One of the most powerful tools of the left is that they define the terms we use to describe things. Then they change the definitions of those terms to twist how people view the world etc etc. Let's stick to simple facts. The rest is fluff.
THEY WANT TO RULE OVER US LIKE KINGS OF OLD. WE WILL HAVE NO POWER, FREEDOM, ETC IF THEY SUCCEED!!!
Actually this resonates ... this is basically neo-feudalism masked as ‘democracy’.
If you control the mind, you control the person.
I believe this is why spiritually or a keen sense of self with respect to a higher power is important. You’re able to look at things in a multi dimensional ... truth is truth.
A highly intellectual being can twist your mind, before you know it you’re doing exactly what it wants you to do.
As the saying goes ... “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”
The German socialists of 1939 supported everything today's left support. Socialism, more government power, nationalizing industries, anti-free speech, no respect for democracy, no respect for national borders, i.e. they wanted a united Europe.
Yet today's sheep have been brainwashed into believing the German socialists were far right.
No, Hitler's values were much closer to Trump's than to Obama's. He fought against globalism, cultural depravity, political incompetence and corruption, marxism, etc. Yet he saw that the capitalists of the time having nothing but disdain for the struggles of the low-level workers gave the marxists a monopoly on the votes of the working class. Nationalist capitalism should not lead to the enslavement of the workers. Hence the "socialist" aspect.
user name check out.
because there is no room in it for the individual. it plays off the left/right paradigm. and basically all the descriptions are the same thing, meet the new boss same as the old boss.
This Overton Window just HAD to include racism on the right-wing side of things, never mind that racism is a product of the left-wing D party, but it has only one notation of 'scientific racism' - whatever that is - in the 1700 to 1850 time period, which is the same time frame in which the D party was started and supported slavery.
The 'current' crop of leftists, in whatever age, tend to think they're smarter than everyone else; hence, they also think they've found the foolproof way of making it work better than all their predecessors.
False dichotomy. Those are all bullshit choices to force us to choose the “lesser” evil in our opinion. That is why I don’t identify as “right,” only that the other side would classify me as right. Right and left mean different things to everyone it seems, rendering it completely meaningless at this point, much the same as the overused term “racism.”
While that is the historical origin of the dichotomy, we don’t have a French Revolutionary Parliament. It seems every little thing now is “right” or “left.” Even getting a vaccine or wearing a mask are no politicized and box people into categories. It’s ridiculous and I think it further divides us into classes. There is power in language, and continuing with the left right verbiage distracts from what we really mean and stand for. To “the left,” everything right is racist, xenophobic, and ultra-religious Christian, but to someone that considers themselves on the right, they are not necessarily any of those things. The terms are too charged at this point and end conversations before they can begin.
We need to take back the narrative and reframe it as pro-liberty and anti-liberty. One side wants to regulate, tax, and ban everything, and the other wants people to make decisions that are best for them.
That's the thing that people don't seem to understand. Conservatives want to draw a line in the sand and say: "This far, and no further." When they're in power, they can usually pull that off. Leftists just keep pulling shit further and further into crazy town. When they're in power, they drag the whole SOB that way.
What is NOT happening is that we're not moving any further to the right, EVER.
The only thing keeping us from getting dragged all the way leftward into hell is the few conservatives that actually dig their heels in (and the others that don't get enough in bribes) or the Leftists that don't get enough in bribes to push harder than they do.
What even IS Liberalism anymore? The Dem party has been so perverted in my mind I can only associate them with scum of the Earth refuse and Satanists anymore.
Many problems with this but here's one: modern left isn't far left enough on this scale. It goes even further than communism and alphabet soup stuff, it's become full on authoritarian, dystopian present.
technically, what is meant here is not just king, but absolutist hereditary kingship.
A head of state, whether President or King is not very important. In Europe, there was a time when kingship was a matter of consent of the tribe, a more or less chosen position. The same with dukes: head of armies.
The issue becomes what dictates laws?
e.g. The Netherlands started out in 1815 as an absolutist monarchy. That did not sit well, so, a parliamentary system was devised. However, the King still had tremendous influence on domestic issues since he governed international affairs. Via the backdoor, all kinds of rules were imposed that were detrimental to the parliamentary system.
Currently, members of the States General (Staten-Generaal, comparable the House and Senate) can only be seated when swearing allegiance to the King and the Constitution. However, the Constitution contains an important loophole: International treaties serve as part of the Constitution, and Judges are prohibited from considering laws conformation to the Constitution.
Now it becomes important, how these international treaties are being brought about and WHO is influencing that process. Bilderberg? When you mention this lot, you also mention WEF, UN, IMF, EU, ECB, etc.
The King is member of Bilderberg, totally controlled.
If self government is to be promoted, it requires a receding and decentralisation of power, not the other way around.
In 1581, the Dutch declared their independence from the King of Spain (and Holy Roman Empire) However, their first instinct then was to seek a new protector in the form of a king. They offered the crown to several nobles. This failed. So, by happenstance, they established a republic. However, it became a hybrid, where a noble house of Orange was not a king but a stadhouder, or vicar. Basically, the commander in chief if and when that sat well with the States - General.
Needless to say, faction began to emerge. One faction favored the Republic in pure form, others, the Oranges, favored the establishment of a heridatary kingdom. That is why, it took 80 years to stabilize the revolution. Meanwhile, the scheming Orangist faction killed some very patriotic people, like the De Witt brothers, Van Oldenbarneveldt, and sent our greatest Admiral to his death.
This opened up the country to an attack from three sides in 1672 and broke the camels back.
That is why allegiance to the Constitution is a peculiar thing, as it is allegiance to an idea and a way of life and self government and independence, instead of allegiance to a person, which subordinates every one else to that person holding that allegiance.
Given Xuo Xiden's EO 's, on the back of decades of Federal centralization (power grab) at the expense of States Rights and Reserved Rights by the People (amendment X), it is easy to see this aims at establishing a system where allegiance to the Constitution amounts to allegiance to a person, or group of persons.
There is a thin red line, that should not be crossed, lest one loses their independence, their self governance, their freedom.
Bringing in millions of people who have not even the slightest impulse to free them selves, or to understand what it means to self govern, added to a dumbed down populace, decadent and dependent (using a microven to dry the cat) is a typical Chinese strategy to change the fabric of a society. (See Manchuria), if you can't get them out, breed them out.
Neither a King nor president will safe decay, but a people standing up and acting on their own behalf.
I don't, I reject the left/right dichotomy.
One of the most powerful tools of the left is that they define the terms we use to describe things. Then they change the definitions of those terms to twist how people view the world etc etc. Let's stick to simple facts. The rest is fluff.
THEY WANT TO RULE OVER US LIKE KINGS OF OLD. WE WILL HAVE NO POWER, FREEDOM, ETC IF THEY SUCCEED!!!
u/#ridetofreedom
Actually this resonates ... this is basically neo-feudalism masked as ‘democracy’.
If you control the mind, you control the person.
I believe this is why spiritually or a keen sense of self with respect to a higher power is important. You’re able to look at things in a multi dimensional ... truth is truth.
A highly intellectual being can twist your mind, before you know it you’re doing exactly what it wants you to do.
As the saying goes ... “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”
"The man who controls his own mind is free and reaps the rewards of liberty"
Correct.
The German socialists of 1939 supported everything today's left support. Socialism, more government power, nationalizing industries, anti-free speech, no respect for democracy, no respect for national borders, i.e. they wanted a united Europe.
Yet today's sheep have been brainwashed into believing the German socialists were far right.
No, Hitler's values were much closer to Trump's than to Obama's. He fought against globalism, cultural depravity, political incompetence and corruption, marxism, etc. Yet he saw that the capitalists of the time having nothing but disdain for the struggles of the low-level workers gave the marxists a monopoly on the votes of the working class. Nationalist capitalism should not lead to the enslavement of the workers. Hence the "socialist" aspect.
oooh - nice!
Me too.
Exactly. I didn't even take 2 seconds to look at the chart.
Nowhere because this is bullshit
Once again trying to ascribe racism to the right, for one.
The last time Democrats were this angry at Republicans was when Republicans freed the Democrats' slaves.
user name check out. because there is no room in it for the individual. it plays off the left/right paradigm. and basically all the descriptions are the same thing, meet the new boss same as the old boss.
I am an American!!
Judeo-Christian Constitutional Republic...in other words an American Patriot.
This Overton Window just HAD to include racism on the right-wing side of things, never mind that racism is a product of the left-wing D party, but it has only one notation of 'scientific racism' - whatever that is - in the 1700 to 1850 time period, which is the same time frame in which the D party was started and supported slavery.
I don't fall anywhere into this stupid chart.
"However the post does its job of highlighting that the American right is just the American left on a generational delay."
Well, at least according to the labels they applied. Your premise is only as good as their labels, and I question the validity of their labels.
Leftism: People with stupid ideas. Rightism: People with common sense.
I'm sort of being facetious, but not entirely. ?
The 'current' crop of leftists, in whatever age, tend to think they're smarter than everyone else; hence, they also think they've found the foolproof way of making it work better than all their predecessors.
I fall in the " fuck your labels" category
I'm 1 millimeter left of far right because I look at naked women on the internet sometimes.
False dichotomy. Those are all bullshit choices to force us to choose the “lesser” evil in our opinion. That is why I don’t identify as “right,” only that the other side would classify me as right. Right and left mean different things to everyone it seems, rendering it completely meaningless at this point, much the same as the overused term “racism.”
Also, why is this nonsense stickied?
While that is the historical origin of the dichotomy, we don’t have a French Revolutionary Parliament. It seems every little thing now is “right” or “left.” Even getting a vaccine or wearing a mask are no politicized and box people into categories. It’s ridiculous and I think it further divides us into classes. There is power in language, and continuing with the left right verbiage distracts from what we really mean and stand for. To “the left,” everything right is racist, xenophobic, and ultra-religious Christian, but to someone that considers themselves on the right, they are not necessarily any of those things. The terms are too charged at this point and end conversations before they can begin.
We need to take back the narrative and reframe it as pro-liberty and anti-liberty. One side wants to regulate, tax, and ban everything, and the other wants people to make decisions that are best for them.
That's the thing that people don't seem to understand. Conservatives want to draw a line in the sand and say: "This far, and no further." When they're in power, they can usually pull that off. Leftists just keep pulling shit further and further into crazy town. When they're in power, they drag the whole SOB that way.
What is NOT happening is that we're not moving any further to the right, EVER.
The only thing keeping us from getting dragged all the way leftward into hell is the few conservatives that actually dig their heels in (and the others that don't get enough in bribes) or the Leftists that don't get enough in bribes to push harder than they do.
I don't fit any of those catagories.
God never changes...
Probably around 1699.
What even IS Liberalism anymore? The Dem party has been so perverted in my mind I can only associate them with scum of the Earth refuse and Satanists anymore.
Many problems with this but here's one: modern left isn't far left enough on this scale. It goes even further than communism and alphabet soup stuff, it's become full on authoritarian, dystopian present.
I have discovered a way to transcend this trap of thinking in terms of left or right. I have stepped off of the political spectrum to higher places.
National Republic Populist limited governmentalist
This is silly.
I don't fit in anywhere... I'm just plain 'ol MAGA!
"Scientific racism"
It's all nonsense. Make your own boxes.
Cosmopolitan-Conservative.... like globalism without the dickheads.
Didn't Time Magazine call Trump the first cosmopolitan back in the 80's??
Pigeon Holes are for Pigeons.
Philosophical Anarcho-capitalist. Pragmatic Constitutionalist.
technically, what is meant here is not just king, but absolutist hereditary kingship.
A head of state, whether President or King is not very important. In Europe, there was a time when kingship was a matter of consent of the tribe, a more or less chosen position. The same with dukes: head of armies.
The issue becomes what dictates laws?
e.g. The Netherlands started out in 1815 as an absolutist monarchy. That did not sit well, so, a parliamentary system was devised. However, the King still had tremendous influence on domestic issues since he governed international affairs. Via the backdoor, all kinds of rules were imposed that were detrimental to the parliamentary system.
Currently, members of the States General (Staten-Generaal, comparable the House and Senate) can only be seated when swearing allegiance to the King and the Constitution. However, the Constitution contains an important loophole: International treaties serve as part of the Constitution, and Judges are prohibited from considering laws conformation to the Constitution.
Now it becomes important, how these international treaties are being brought about and WHO is influencing that process. Bilderberg? When you mention this lot, you also mention WEF, UN, IMF, EU, ECB, etc.
The King is member of Bilderberg, totally controlled.
If self government is to be promoted, it requires a receding and decentralisation of power, not the other way around.
In 1581, the Dutch declared their independence from the King of Spain (and Holy Roman Empire) However, their first instinct then was to seek a new protector in the form of a king. They offered the crown to several nobles. This failed. So, by happenstance, they established a republic. However, it became a hybrid, where a noble house of Orange was not a king but a stadhouder, or vicar. Basically, the commander in chief if and when that sat well with the States - General.
Needless to say, faction began to emerge. One faction favored the Republic in pure form, others, the Oranges, favored the establishment of a heridatary kingdom. That is why, it took 80 years to stabilize the revolution. Meanwhile, the scheming Orangist faction killed some very patriotic people, like the De Witt brothers, Van Oldenbarneveldt, and sent our greatest Admiral to his death.
This opened up the country to an attack from three sides in 1672 and broke the camels back.
That is why allegiance to the Constitution is a peculiar thing, as it is allegiance to an idea and a way of life and self government and independence, instead of allegiance to a person, which subordinates every one else to that person holding that allegiance.
Given Xuo Xiden's EO 's, on the back of decades of Federal centralization (power grab) at the expense of States Rights and Reserved Rights by the People (amendment X), it is easy to see this aims at establishing a system where allegiance to the Constitution amounts to allegiance to a person, or group of persons.
There is a thin red line, that should not be crossed, lest one loses their independence, their self governance, their freedom.
Bringing in millions of people who have not even the slightest impulse to free them selves, or to understand what it means to self govern, added to a dumbed down populace, decadent and dependent (using a microven to dry the cat) is a typical Chinese strategy to change the fabric of a society. (See Manchuria), if you can't get them out, breed them out.
Neither a King nor president will safe decay, but a people standing up and acting on their own behalf.
It seems, that process is well underway.