• CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it's subjective, but this quote seems to align with my perspective:

    Generally, the left wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism" while the right wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism"

    • buckykat [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the sake of argument, let's run with that. Now, which of those lists does landlording fit into?

        • yoink [she/her]
          ·
          1 year ago

          that would have to also necessarily imply that being gay is a choice, similarly to landlording, and that you have no choice but to be a landlord regardless of your political beliefs

        • buckykat [none/use name]
          ·
          1 year ago

          A person can only be openly gay and right leaning if they're more racist than they are gay

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            There are also capitalist gay people. I was going to point to Pete, but he's not a good example of not hating black people.

        • machinya [it/its, fae/faer]
          ·
          1 year ago

          being gay doesn't say anything about personal beliefs or political alignment. it's just one personal feature that might or might not influence your political thinking. people in privileged possitions tend to lean right because they tend to benefit from the current system regardless if they are part of a generally opressed minority

            • silent_water [she/her]
              ·
              1 year ago

              not really - you can be gay and own a major corporation, which necessarily moves you rightward. these personal identity markers are subsumed by material interests and therefore class. it's, for example, why so many white, wealthy gay people are significantly to the right of where they were 40 years ago - cf Peter Thiel. when the state was turned against their existence they were nominally left and as that violence abated, class interests dominated. it's also why so many trans people are communists right now - the state is trying to murder us.

              • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                ·
                1 year ago

                you can be [openly] gay and own a major corporation, which necessarily moves you rightward.

                Exactly. And you can be openly gay and a white supremacist, and you can be openly gay and pro-gun, you can be openly gay and a Christian nationalist.

                You can be an openly gay, white supremacist, pro-gun, Christian nationalist. You could have 99.99% republican values, but spend your weekends furthering LGBTQ rights. The class structures that subsume indenty aren't as stringent as you present them to be.

                Like without even looking it up I bet there are trans Republican groups, do you disagree?

                • silent_water [she/her]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  yeah of course. no one is saying class traitors don't exist. but it's on them to prove it. Engels himself was one such person.

                • GarbageShoot [he/him]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Generally you would not expect a gay Republican to be very proactive in furthering gay rights (Dems don't either most of the time, but w/e). They would spend their time role-playing as "one of the good ones" and get accused of being a subversive is they actually collaborated with queer groups that were anything but "Gays for Trump" type PR campaigns.

                  This is not just hypothetical, we can see many people of different minority identities who support horrible reaction and only use that identity as a shield from left criticism. Milo Yianopolos (forgot the spelling) publically gave lectures on how lesbians "don't exist" and "need a good d***ing" and defended pedophilia, but never seemed that interested in actually furthering rights even for relations between gay men. Candace Owens famously defended Hitler's domestic policy in public and speaks on black issues mainly to launder conservative talking points using her identity.

            • charlie
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is borderline (and in my opinion flies right past it) homophobic rhetoric. I would read the responses you get and do some self crit.

              • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                ·
                1 year ago

                You think believing someone can be openly gay and Republican is homophobic?

                Or maybe you just don't like the political implications of what I'm saying, and how that effects the practicality of your ideology.

                Replace 'openly gay' with 'supports universal healthcare. Better?

                • Shinji_Ikari [he/him]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Replace 'openly gay' with 'supports universal healthcare. Better?

                  Uhhh, yeah I'm sure people who support universal healthcare have that hardwired into their brain from childhood. Totally the same thing.

                  it's totally not a conclusion based on analysis of material conditions.

                  • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Uhhh, yeah I'm sure people who support universal healthcare have that hardwired into their brain from childhood. Totally the same thing.

                    Ugh.. I'm kind of tired of clarifying this. I didn't say 'gay' I said 'openly gay', keyword 'openly', you understand the distinction do you not?

                    • Shinji_Ikari [he/him]
                      ·
                      1 year ago

                      No, I think it's fairly bigoted to compare an open existence to a political act. To say the dignity to exist without hiding one's nature is a political act is pretty fucked up. It's not a political act for straight people to exist.

                      This exact argument is why people get away with bigotry, calling it all political, implying the non political thing would be to hide and make sure no one sees you.

                      Perhaps if you're tired of clarifying this, you should rethink your stance.

                      • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                        ·
                        1 year ago

                        No, I think it's fairly bigoted to compare an open existence to a political act.

                        Well the fact of the matter is open existence is a political issue. It shouldn't be, but it is, and I referenced it because it was appropriate to the topic of discussion. Like the whole fact that this is a contentious subject is why I referenced it.

                        Just to be clear, are you denying that the right has traditionally been anti-lgbtq?

                        Perhaps if you're tired of clarifying this, you should rethink your stance.

                        Rethink it how?

                        This exact argument is why people get away with bigotry, calling it all political, implying the non political thing would be to hide and make sure no one sees you.

                        Sorry that's your implication not mine.

                        Also... None of this makes me wrong. I kind of understand now you guys view everything through class structures whereas I'm a pretty staunch individualist. We really don't have common ground for a discussion.

                        This has been interesting.

    • CrispyFern [fae/faer, any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      The left/right distinction is to determine if something is pro or anti capitalism. If you like capitalism or think it can be "reformed" then you are right wing. If you want to see capitalism destroyed, then you are left wing.

      The 2 main classes of people under capitalism are the proletariat (working class, 99%, people who make a living by performing labor and receiving a wage), and the capitalists (bourgeois, ownership class, 1%, people who make a living by owning shit). Landlords are firmly in the capitalist class, which means their entire livelihood is based around capitalism continuing to exist in it's current form. It's nearly impossible for a landlord to be left wing because it goes against their own self interest. I guess class traitors exist, but I doubt the person in question is one since they're trying so hard to downplay being a landlord.

      TL;DR: porky-scared-flipped stalin-gun-1 mao-shining

      • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        ·
        1 year ago

        The left/right distinction is to determine if something is pro or anti capitalism. If you like capitalism or think it can be "reformed" then you are right wing. If you want to see capitalism destroyed, then you are left wing.

        I don't agree.

        From what I see there's a strong effort to redefine terms like left and right to shame people into adjusting their values.

        • silent_water [she/her]
          ·
          1 year ago

          no, that happened ages ago. for most of the twentieth century leftwing meant anticapitalist.

            • combat_brandonism [they/them]
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hey liberal, I see you're running afoul of our "Post"-based posting rules here. If you'd like I can explain them so fewer of your comments are removed.

              Also, just because liberal hegemony brutally suppressed the left in the west for the last ~150 years (including the present day) doesn't mean that liberalism magically became left wing as a result. Liberalism hasn't been left-wing since the mid-19th century. So now it's our turn to ask you, sorry what year is it again?

            • silent_water [she/her]
              ·
              1 year ago

              liberals can insist they're left all they like. it doesn't make it true.

                • silent_water [she/her]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don't think you know what that term means. also, my meaning of left connects me with historical movements while yours infinitely atomizes. which meaning is more useful?

                  • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I don't think you know what that term means.

                    Or is that just want you want me to think!?!

                    also, my meaning of left connects me with historical movements while yours infinitely atomizes. which meaning is more useful?

                    I think trying to grade political ideology on a left/right axis doesn't really make a ton of sense, and really only servers to muddy the waters, and create a sense of consensus that isn't really there.

                    What's the significance of feeling connected to historical movements?

                    • silent_water [she/her]
                      ·
                      1 year ago

                      I get to analyze possible actions based on the works and results others have produced. it makes it more likely that I'll succeed. to atomize oneself away from history is to destroy the possibility of progress.