Like I said at the beginning, the cabal perverted the labels. I’m not going to let the cabal’s squid ink make me give up on the usefulness of the properly defined political spectrum. If you’re trying to communicate with someone who has been confused by the cabal, for example someone who has been tricked into thinking that coercive National Socialism is on the right, then I can see why you’d think it’s easier to avoid using the spectrum’s terms. In those cases, maybe eschew the abstract terms and just go with more direct or literal terminology, like “coercionists” instead of leftists. But for the sake of expedience in communicating over a word-counted medium like twitter like what James Woods was doing, the shorthand “the left” is fine.
Is your mom your example of a leftist who you think doesn’t support coercion? Well, what makes her a Democrat? Does she agree with violently enforced taxation? With the forced welfare state? With government schools? With the retirement planning financial sector being commandeered by the state? With people being mandated to purchase the products sold by the health insurance corporations? If the answers are ‘yes’, then she supports coercion, and I’m sorry to say that she’s immoral at least in those instances. Even Christians have been tricked into supporting coercion and making themselves immoral.
The leftist cabal’s meddling with the labels of the political spectrum was less effective at pitting people against each other than the cabal’s tactic of coercively taxing some people to give politically-privileged handouts to other people. You can see how coercion breeds resentment much more effectively than labels do.
At the extreme end of decentralization is non-coercive individualism, so there’s a lot of overlap in the concepts of your preferred labels with those of the properly defined political spectrum.
You still haven’t really provided an example of a leftist who doesn’t support coercion. And you didn’t answer what makes your mom a Democrat.
I don’t want to be brought together with immoral people who advocate coercion. They should improve themselves and their worldviews for voluntary unity to occur:
Like I said at the beginning, the cabal perverted the labels. I’m not going to let the cabal’s squid ink make me give up on the usefulness of the properly defined political spectrum. If you’re trying to communicate with someone who has been confused by the cabal, for example someone who has been tricked into thinking that coercive National Socialism is on the right, then I can see why you’d think it’s easier to avoid using the spectrum’s terms. In those cases, maybe eschew the abstract terms and just go with more direct or literal terminology, like “coercionists” instead of leftists. But for the sake of expedience in communicating over a word-counted medium like twitter like what James Woods was doing, the shorthand “the left” is fine.
Is your mom your example of a leftist who you think doesn’t support coercion? Well, what makes her a Democrat? Does she agree with violently enforced taxation? With the forced welfare state? With government schools? With the retirement planning financial sector being commandeered by the state? With people being mandated to purchase the products sold by the health insurance corporations? If the answers are ‘yes’, then she supports coercion, and I’m sorry to say that she’s immoral at least in those instances. Even Christians have been tricked into supporting coercion and making themselves immoral.
I'll stick to using "Decentralization" vs "Centralization" of power.
The Cabal didn't pervert the labels. There created these labels to put people against each other.
The leftist cabal’s meddling with the labels of the political spectrum was less effective at pitting people against each other than the cabal’s tactic of coercively taxing some people to give politically-privileged handouts to other people. You can see how coercion breeds resentment much more effectively than labels do.
At the extreme end of decentralization is non-coercive individualism, so there’s a lot of overlap in the concepts of your preferred labels with those of the properly defined political spectrum.
You still haven’t really provided an example of a leftist who doesn’t support coercion. And you didn’t answer what makes your mom a Democrat.
So you go ahead and use Leftist.
I will fight against you to change that language to something that brings people together.
I don’t want to be brought together with immoral people who advocate coercion. They should improve themselves and their worldviews for voluntary unity to occur:
My mom, brother, leftist friends, etc.
I know I know.
You will say that doesn't make them leftist.
I will just say.
This is the reason why the label is shit.
Get rid of it. Change it to something new.
Blockchain is all about the decentralization of authority.
So I use that inside of your latest label. Yes, I am saying something similar.
I am saying the Leftist crap does nothing but pushes people into their corners.
That's how you know a label is crappy. When it gets people to become irrational.
What beliefs does your mom hold that classify her as a Democrat?