the left to insure we have sound voting practices, reduce illegal aliens, and reduce what is called free trade?

What is the solution from the left to stop illegal immigration?

What is the solution from the left to return living wage jobs to the USA?

What is the solution from the left to insure we don't have vote tampering?

What are the solutions, that are not causing other problems...
Click to expand...

Why do you assume that lefties believe these things? Why are you making assumptions about all lefties when you, yourself do not adhere to the beliefs that mar the right wing agenda?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Back to what I responded to, I think "leftism" does make us stupid as a nation! I don't think the right sided people calling it out is ironic at all. Again, I see it as spot-on.
Click to expand...

And back to what I responded to. I think "rightism" does make us stupider as a nation. I think that left sided people calling the opposite ironic is spot on. The fact that you, as most right wingers, overgeneralize and try to define "leftism" when it's not your call is good evidence that I am right.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Then you are not supporting the positions that many righties do.



Why do you assume that lefties believe these things? Why are you making assumptions about all lefties when you, yourself do not adhere to the beliefs that mar the right wing agenda?
Click to expand...

You are correct that I don't support the right as much as most to the right do. I label myself as "libertarian right" for a reason. There are almost no left policies I agree with, and maybe about half from the right. In the end, I believe as a true libertarian does, that our rights end when they affect others. In reality, this leaves open a very large grey area. Most libertarians for example believe in free trade, but I see it as harmful to our nation.

I accept that when speaking of generalities, it doesn't apply to all.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You are correct that I don't support the right as much as most to the right do. I label myself as "libertarian right" for a reason. There are almost no left policies I agree with, and maybe about half from the right. In the end, I believe as a true libertarian does, that our rights end when they affect others. In reality, this leaves open a very large grey area. Most libertarians for example believe in free trade, but I see it as harmful to our nation.

I accept that when speaking of generalities, it doesn't apply to all.
Click to expand...

Firstly, in my experience, a "Libertarian-Right" person is someone who is anti-liberal but just doesn't want to call themselves a conservative for whatever reason. Most are FAR more rightwing than conservatives are, except that SOME don't try to push their morals on others. Some. From my experience, true libertarians are not libertarian "right" or libertarian "left". They are just libertarian. Secondly, your generalities of the left make your comments invalid. The beliefs of the left are as varied as the beliefs on the right. You're making the same mistake many on the right do. You're listening to the loudest lefties, the one's who tend to be the most extreme. Many leftwingers make the same mistakes when they try to define the right. They listen to the loudest, hence most extreme righties. Those who listen to those folks and believe that they define that ideology are way over simplifying a complex issue. From my observation, each and every right winger in this thread has done exactly that. And lastly, if you do not adhere to general conservative positions, then you are not part of the problem. Conservative extremism is.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Firstly, in my experience, a "Libertarian-Right" person is someone who is anti-liberal but just doesn't want to call themselves a conservative for whatever reason.
Click to expand...
Well, I am conservative in many ways. I just don't believe in imposing my ideals on others, or have others impose their ideals on me.

CaptainCourtesy said:
Most are FAR more rightwing than conservatives are, except that SOME don't try to push their morals on others. Some. From my experience, true libertarians are not libertarian "right" or libertarian "left". They are just libertarian.
Click to expand...
Is there really a "true" anything?

CaptainCourtesy said:
Secondly, your generalities of the left make your comments invalid. The beliefs of the left are as varied as the beliefs on the right. You're making the same mistake many on the right do. You're listening to the loudest lefties, the one's who tend to be the most extreme.
Click to expand...
I will agree with your point somewhat. Still, I don't see the "reasonable" left speaking out against them. Even the mild form of the left agrees we should be authoritarian and mandate so many things. I see the right generally trying to protecting from extra authoritarianism, rather than trying to add to it.

CaptainCourtesy said:
Many leftwingers make the same mistakes when they try to define the right. They listen to the loudest, hence most extreme righties. Those who listen to those folks and believe that they define that ideology are way over simplifying a complex issue. From my observation, each and every right winger in this thread has done exactly that. And lastly, if you do not adhere to general conservative positions, then you are not part of the problem. Conservative extremism is.
Click to expand...
I agree the loudest are listened to, too much. I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh quite a bit in the early 90's, and as much as I agree with so much of what he said, I disliked his pampas attitude. I also liked a local host, Lars Larson, until he went national. Once he went national, he also went extreme. I have from time to time voiced opposition to the far right ideals, but I do generally avoid the political parts of these forums, and when I do, it's railing against things that I see as more damaging. Liberal ideal...

You are aware, I am involved with the climate discussions more than anything else here, right? Hell, I don't even listen to the latest news in politics. I am sick of it, and don't jump into such topics like I once did. every now and then, I see a thread title that sparks my interest though. I don't particularly like any of the republican/conservative politicians. I see them as the lesser evil.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Well, I am conservative in many ways. I just don't believe in imposing my ideals on others, or have others impose their ideals on me.
Click to expand...

That isn't similar to many conservatives especially on social/moral issues... which is the essence of most issues, even financial ones.

Is there really a "true" anything?
Click to expand...

Of course. In theory. In practicality, not so much.


I will agree with your point somewhat. Still, I don't see the "reasonable" left speaking out against them. Even the mild form of the left agrees we should be authoritarian and mandate so many things. I see the right generally trying to protecting from extra authoritarianism, rather than trying to add to it.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I don't see the "reasonable" right speaking out against he "extremist" right and see the right as trying to add to authoritarianism rather than trying to protect from it. Notice how perspectives are different? What that shows is that the entire premise of this thread is both idiotic and wrong. NEITHER side adds to the stupidity of this country. Those that add to the stupidity of this country are those who believe that either side adds to the stupidity of this country.


I agree the loudest are listened to, too much. I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh quite a bit in the early 90's, and as much as I agree with so much of what he said, I disliked his pampas attitude. I also liked a local host, Lars Larson, until he went national. Once he went national, he also went extreme. I have from time to time voiced opposition to the far right ideals, but I do generally avoid the political parts of these forums, and when I do, it's railing against things that I see as more damaging. Liberal ideal...
Click to expand...

And though I participate in the political parts of this forum far more than you, I have grown disallusioned with a lot of what I see in politics, mostly the partisan gridlock that both sides seem to want to maintain. Some of the damage is caused by liberals, more by conservatives.

You are aware, I am involved with the climate discussions more than anything else here, right? Hell, I don't even listen to the latest news in politics. I am sick of it, and don't jump into such topics like I once did. every now and then, I see a thread title that sparks my interest though. I don't particularly like any of the republican/conservative politicians. I see them as the lesser evil.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of where you mostly post. You've been here for a while and I know about pretty much all posters who've been here a while. I have mostly contempt for all politicians, but when it comes to ideology, I see conservatism as being more damaging; that being said, I see extremism on both sides as being far more damaging than that.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
That isn't similar to many conservatives especially on social/moral issues... which is the essence of most issues, even financial ones.
Click to expand...
Well, maybe it has to do with understanding one side more than the other as well. I understand the religious not wanting gay marriage to be allowed, and is one reason why I decided the government shouldn't even be involved with marriage. I don't know this as fact, but I have heard that government first got involved with marriage to stop interracial marriages. What marriage has become from legal terms, is automatic acknowledgement of certain spousal privileges and rights. I see no reason not to simply take marriage out of the government legalities, and simply have a common legal document that spells out what a couple wishes to share in such legal terms.

I do accept, that marriage was designed to be between one man and one woman. That is why I understand the religious opposition to gay marriage.

Now, I see no problem in granting legal benefits and rights between a consenting couple. Must it be called marriage, and offend what others hold dear?

CaptainCourtesy said:
Interesting. I don't see the "reasonable" right speaking out against he "extremist" right and see the right as trying to add to authoritarianism rather than trying to protect from it. Notice how perspectives are different? What that shows is that the entire premise of this thread is both idiotic and wrong. NEITHER side adds to the stupidity of this country. Those that add to the stupidity of this country are those who believe that either side adds to the stupidity of this country.
Click to expand...
OK, what have I missed that the right is trying to implement that is "authoritarian?"

As for the stupidity...

Equal outcome rather than equal opportunity, covers so many things the left seems to champion.

CaptainCourtesy said:
And though I participate in the political parts of this forum far more than you, I have grown disallusioned with a lot of what I see in politics, mostly the partisan gridlock that both sides seem to want to maintain. Some of the damage is caused by liberals, more by conservatives.
Click to expand...
Well, try to enlighten me if you like. At the moment, I can't think of anything damaging by the right, but I can think of several damaging things from the left. But then, I have mostly tuned out politics for a few years. I seldom see or hear more than a work break discussion, or a thread that spikes my interest.

CaptainCourtesy said:
Yes, I am aware of where you mostly post. You've been here for a while and I know about pretty much all posters who've been here a while. I have mostly contempt for all politicians, but when it comes to ideology, I see conservatism as being more damaging; that being said, I see extremism on both sides as being far more damaging than that.
Click to expand...
Do you think there is any solution to get better politicians elected?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Well, maybe it has to do with understanding one side more than the other as well. I understand the religious not wanting gay marriage to be allowed, and is one reason why I decided the government shouldn't even be involved with marriage. I don't know this as fact, but I have heard that government first got involved with marriage to stop interracial marriages. What marriage has become from legal terms, is automatic acknowledgement of certain spousal privileges and rights. I see no reason not to simply take marriage out of the government legalities, and simply have a common legal document that spells out what a couple wishes to share in such legal terms.

I do accept, that marriage was designed to be between one man and one woman. That is why I understand the religious opposition to gay marriage.

Now, I see no problem in granting legal benefits and rights between a consenting couple. Must it be called marriage, and offend what others hold dear?
Click to expand...

I also understand the religious argument against SSM. And I reject it since it is based on a moral perspective and a feeling of offensiveness. And I am very religious myself. We do not create tiered scenarios just because one group may be offended that another group gets the same privileges as them. That's what segregation was all about. If some of the religious are offended because other folks are getting equal rights to them... too bad. Discrimination is not acceptable because one is offended. From a legal perspective, there is no difference between traditional marriage and SSM, so there is no reason to call it anything different or give either side different benefits.

OK, what have I missed that the right is trying to implement that is "authoritarian?"
Click to expand...

Gay rights, transsexual rights, abortion, adoption, mixing government with religion. There's plenty. I'd like to know how the left is being authoritarian.

As for the stupidity...

Equal outcome rather than equal opportunity, covers so many things the left seems to champion.
Click to expand...

As as for stupidity, the right seems to believe that everyone either has or could potentially have an equal opportunity.

Well, try to enlighten me if you like. At the moment, I can't think of anything damaging by the right, but I can think of several damaging things from the left. But then, I have mostly tuned out politics for a few years. I seldom see or hear more than a work break discussion, or a thread that spikes my interest.
Click to expand...

I've already mentioned many earlier in this post. A lot has to do with the right wanting to involve itself in people's private lives and dictate morality.

Do you think there is any solution to get better politicians elected?
Click to expand...

Not until being a politician stops being a profession.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Firstly, in my experience, a "Libertarian-Right" person is someone who is anti-liberal but just doesn't want to call themselves a conservative for whatever reason. Most are FAR more rightwing than conservatives are, except that SOME don't try to push their morals on others. Some. From my experience, true libertarians are not libertarian "right" or libertarian "left". They are just libertarian. Secondly, your generalities of the left make your comments invalid. The beliefs of the left are as varied as the beliefs on the right. You're making the same mistake many on the right do. You're listening to the loudest lefties, the one's who tend to be the most extreme. Many leftwingers make the same mistakes when they try to define the right. They listen to the loudest, hence most extreme righties. Those who listen to those folks and believe that they define that ideology are way over simplifying a complex issue. From my observation, each and every right winger in this thread has done exactly that. And lastly, if you do not adhere to general conservative positions, then you are not part of the problem. Conservative extremism is.
Click to expand...

Many of the people that call themselves Libertarian-Right do so because they are Liberal (in the classical sense). On average Libertarian-Right would technically be center in the modern political climate because the support the socially liberal policies of the Left (SSM, Drug legalization, etc) while supporting the liberal economic policies of the Right (free market capitalism).
 
Nap said:
Many of the people that call themselves Libertarian-Right do so because they are Liberal (in the classical sense). On average Libertarian-Right would technically be center in the modern political climate because the support the socially liberal policies of the Left (SSM, Drug legalization, etc) while supporting the liberal economic policies of the Right (free market capitalism).
Click to expand...

Not the way it gets presented by folks here. Perhaps in theory. Most of those who, at DP, identify as Libertarian - Right, disagree with the social policies of the left.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Not the way it gets presented by folks here. Perhaps in theory. Most of those who, at DP, identify as Libertarian - Right, disagree with the social policies of the left.
Click to expand...

Because many of the Left positions socially are trending more authoritarian. For instance, the attacks on the 1st amendment. The Left has become what they have hated and the nonsense about hate speech sounds just as illiberal as the Religious Right only a few decades ago attacking "foul" language in music and television. The policies that support individual freedom is what they share.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Well, maybe it has to do with understanding one side more than the other as well. I understand the religious not wanting gay marriage to be allowed, and is one reason why I decided the government shouldn't even be involved with marriage. I don't know this as fact, but I have heard that government first got involved with marriage to stop interracial marriages. What marriage has become from legal terms, is automatic acknowledgement of certain spousal privileges and rights. I see no reason not to simply take marriage out of the government legalities, and simply have a common legal document that spells out what a couple wishes to share in such legal terms.

I do accept, that marriage was designed to be between one man and one woman. That is why I understand the religious opposition to gay marriage.

Now, I see no problem in granting legal benefits and rights between a consenting couple. Must it be called marriage, and offend what others hold dear?


OK, what have I missed that the right is trying to implement that is "authoritarian?"

As for the stupidity...

Equal outcome rather than equal opportunity, covers so many things the left seems to champion.


Well, try to enlighten me if you like. At the moment, I can't think of anything damaging by the right, but I can think of several damaging things from the left. But then, I have mostly tuned out politics for a few years. I seldom see or hear more than a work break discussion, or a thread that spikes my interest.


Do you think there is any solution to get better politicians elected?
Click to expand...

Marriage has always been a government institution in America since day one. They brought the British system where government took over marriages from the church before the US existed.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Gay rights, transsexual rights, abortion, adoption, mixing government with religion. There's plenty. I'd like to know how the left is being authoritarian.
Click to expand...

By creating laws, forcing others to do as they don't want to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom