Removed by mod
F.AGGOTS REPRODUCE BY MOLESTING CHILDREN
Removed by mod:flag-gay-pride: :elmofire: :jesus-cleanse:
You must log in or register to comment.
REALLY it's referring to the seating chart in the French National Assembly ~1789. Supporters of the king to the president's right and supporters of the revolution to his left
Everything else is an anachronism and revisionist.
The Political Compass is just astrology for lanyards
I have a girthy 6 inch shecock and it's probably longer and thicker than yours
Stealing a comment from somebody here regarding the political compass:
"Reactionaries view politics through a lens of enforced behavior and hierarchy (good) vs everything cool (bad)
Liberals view politics through a lens of free market capitalism (normal) vs regulated capitalism and social safety nets (idealistic but acceptable)
The left views politics through the lens of capitalist control of the means of production (bad) vs worker control of the means of production (with significant differences in how direct that control should be)
The political compass lies by combining the first two framings and saying that’s all of politics. It lies again by supposing that all combinations of those are equally meaningful, as if there’s actually a significant number of people who like state enforced morality and social safety networks. You could add the third framing to the chart, but it’d still have the lie that there’s any meaningful number of nazbols, or that laissez faire communists are a coherent thing that exists."
laissez faire communists are a coherent thing that exists
:lt-dbyf-dubois:
as if there’s actually a significant number of people who like state enforced morality and social safety networks.
The compass claims this is what communists are, which is extremely goofy. It has to be deliberately goofy, since the official explanation of the Y axis says Hitler and Stalin would agree on most aspects of governance so long as economics were not mentioned. Deliberate slander of communism by comparison to fascism.
I've never seen someone score in the upper left portion of that test, ever. You'd have to answer in the positive to bloodthirsty nationalist pride and aggressive racism.
I score in the upper left but I do it as a flex to instill fear in my enemies.
Liberals view politics through a lens of free market capitalism (normal) vs regulated capitalism and social safety nets (idealistic but acceptable)
They more often than not find what little there is to regulation and social safety nets unacceptable, usually with editorials saying "sorry, but." :maybe-later-honey:
The worst part of this is that you bore me.
This is perhaps within the bottom 5 percentile of hexbear trolls, not worth reading the comments
but I always felt like the author had a trans fetish with the amount of time he spent talking about sex changes.
R/selfawarewolves
not really fucking weird with the trans shit?
You're really fucking weird with it, that's for sure
ACTS 4 34-35: All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.
All christians must be communists, you demon worshiper.
Came expecting a discussion about how a historical event led to unusual political labels, but I guess this guy is just really angry about trans people?
The origins of right and left are, as Leon_Grotsky said, terms arising from where groups sat during the French Revolution. In mordern usage, imo, the key difference is how many people should have control over society relative to the status quo. The right wants this control more concentrated in fewer people, while the left wants this control more spread out. Thus a liberal is left of a monarchist but right of a socdem who in turn is right of a communist.
The political compass was made up by libertarians to trick people into thinking they were libertarians.
The political compass was made up by libertarians to trick people into thinking they were libertarians.
Created along with a very pointed survey which tells anybody who's not a genocidal maniac that the best way to improve the world is living in a trailer in the middle of the woods and not interacting with the world at all.
Political compass is useful for two things:
-
Memes
-
Demonstrating to :grillman: who are not lost causes that there are ways of viewing politics beyond Democrat and Republican, such as this flawed model that demonstrates a couple other dimensions
-
There were two main sides of an argument once inside a big room, each side literally took a side of the room, the left or the right, deadass thats it and its an unhelpful descriptor that is used to divide and misinform the working class.
Like, ok, sometimes the terms have their uses, but god fuck its so annoying
It's from the French revolution too. So the only valid left-right distinction is on the issue of what to do with the royals' heads.
exactly, its not capitalism and not capitalism, it was liberal democracy and "progressivism" vs monarchists
One good way to think in modern terms is if you’re pro-capitalism you’re right-wing and anti-capitalists are left-wing.
Edit: Of course, that requires people knowing what capitalism actually is (so you don't have people claiming sucdems are left wing, or well-meaning but ignorant people assuming markets = right-wing).
And it also depends on which ideology you follow. If you're a Maoist for example, you'd claim modern china is right-wing (also claimed by several old-school MLs). Modern MLs, of course, would consider china left-wing.
It can get very complicated very quickly, even with this definition, but I still think it is the best one.
