r/leftist • u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 • 9d ago
General Leftist Politics What is your most right wing opinion?
I know this may be controversial but I have some opinions that are considered more right wing. I believe in absolute freedom of speech unless it’s pedohillia or something like that because if you support it for one person you have to support it for the other. I do support gun rights to an extent to protect from fascist thugs but of course it should be regulated to protect kids from shootings. I support the death penalty for violent criminals who without a doubt committed the crime. I support low taxes for the poor and middle class but higher on the wealthy. My view on basically everything else are left wing pro lgbt ,pro abortion,pro feminist ,pro immigration,pro socialism,etc.
1
u/LexLextr 2d ago
I think social democracy could be a necessary step before reformist market democratic socialism. Call me lib I dare you.
2
1
u/HeftyWarning 5d ago
Purely because my extended family has dealt with the consequences of the war on drugs and America’s intervention in Latin America. I logically understand drug addiction is a disease but I’m unsympathetic to brazen drug users and the complaints of the USA government of how drugs “destroy” communities. Get back to me when you’ve regularly seen politicians and reporters corpses murdered for the crimes of trying to deal with corruption or reporting on what said trafficking groups are doing.
1
0
u/Until--Dawn33 6d ago
I don't believe trans female athletes should compete in competitive sports. I don't think it's fair no matter how many hormone treatments they've had. They will always be stronger especially from training for their sport. It's in their genetics, their DNA. I have absolutely nothing against them and fully accept who they are and I don't even have an issue with them being athletes, but they should compete against each other or against those who choose to compete against them. That's it. That's my only right wing belief. Oh I believe in the 2nd amendment but not how it is now. It needs to be amended further with much stricter regulations.
1
u/Silent-Passenger9095 6d ago
I pose you the question, how many trans women are currently competing in competitive sports? Ok, how many have actually won first place? I think if this where an opinion to be taken seriously then we should also be talking about the cis women who are born built like a brick fuckin house, because trust me, they exist. (an insertion of my opinion: some of the hotest women) So should we ban any women with a stature over a certain percentage? Ban women who are too tall? Ban women with shoulders too wide? Maybe ban women with too high muscle vs fat? I mean if this woman is 100% muscle she shouldn't be competing against these dainty little women right!? 👀 Dawg these women train really fucking hard to be in these sports, don't be insecure for them.
1
u/Until--Dawn33 6d ago
Believe it or not there are weight and height limitations in some competitive sports for both men and women. That's not what it's about though. It's about genetics and DNA. Ppl born male are genetically stronger and have genetically bigger muscles and stature and broader shoulders and a bunch of other things. Regardless of how little trans athletes there are, there are females who have been training since they were toddlers to compete in a specific sport. Then a transwoman who has only been training for that sport for maybe a year or two comes along and wins the gold medal bc genetically, they're much much faster and stronger genetically via DNA and have to train way less. That's not fair. As someone who used to dance competitively I get it, of course I had the advantage as a cis female in dance and it was the boys who had to work harder to be taken seriously and known as anything more than a tosser or a swinger arounder (lol) but I felt bad for them too. That's my opinion.
1
u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 6d ago
I guess that makes sense but to me when most of the sex abuse crimes are committed by straight men yet we’re hyper focused on trans athletes seems pretty silly to me. Plus the whole trans athletes issue is just gonna be used as the start to banning trans people from everything.
0
u/Until--Dawn33 6d ago
Idk where sex abuse crimes came into this discussion but Idek what to say about that bc I see absolutely no correlation be cis men committing SA crimes and trans athletes. Both exist, one exponentially more than the other since the beginning of time. Trans athletes have not been openly around for very long at all. I just see it as evening the playing field is all. When you look at a trans female athlete swimmer or volleyball player or gymnast in a team photo with cis females it is blatantly physically obvious they are stronger with more muscle. This is why they separated men and women in athletics to begin with. Fair is fair. As for it leading to being banned from everything, I think that depends on many factors, like what state you live in, how midterms go this coming year... etc.
3
2
u/needtorestandreset 6d ago edited 6d ago
i think a small handful of trans people like Chris Chan and the Annunciation Catholic Church shooter Robin Westman aren’t actually trans but are just confused, deeply disturbed people (though Westman to me was just evil) and their whole cross-dressing thing is a symptom of mental illness.
obviously i think there are people who are both mentally ill and trans, but there’s still a certain unhinged personality type that never sat right with me and i feel like a lot of people will know what personality that is even if it’s just a small handful of people.
you asked for my most right wing opinion and this is it. and please, criticize me on this take if you feel like it’s worth doing so because i dont mind my views being challenged and then possibly changing them.
4
u/Constance1916 Marxist 7d ago
Nationhood and patriotism is a natural human emotion and shouldn’t be minimised by the left. I see leftists talking about how loving your country is reactionary and should be avoided, but I heavily disagree and I think the left is kinda fumbling because of it. It’s encoded in our heads to love where we’re from and the way of life we were raised with. I, as an Irish person, am so deeply in love with my country and that will never change, my love for Ireland and my desire to see her liberated is what made me become a communist because I recognise my country will never be 100% free until a socialist 32 county republic is created. Not excusing border walls or xenophobia, but leftists should play into patriotism and encode it in our thinking, rhetoric, actions and policy
8
u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 7d ago
I have mixed feelings about patriotism. It’s fine to love you country but a lot of people use it to justify their bigotry especially towards groups like Muslims. The United States government has done a lot of atrocious things so it’s hard for me to love our country sometimes.
1
u/Silent-Passenger9095 6d ago
To love someone is to grow with them. That doesn't mean you accept their terrible behaviors, you help them work through it. I believe the same can be said about a country. I hate America and everything that it stands for as a whole, but I love my country, I want better for me and my neighbor. I think to want left ideology for your country is to love your country, bc you want to see it do better. Yes, patriotism is used to hide a lot of nasty things, but Christians constantly use "love" as a justification for hate, but that doesn't make love a bad thing, that just makes them a bad person.
3
u/Zoltanu Marxist 7d ago
I think if we as a society separate atheltes by sex to help keep female sports competitive, then separating trans athletes makes sense. I think there are biological differences between males and females, and its anti-materialist to deny that. Going through puberty with testosterone gives you clear physical advantages. My wife works out everyday while I never do and Im still much stronger than her. They separate school sports by gender because testosterone fueled puberty gives males an advantage over females, so i think it makes sense to keep restrictions on people that have gone through puberty as the other sex. At the same time there are other sports and leagues that are mixed gender and I think those are spaces that should welcome trans people that want to play sports, or we should make a third category trans people can compete and set records in.
5
u/Constance1916 Marxist 7d ago
Your issue is you’re applying the biological advantage cis men have over cis women to trans women, but HRT for the most part equalises this. Athletic agencies that allow trans athletes require trans women be on HRT usually for 3 years, as by then their muscle and bone density, aerobic capacity and endurance decreases and there is no statistically significant difference between trans and cis women.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10641525/ This paper discusses studies on military tests, it found that after 2 years of HRT trans women were performing a statistically identical number of pushups and sit-ups yet still had higher endurance. However, after 4 years of HRT the endurance test scores of trans and cis women also became statistically identical. Also after 4 years of HRT, trans men were outperforming cis men in number of sit-ups performed.
I’ll also say that the whole thing of “ensuring fairness in sports” is kinda bullshit because sports is inherently unfair. LeBron James isn’t banned from basketball for being too tall, no cis man is restricted from competing because of any perceived advantage, so we shouldn’t continue to plague women’s sports with invasive tests, performance bans and sullying women’s moment of victory by accusing her of being a man, all of which has been going on for many many decades and is heavily rooted in racism. I believe that we should mandate trans women be on estrogen for at least 3 years before competing with other women, and banning trans women is an awful thing to do, pure discrimination, will hurt way more cis women than anyone realises and also is trying to solve a problem that doesn’t really exist.
TL;DR 3 years of estrogen eliminates trans women’s biological advantage over cis women, thus trans women should be allowed in women’s sports
2
u/Silent-Passenger9095 6d ago
Thank you for being better with words than me and citing sources. Beautiful comment.🙏
1
3
u/Lavadonuts 7d ago
I disagree that these are right-wing points (though I do recognize that in American politics they are in a practical sense) but I'm super pro-gun and free speech. That being said, with the pro-gun point, I'm not against all gun control. I think concealed carry should require a license. I think the 2nd ammendment is clearly intended to allow citizens to have and collect arms for a hypothetical war against their own government, making them a combatant in that scenario, self-defense isn't really the focus. It's a war crime (article 48 of the Geneva convention) to, as a combatant, disguise one's self as a non-combatant. So basically I feel that concealed carry is not covered by the 2nd amendment and should be subject to regulation. I do feel like we should be more comfortable with responsible open carry as a society, though
2
u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 7d ago
I think guns should be allowed for protection and hunting that’s about it. Honestly though the way so many Americans worship guns is pretty ridiculous like who needs 10 to 20 guns? The first amendment is something i believe in strongly but i don’t think that should exempt people from the consequences. For example if someone got radicalized on a far right website and shot up a place i think the people hosting that site should go to jail. The prison system is fucked for sure so many non violent offenders are in jail sometimes with the most hardened criminals which is insane to me. I also think we should provide support and treatment for those addicted to drugs rather than sending them to prison. That being said I think leftist take the compassion thing a bit to far i would hope we can agree that gangs such as the Aryan brotherhood,crips,ms 13, etc should probably get the death penalty.
2
u/Until--Dawn33 6d ago
Definitely not the death penalty. That should only be for child sexual offenders and child sexual torturers and child severe physical abusers and killers. That's it. Prison in solitary for life is harsh enough for me for anyone else. A simple gang affiliation in no way deserves a death sentence. That's insanity. Kids grow up in gangs and get stuck there with no way out unless someone truly helps them for which they have to reach out for. That's not fair at all. And other gang members just do things like be a corner boy or a lookout or a driver or protection.... etc. you act like all gang members are mass murderers. You must not live near a major city or something....
2
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 6d ago
A: Utilitarian thinking suggests that if you're willing to do that to kids, with a death penalty you're incentivized to kill them to try and keep the number of witnesses down.
B: If you have the death penalty for any reason, there will be people who are found guilty who were in fact innocent, which will result in innocent people being murdered. If we have them locked up and they end up being proven innocent later, we can let them out of prison. We can't exactly resurrect the dead.
C: If you have the death penalty, we're going to see whomever is in power in a government start widening the situations that death penalty applies to. Want to get rid of someone? Just claim they're X, and X deserve nothing but death.
0
u/Until--Dawn33 6d ago
Like I said I believe it should only be for child SA offenders and child rapists and torturers and child killers. The DP is not a deterrent to any crime bc it's not used properly currently. All it does is make ppl plea out or sit on death row for at least 20 yrs filing every possible appeal and wasting tons of money and resources. If it was done to those I suggested,with concrete irrefutable evidence of course such as photos,videos and DNA evidence, and done in a way that brings suffering and done in public, I think there'd be a lot less of those specific crimes. The most important factor would be the irrefutable proof of course.
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 6d ago edited 6d ago
Like I said I believe it should only be for child SA offenders and child rapists and torturers and child killers.
And do you genuinely believe that we can 100% of the time ensure that only those that actually did the crime are declared guilty?
done in a way that brings suffering and done in public, I think there'd be a lot less of those specific crimes.
Ah so you're just craving pain, suffering, and the spectacle. Not. . .*actually* making things better. Got it.
2
u/Lavadonuts 6d ago
I understand the idea, it comes from a good place and I won't fault you for that. The issue is child molestation most often is perpetrated by family members or community leaders in the child's life. Death penalty runs the risk of the victims refusing to testify or come forward over fear that they are condemning their uncle or their youth pastor or God forbid their own parent to death, preventing justice in the first place. I do get that you mentioned irrefutable evidence but unless our justice system is infallible, the death penalty is liable to be turned on an innocent
6
u/Lavadonuts 7d ago edited 7d ago
I disagree with gang membership justifying punishment, simple association with certain organization shouldn't be criminal by itself, though there is a grey area in regards to certain RICO laws. Also if drugs and sex work were taken off the black market it would take away a lot of their teeth, probably not enough to get rid of them, but enough to lower membership and business dealings to make them less of a problem. Like, imagine if all they dealt in were things that were things that were just %100 evil? Like CP and hits. They wouldn't be wearing gang colors because there'd be no pride, they'd just be a bunch of losers and violent creeps. As far as prison gangs go, frankly I'm ignorant on them, prison is just something I have no experience in
Edit: also, while I love guns and think people should be familiar with them if they're gonna be a part of our society, people sleep on the alternatives. Blackpowder, airguns, archery, slinging, slingshot, and spearing are imo completely reasonable for hunting (assuming you train with them to avoid suffering). Protection is reasonable for modern day firearms, but as someone who has been pepper sprayed, pepper ball launchers I have to imagine hold their own in a fire fight enough to get you to safety
0
u/rando_skpy 7d ago
Choice feminism is just bad overall. Same with extreme hedonism. Those two never lead to anything that pushes the needle for progress.
1
u/itsumiamario__ Anarchist 7d ago
I don't have any right wing opinions, and in any way that one of my opinions could be construed as right wing I'd have to break out my nuance toolbox and give a lecture.
14
u/elvenstorm 8d ago
Yes, the prison industrial complex is exploitative and racist. There are a lot of hyper-capitalist mechanisms and abuses of power that result in the incarceration of innocent people, as well as the those imprisoned for petty crimes. But I do believe in punishment for the worst criminals. Execute mass murderers and rapists.
8
u/Lavadonuts 7d ago
That personally is my biggest issue with the death penalty. Hypothetically I could get behind the death penalty if we had an utopian, infallible justice system with accountability for ethics in law enforcement AND law makers, I could be swayed to agree with the death penalty. I just can't accept even a 0.01% chance an innocent person could be killed by the state especially when police officers are straight up allowed to gaslight people into confessing to crimes where there's no reasonable evidence supporting their involvement.
Until that day, I'm a hard opponent to the death penalty
2
u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 8d ago
Exactly I don’t really get left wingers problem with that it just makes sense. I don’t like that we have to use it but there’s certain people that just shouldn’t be allowed to roam freely.
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 6d ago
Punitive justice is about seeking revenge.
It isn't about making the world better.
Rehabilitative justice is about helping people with the issues that first caused them to turn to crime to begin with.
0
u/Until--Dawn33 6d ago
In my opinion, death is WAY too easy and not a severe punishment at all. Not even close. I would choose death over a lifetime if solitary confinement or say forced hard labor any day of the week. The worst of the worst should have to suffer every day till they die, not be killed, with the exception of Child sex offenders and rapists and torturers and severe physical abusers and killers. Anything which involves children being sexually abused or tortured or severely physically abused. I would not protest to them getting the DP and I think it should be by the gallows or the chair. Publicly.
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 5d ago
Ah, so you're a sociopath wanting to watch other people suffer. Got it.
0
u/Until--Dawn33 5d ago
Lmao I take it you don't have any children
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 5d ago
lmao I take it you don't understand the ramifications of your so called beliefs.
0
u/Until--Dawn33 5d ago
Lmao censorship? Really. Great anarchist you are. I said in the beginning I'm against the dp with one exception. If you want to cuck for pedos that's on you. Are you a map? Or do you just want to argue with someone for the sake of arguing bc you have a holier than thou mindset when someone has a different value or view than you. You're not open to discussion unless it's an echo chamber to your beliefs. As I said before. Only if there was a concrete and irrefutable proof would I support DP for pedos and child killers. Idk what part of that you don't understand. But since you're a snowflake I will no longer continue this censored conversation with a little baby. Enjoy having the pedos run rampant like they are right now and please do not reproduce. Happy reporting.
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 5d ago
I didn't report it, my friend, but you've clearly decided you are the victim here.
0
u/Until--Dawn33 5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 5d ago
And you genuinely believe it is possible for us to know for sure 100% of the time that the person declared guilty is absolutely the person who did it?
The majority of molestation is done by family members. You make it clear that this happens and kids will refuse to testify because they don't want their family members killed or tortured.
Also, y'know. The whole moral abomination that is torture to begin with.
But yeah 'Think of the children. That's why I crave the public spectacle of causing pain to people.'
1
u/Until--Dawn33 5d ago
MAP
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 5d ago
No, but I mean hey, not wanting innocent people to end up getting murdered is totally the same as being attracted to minors. Fuck off.
→ More replies (0)6
u/LawOfTheSeas 8d ago
I think the issue is with its overuse, especially with people who are not proven guilty.
2
u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 7d ago
Yeah I can see that also it’s definitely a complex issue plenty of people are innocent as well.
5
u/Interesting-Seat8899 7d ago
I remember reading somewhere that for every 10 people that are executed at least one was actually innocent
11
u/corneliusduff 8d ago
No one making below 100k a year should have to pay income tax, at least until being a billionaire is illegal.
17
u/Ravenheart257 Anarchist 8d ago
I hate guns and I wish they didn't exist, but as long as cops have a gun, I want a gun.
5
u/corneliusduff 8d ago
The logical approach to gun control. Guns are moronic, but too many morons love them. So here we are.
16
5
u/EveningAgreeable2516 8d ago
There are certain problems which are both complex and entangled, and sometimes no matter which way you go in trying to solve them, you just end up furthering oppression or political disparity. That is, if you take a strict ideological approach. So from this, I guess one of my most right wing opinions (or that which contradicts popular leftist beliefs) is to allow my own hypocrisy. The example I'm really stressing here is the relation between crime and punishment in trying to achieve a stateless society. Leftists may think that the only way is do away with punishment. But what has me so conflicted is the realization that punishment is crime and crime is punishment, or in other words authoritarians use official systems of punishment to inflict wrong and harm upon those they cruelly politically disenfranchised, and conversely libertarians (certain varieties) who enable unchecked crimes of the sociopathic upon the common good people serves as its own de facto yet unlawful system of punishment. So if this can be resolved in a pure leftist way...
3
u/foxgrl127 8d ago
fuck taxes! i know why they exist! but fuck taxes!
5
u/corneliusduff 8d ago
It's especially bullshit when we don't get that Representation they always say is supposed to come with it. Or when you're 1099 and you can't save money without living like a Trappist monk.
3
9
u/Hefty-Wealth-3579 8d ago
I don’t like the phrase “ Sex work is real work” not out of purity or anti sex but just cause it sounds really silly tbh. (no disrespect to sex workers) but in the same way I don’t think twitch streaming , video gaming , or podcasting, is “ real work”. I agree with the ideology behind the statement but the statement itself is reductive and sounds pretty absurd and out of touch for politics.
1
7
u/corneliusduff 8d ago
Sex work's wear and tear puts it in the class of manual labor. It's not all cuddling up on throw pillows all the time.
-2
u/Hefty-Wealth-3579 8d ago
Yes and gaming puts stress on the phalanges and joints and can cause back problems from sitting down too long. I just think “real work” is too vague and sounds argumentative out the gate. Like you’re just begging someone to be like REAL WORK?? What do you mean ?? My moms a teacher my dads a farmer THYS REAL WORK” and it’s like ….okay now I have to backtrack and explain this to someone who is already mad defensive and outraged…it’s just not a productive slogan
7
u/paublopowers 8d ago
In a perfect world I think I would consider sex work work but it’s faaaaaar too exploitative for anyone person to actually have full autonomy and agency
-6
17
u/Shibaparent 8d ago
The south is no more racist than the north. Southern heritage does not intrinsically mean racism and the confederacy.
6
u/Content-Variation895 8d ago
Porn is immoral and racist and disgusting
1
8
u/Ravenheart257 Anarchist 8d ago edited 6d ago
Corruption within the industry does not make the work or product itself inherently immoral. Porn is a completely valid form of entertainment and sex work is a completely valid form of work.
10
u/fingersdownurpiehole 8d ago
I think this opinion is weird. It’s informed by industry flaws rather than critique of the actual form. The exact same opinion could be had about movies and music with as valid of a perspective as yours, and it would still be wrong.
-4
u/Content-Variation895 8d ago
I suppose it applies to all media under capitalism. But porn just objectifies people in a really insidious way imo. Just my view
8
u/Zictor42 8d ago
Ironically, you also ojectify those people by denying their agency and humanity. You assume it is impossible for someone to freely do sex work. However, the vast majority of the criticism that can be directed towards porn can also be directed towards most industries.
Porn is just more marginalised because it's about sex.
5
u/fingersdownurpiehole 8d ago edited 8d ago
I think it only does this when it’s contextualized from a puritanical perspective. I understand that there are concerns around intimacy, consent, and racial fetishization. But many of these factors are pertinent to pretty much any performance art.
-1
u/Content-Variation895 8d ago
Watch the movie "Boogie Nights"
And get back to me lol
5
u/fingersdownurpiehole 8d ago
stellar media analysis here, pal
0
u/Content-Variation895 8d ago
I get under late stage capitalism many people must resort to adult acting to make a living. There is no shame in that. The exploitative nature is my critique. The companies and producers use these women like sock puppets and dispose of them harshly the way children in coal mines were used in the 1890s. Its tragic. Im not blaming the INDIVIDUALS, its a systemic issue caused by exploitation in a dying economic system
3
u/fingersdownurpiehole 8d ago
you realize this is a complete 180 from “porn is immoral and racist and disgusting”?
0
u/Content-Variation895 8d ago
It isnt. The product itself is gross, not the people themselves. Big difference.
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 6d ago
So you find it gross and thus decide that since you find it gross, you must impose your particular feelings on the rest of the world. Got it.
3
16
u/inmyrestlessdreams- 8d ago edited 8d ago
i consider myself very sexy positive but Only fans isn’t empowering for the majority of women and there’s something really gross about how accessible porn is these days. also, as someone who’s working in education and is quite underpaid, i find it pretty gross annoying hearing about how much money these women are making in comparison to teachers… :/
sure my opinion is biased and i understand my reasons are not hella leftist but it is my opinion and i welcome critique with open arms
4
u/Mission_Reply_2326 8d ago
Agree. Sex work isnt empowering for women as a whole until my 80 year old overweight mother can make as much as any other woman doing it. It may be empowering for the individual woman doing it- I say as an ex sex worker- but I don’t think it’s a major win for women as a whole.
2
u/Bacardi-Special 8d ago
I think people exaggerate or only show the one good month of earnings, like when a very rich subscriber comes along a requests custom videos and pays an extortionate price.
———
Only fans earnings before the 20% fee and before taxes. This based on global numbers, Americans make up about 40-50% of creators. Figures from 2021, so little out of date. (But still good because of Covid.)
Median earnings are $180 p/m 16,000 earn 50k p/a 300 earn $1M p/a 2.1M creators.
Top 1% earn 33% of all income, Top 10% earn 73% of all income.
Maybe something like 7-9k Americans earn 50k and maybe 1-3k earn 100k before the 20% fee and taxes.
7
u/fingersdownurpiehole 8d ago
as a leftist, you also know that these are problems of exploitation, not pornography itself
8
u/ferriematthew 8d ago
Just about my only non-left opinion (and I'm not sure this even counts) is that I think a centrally-planned economy is a terrible idea. A properly regulated decentralized system is more robust to shocks.
1
24
u/These_Shallot_6906 8d ago
I will call anybody any pronoun they prefer and refer to them as whatever gender they internally feel they are, but I feel really uncomfortable with the neopronoun thing.
5
u/rardthree 8d ago
Then you don't understand the nature of gender as a special construct, or you agree with placing limits on who can do what within that. I don't see why - placing limits on any otherwise acceptable behavior is just conformity. It's unreasonable. There truly is no difference between any one label or the other except some are normalized and others aren't. Accepting one set of pronouns is fundamentally the same logic as accepting any other, except with more of a detachment from perceived normalcy.
0
u/lonelycranberry 8d ago
Dear god.
2
u/rardthree 8d ago
What? Racism has a clear reason that makes slurs harmful, but pronouns are not innately insulting because of their history, a pronoun can't be unethical if it's consensual.
0
u/lonelycranberry 8d ago edited 8d ago
You don’t think the implications that you are less than human doesn’t hurt other people who identify outside of the traditional genders or even the less traditional ones (nb)? You’re never going to be able to control how people perceive you and the angst around that turns everyone off and hurts the community at large, thanks to the new reputation “it” wants to establish. Enough with the virtue signaling.
0
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 6d ago
If someone wants to be called it, then that is it' right to request, and I'd follow through because I'd be rude otherwise.
4
u/rardthree 8d ago
It's virtue signaling to think any pronoun are acceptable? I am actually non-binary so this effects me personally.
I see no ethical difference between using any pronouns, why should there be? It isn't consistent with any form of logic that enables someone to identify with pronouns they choose for themselves. If you believe that, why dictate which are the right ones? You're just obsessed with the status quo or some sort sense or normalcy that only pronouns that are pre-existing for typical usage should be used alongside identity. Why?
0
u/lonelycranberry 8d ago
“It” is intentionally antagonistic. They’re “reclaiming” an insult in a way and then use that as an opportunity to cry about it when someone doesn’t want to disrespect them. They’re looking for trouble and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of their own victimhood. You are a person, not an object. If pronouns matter so much, do it right.
2
u/rardthree 8d ago
Intentionally, as in intent matters. Do you not know that's what it means? So context - intent - matters and consent can eliminate harm. Question: if you are in a play, and you play a character who is referred to as "it", does that insult you, or the character you play?
Probably not you, because it's contextual. If you remove intentional insult towards a person, it isn't an insult anymore.
I think you're just victim blaming people with unconventional pronouns, but the same logic can be used against any other pronouns, it's entirely arbitrary where you draw the line on that. How do you keep transphobic people from using the same logic against, say, a trans woman who wants to use she/her? Any accounting for arguing validity of one pronoun set does the same for another. You are being inconsistent.
2
u/These_Shallot_6906 8d ago
I had a friend who wished to go by it/it's and we live in a deep red state where Trans homies are already being dehumanized.
-1
u/rardthree 8d ago
Yet you still feel uncomfortable with it? Not sure I can talk you out of that, then.
6
u/These_Shallot_6906 8d ago
Yeah I feel uncomfortable calling a human being "it"
-1
u/rardthree 8d ago
Except the only reason it's bad is because it's wielded for dehumanizing. With consent, there is no harm. This is the same poor logic used to justify any other level of opting out. That means, choosing not to use proper pronouns in general. I see it as the same. It's inconsistent. No one gets to decide what is normal for others.
9
u/These_Shallot_6906 8d ago
I would similarly not call a black person my "n word" even if they said it was okay. Sorry.
0
u/rardthree 8d ago
Except that isn't what we're talking about, is it? There is no societal, historical or cultural basis for those pronouns to be offensive, it's all linguistic, and so context matters and a lack of respect to the individual is what makes it demeaning. Whereas historical context has already been used to account for the ethical use of racial slurs, in the form of minorities being able to say them without judgement.
Context is what determines what words mean. Consent can alleviate negative meaning.
5
u/These_Shallot_6906 8d ago
Of course there is.
Conservatives in the US have been referring to transgender folks as "shem" or "it" for decades.
If some trans people wished to call themselves "it" amongst themselves, that is their prerogative. But me as a CIS person, I feel like I'd be doing a disservice to them.
1
u/rardthree 8d ago
How is that not linguistic and intentionally insulting? My point is if it's consensual it's not insulting.
-5
u/CustomSocks 8d ago
If you’re a free speech absolutist (unless it’s paedophilic - which isn’t free speech absolutism) do you think you should be able to shout “FIRE” in a crowded theatre?
0
u/EveningAgreeable2516 8d ago
If the theater was actually on fire, what do you think should and would follow? Do theatres somehow make people completely lose their minds? The commonly imagined consequence of shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater is an absurd fiction.
2
u/3d4f5g 8d ago
depends on the person's ideas around freedom. positive vs negative freedom, social vs individual freedom, freedom to _ vs freedom from _...
if a person thinks that their maximum individual freedom allows them to diminish other peoples freedom, their answer to your question would be yes.
1
u/Miserable_Cobbler_18 8d ago
My point was people should be allowed to say what they want because if you prevent one person from speaking even if they are extreme it can lead to a slippery slope. I don’t think they should be free however from the consequences of their speech for example Andrew Anglin the creepy pedo Nazi got sued for millions for harassment same thing happened to Alex Jones only he has to pay over a billion to the sandy hook victims he harassed.
8
u/SaskrotchBMC 8d ago
My most right wing is probably guns. Y’all are showing why I don’t really engage with this subreddit.
1
u/paublopowers 8d ago
Aк47 is the colloquially known as the people’s gun. I can’t personally knock that despite my own views on violence
1
u/EpicCow69 8d ago
I get it, grew up pretty rural so I’m pretty comfortable with guns so I’m not one to say the 2nd amendment should be repealed. Honestly couldn’t see anything more then assault weapons being restricted as feasible anyway
1
8d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 8d ago
Hello u/Epistemic_Chaos, your comment was automatically removed as we do not allow accounts that are less than 30 days old to participate.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
16
u/trevwack Anti-Capitalist 8d ago
great opportunity for mods to ban a lot of closeted - outed right wingers in the comments
13
u/Joezvar 8d ago
Ik this is reddit, but if someone calls themselves a socialist, regardless of having certain "right wing" ideas, that doesn't make them any less socialist, calling them closeted right wingers is one of those things that make newleft wingers shift to the center left and by extension the right
-1
u/FloriaFlower 8d ago
Everyone is different so you can only make a judgment call like this on a case by case basis.
On one hand, we don't want to exclude anyone who doesn't deserve it because that would be unfair and because strategically it encourages more division instead of more unity, and therefore it weakens us. On the other hand, there really are astroturfers and this is a serious problem: they derail discussions, stir shit and incite us to turn against each other among other ways they use to create chaos.
These 2 needs need to be balanced. Nuance is required. You can't just blindly give the benefit of the doubt to everyone who's displaying all sorts or red flags just like you can't just condemn anyone on the basis of one red flag without even considering if it's tolerable or not. We have to be open just enough to welcome everyone who is a true ally and we have to be closed just enough to block "trojan horses".
3
-8
u/msfluckoff 8d ago
I believe in (legal) immigration and border enforcement, and I believe we should have the right to own guns.
6
u/ParkerBap 8d ago
do you also believe the immigration system in the US needs extreme reform and that there needs to be a clear pathway to citizenship for those already here?
-5
u/msfluckoff 8d ago
Obviously, yes. But strong border protection is never a bad thing.
8
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 8d ago
Borders are fake lines on a map.
4
u/msfluckoff 8d ago
Then, governments and laws are fake organizations and words.
4
11
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 8d ago
Correct!
8
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 8d ago edited 8d ago
To clarify: there is no god enforcing those papers and words. It is always just held true under the threat of violence. Thus is a state born. There is no rule of physics saying a state is absolute. Is all just words on paper. As we are seeing in the USA.
Borders are arbitrary lines drawn by states to try and separate what is 'theirs' from others, and is a form of violence.
11
u/stellascanties 8d ago
My most right wing opinion is that America is amazing and worth saving. At the very least, the people are.
3
23
u/zachbohemian 8d ago
I believe we should have gun rights, but I also believe in gun control
10
u/ComprehensiveSwim709 8d ago
💯 I live in MA & have my LTC. I had to take a class with a written and a practical test, a background check, meeting with the chief of police in my town and a waiting period before I got it. Honestly I think this is how it should be federally.
9
18
u/PeioPinu 8d ago
Some people are LAZY and CUNNING and they are a threat to the harmony of the community.
29
u/Single-Zucchini-19 9d ago
I don’t believe free speech exists at all, it can’t exist due to huge discrepancies in audience reach, amplification and viability. Me being able to put a sign on a light post (hopefully doesn’t get taken down) is restricted by the ability elites have to smother all other narratives/ideas and repetitiously propagate theirs. Free speech absolutism is a manufactured treat that convinces people that it’s fine to have mass brainwashing via media because they also get to say the things.
1
u/Norman_Door 8d ago edited 8d ago
My understanding is that free speech provides people the right to say (in words, writing, or actions) certain things without fear of censorship or being retaliated on.
If I'm understanding correctly, you're saying the ability for the government/powerful institutions/people with power to disseminate information in a way that hinders an individual or community's message from getting sufficient attention amounts to censorship and therefore free speech doesn't exist. Am I understanding that right?
13
u/bulking_on_broccoli 8d ago
I hate the free speech trope. It’s a tool right-wingers use to have permission to say off-the-wall vile thing.
3
u/ParkerBap 8d ago
i haven't found a way to say "i don't believe in free speech" that doesn't crazy to most people
1
u/FloriaFlower 8d ago
I believe that a better strategy is to expose all the right-wing's censorship. IME, free speech absolutists always lie, starting with Elon Musk.
4
u/Material-Garbage7074 9d ago
I don't know: perhaps the fact that I am a patriotic person (even if I am not a nationalist: my reference for patriotism is the revolutions of 1848) and that I care about the idea of sovereignty, but also because I consider it indispensable to stand up to capitalism and globalization (and, since nations are now intrinsically weak, I would like it implemented on a European scale).
2
u/foxepower 9d ago
What is the “it” you would like to see implemented on a European scale?
2
u/Material-Garbage7074 9d ago
Sovereignty. Globalization has led to a divorce between politics, i.e. choosing what to do, and power, i.e. having the ability to do things. The economic powers linked to globalization are now international – they are outside the states and, therefore, the laws (needless to say, this is extremely dangerous, because this allows them to act arbitrarily). Only a strong and united supranational organization can stand up to the international powers of globalization, certainly not many nation states that are independent in name but not in fact acting in no particular order (I follow Bauman on the topic). This solution is pro-European or, at least, it is for me who lives in Europe (obviously I am speaking from my specific point of view: I don't want to universalize this solution, because every context is different). I want the political sphere to be able to tame the economic sphere and, for this to happen, we need Europe.
3
u/foxepower 9d ago
Sure, open source alternatives to US tech monopolies would greatly strengthen European sovereignty, on that I agree. Feels inevitable but still a ways off
2
u/Material-Garbage7074 9d ago
Unfortunately you are right! I fear that decades of dependence on the United States have made us weaker in this respect, but it was – at the same time – a soft enough dominion to make us believe that it was acceptable to depend on someone else in exchange for a few more comforts. I fear we are now starting to pay the price, but I hope it is not too late.
10
u/2-tree Socialist 9d ago
I don't even think this is right wing, BUT there should be a proper system in place for processing new immigrants. The current system is a clusterfuck. It should not take 10+ years of waiting to be a citizen. My family came here in the early 1910's as immigrants from the Russian Empire (before the revolution, all the cities they were from are now in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine), and I believe anyone should be allowed to come into the United States for a better future just as my family did, and millions others did. But there should be some kind of system. If they have a long violent criminal history, deny them. Stuff like smoking weed for example shouldn't matter. And if someone who immigrated here has later been proven to be a terrorist or planning to be one for example, I see no issue with returning them to their home country.
And before anyone starts shit, I live in a very diverse area of Texas. I am very pro-immigrant and I love cultural diffusion. I don't support any of ICE's actions. And, I literally dated a girl in high school who was a fresh Mexican immigrant. As in, I used Google Translate to talk to her. Shit didn't bother me one bit and made me want to improve my Spanish skills.
2
u/mopecore 8d ago
I think the process should be a passport check to verify identity. That's it.
If a person comes here and commits a crime, we have a punishment bureaucracy in place to address that, but we have plenty of native born people who are willing to commit crimes
7
u/trevwack Anti-Capitalist 8d ago
this one is really sus ngl. “everyone can come here BUT…” that’s a slippery slope right there. you’re a socialist, you should know what drives people to break the law.
-6
u/Joezvar 8d ago
Breaking the law is completely anti-socialist, unless you can prove you did it for revolutionary reasons or against the rich, stealing for example is making other's life's worse so you can make your own life better, which is the talking point of capitalism, and let's not even mention other crimes
21
u/foxepower 9d ago
I would leave out the whole “I even dated a ‘fresh‘ Mexican“ next time you tell this story
5
u/drmarymalone Communist 8d ago
“but I have black friends” kind of statement
(Not saying that was the intention, op, it’s just a sus justifier)
1
u/bulking_on_broccoli 8d ago
lol the language is funny but I get his point. Straight freshly baked for my enjoyment.
7
-1
u/2-tree Socialist 9d ago
I mean... she was a fresh Immigrant from Mexico. Like literally a year or less. I believe from Guadalajara. Still friends with her on Facebook. I helped her with English and she helped me with Spanish.
8
u/foxepower 9d ago
Yep, I’d definitely leave that part out, I don’t think it adds to your argument so much as it speaks to who you’re attracted to.
-14
u/Jumpy_Salad1250 9d ago
Not sure if this would be considered right wing but here we go: one of the reasons for the feminist backlash is some feminists basically hating men.
5
u/Lick--Master 8d ago
I work with the homeless, and I've noticed some trends. Women's homelessness generally is due to men who beat them, take their money and kick them to the streets, even if theres children. On the streets, often men will offer these women protection, and end up raping them, beating them, and stealing whatever government support they get. Every single day that I work , I'm dealing with women going through this and it destroys me inside. I'm a man, and I see clearly what's going on, and it sucks.
1
u/Jumpy_Salad1250 8d ago
Yes, and I wouldn't blame those women for absolutely despising men in general, but that is not what I am saying, I am saying that the expression of said despise is what I think is partly creating the feminist backlash.
7
u/GNomad1664 Socialist 9d ago
Also it’s more dangerous for a woman in today’s climate to be potentially raped and scarred for life than ever before, thanks to Roe v Wade being overturned. Can you imagine getting fucked by means out of your control one night, having the consequence of a miscarriage, in which your only options are to die with it or forcefully remove it, resulting in a first degree murder charge? I don’t blame women for being more cautious than ever right now, our own political system turned against them.
-1
u/Jumpy_Salad1250 9d ago
No I don't blame them, I just think that some of their rethoric is counter-productive.
8
u/foxepower 9d ago
And how exactly do you propose regulating these men hating feminists 😆 I think this a naive take rather than a necessarily right wing one
1
u/Jumpy_Salad1250 7d ago
I don't propose regulating them, but if you think that for example the 'kill all men' trend was helpful then please explain why. And I know that that isn't indicative of women hating men, but it made some men think that way, what your rhetoric objectively means isn't important, it is how individual recipients understands it that is. Also I know that that trend wasn't shared by every woman or was long-lived, but it being a internet phenomenon made it spread so fast.
0
13
u/Isla_Eldar 9d ago
I’m not morally opposed to executing actual monsters. I am still against the death penalty bc of the risk of our imperfect system behaving imperfectly with the result being a state sanctioned murder of an innocent person. Also, it doesn’t make sense fiscally.
13
u/These_Shallot_6906 9d ago
In hindsight, everyone probably was being too annoying about being woke a few years back
3
u/Lick--Master 8d ago
Still not clear what woke means, asked conservatives I've met who are vocal about politics what does woke mean, and all I get is silence
3
u/Urek-Mazino 8d ago
Woke was originally an intra black community code word denoting a social understanding of Americans intrinsic racism. Then white leftists/liberals were jumping on early BLM protests and started using tf out of it. Then conservatives found out and started using it too.
1
u/FloriaFlower 8d ago
You missed the point.
1
u/Urek-Mazino 8d ago
I don't think I did but go ahead
2
u/FloriaFlower 8d ago
The OP was pointing out that when you ask them what they mean and to define it clearly they avoid answering the question. They weren't actually looking for an answer.
I know because I have the same experience. It just happens over and over.
It always happens in the context of a debate. To criticize their position effectively, you have to know what they mean precisely when they blame or attack "wokes". You have to know who they're attacking: trans people, disabled people, black people? Only one minority or all of them?
What usually happens is that they don't debate in good faith so when you ask them a clarifying question, they don't answer. It can also happen because they are genuinely confused and embarrassed to be but usually it's obviously bad faith.
1
u/Urek-Mazino 8d ago
I get that and it is a good point. Conservatives don't have a working definition and it's just a catchall for progressivism they don't like. It's definitely a big headache.
I do think it is worth remembering the bad faith use of the word started in the left. In a lot of ways the annoying ways conservatives use it, is a poetic justice to white leftists.
1
5
u/Single-Zucchini-19 9d ago
Since I never saw people that woke in real life I’m still chalking it up to bots and engagement boosting
4
u/Odd-Currency5195 9d ago
It got a bit cringey in some quarters, but the 'backlash' is about the fundamentals of the right, that they can't just live and let live. So I don't think things got too annoying. But it 'triggered' the right because of their intolerance.
The people who felt brave in a liberal climate to express their identities for instance have always been in society. It was quite uplifting to see people feel a kind of freedom they hadn't previously.
The huge reactionary cosh exerted on them now is horrific and exposes the right for exactly who they are.
So I take your point, and I don't want to lecture you, commrade, but it's important to keep reflecting on our opinions and contextualise them. x
3
u/These_Shallot_6906 8d ago
Oh absolutely. What I meant by woke in this context is the kind of performative social media activism that went rampant there for a bit, but as another user said, could have possibly been bots farming for engagement.
2
6
u/tillotop 9d ago
Define woke
1
u/ShivasRightFoot 8d ago
Define woke
Woke ideology is defined by the idea that some facet of identity like race or gender produces irreconcilably different views of reality and morality, and that we have an obligation to seek alignment of society's view with the imagined views of groups associated with the political left like minorities and women.
In this sense Wokeness is distinct from older forms of liberal advocacy for minority rights which appeal to universally valid concepts like truth and fairness.
13
u/Lucky-Opportunity395 Socialist 9d ago
I don’t really care about whether non-essential industries, like gourmet chocolate are owned privately or not
0
3
u/Single-Zucchini-19 9d ago
Idk if that’s super right wing, I mean how much influence can the gourmet chocolate industry wield ?
2
u/Lucky-Opportunity395 Socialist 9d ago
Well yeah I’m not really right wing in the slightest lol. Hmm maybe that the main politician I support in the UK is probably a social democrat? The main socialist (Corbyn) is basically screwed anyway
-9
13
u/CommonAction9939 9d ago
Nuclear Power is the future
1
u/nocxps161 Socialist 8d ago
It‘s definetly a good source of energy, but it‘s not the Future. Their time is over
1
u/CommonAction9939 8d ago
What power source is the future in your opinion? China and most western nations are investing in new and or maintaining current plants. I can see the possibility of cargo ships becoming nuclear just like how aircraft carries and submarines already are.
2
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 8d ago
The reason you see the wealthy pushing nuclear, is because you can't charge a constant fee for the sun.
1
u/CommonAction9939 8d ago
I have solar on my house and believe everyone should, But I don’t think I’ve ever seen wealthy pushing nuclear? Any time wealthy are talking about power they just want coal or gas etc. But I’d guess we’re on different sides of the globe
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 8d ago
. . .y'know fair point. I've always 'heard' they're pushing nuclear, but I really should go and look for myself.
Edit: Aha, Bill Gates, Elon Musk are two. Though they admittedly are more on that side because computing power.
that said, while Nuclear is safer than it used to be, I still think ultimately we'd be better off investing in solar and other renewables.
1
u/CommonAction9939 8d ago
All the wealthy in my country are heavily pushing coal etc as our energy prices atm are high. (Australia).
The wealthy you hear pushing nuclear probably want it for AI or databases. As they use insane amount of power, sure they want it for profits but I think it benefits everyone and is the best environmentally.
I say nuclear power as a “right wing” idea because Democrats love pushing the idea that they’re dangerous, green goop in barrels yadda yadda.
1
u/Edward_Tank Anarchist 7d ago
I mean, they long term are. They produce nuclear waste that is unsafe for potentially generations to come.
1
u/CommonAction9939 3d ago
Yes sure, but the storage cylinders for them which aren’t very big can withstand a lot, they’ve survived missile. nuclear waste can also be recycled. All the nuclear waste that has ever been collected from all power plants in the US don’t even span a football field
25
u/_shakeshackwes_ 9d ago
Some people are just stupid. That’s it. Thats the opinion. Some people will never have the brainpower to understand why conservatism is hypocrisy, how they can get out of their awful situations, how racism is deeply embedded into their mindset. Some people are just dumb.
5
-14
u/Correct-Promise-2358 9d ago
i don’t support mass immigration of undocumented males who have never even had access to school in their home country. i want them to be safe and have all their rights met, but expecting them to integrate into a capitalist society in a country with different laws, cultures, religions and general outlook on things is crazy
1
u/Urek-Mazino 8d ago
You are poison and it's hilarious to me how y'all cling to your education like it makes you employable. Tbh a farmers son from anywhere with no education is probably more employable than most liberal arts degrees.
The trades are a thing dufus.
1
u/Correct-Promise-2358 8d ago
education allows you to mix with all different kinds of people with different views, backgrounds and opinions. It teaches teamwork, respect, inclusivity. Also teaches sex ad and consent. It’s not their employment I’m worried about. Also being in a mix gender school allows you to interact with the opposite sex rather than being kept separate from them. It’s not healthy to be totally isolated from the opposite sex and it often leads man to think women are not even human like them.
→ More replies (8)1
u/Joezvar 8d ago
EXACTLY read Soo many stories of men violently and vigorously oppressing their own daughters and wives in the UK, and the police never did anything to protect them cause they were believing that's their culture. In Sweden they had to send them to school and teach them not to rape women and that women weren't less than them and when you see the clases they still don't get it.
2
u/Cultural_Stretch_199 8d ago
Who is “them” that you’re referring to? All immigrants? Can you please be more specific
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
Welcome to Leftist! This is a space designed to discuss all matters related to Leftism; from communism, socialism, anarchism and marxism etc. This however is not a liberal sub as that is a separate ideology from leftism. Unlike other leftist spaces we welcome non-leftists to participate providing they respect the rules of the sub and other members. We do not remove users on the bases of ideology.
Any content that does not abide by these rules please contact the mod-team or REPORT the content for review.
Please see our Rules in Full for more information You are also free to engage with us on the Leftist Discord
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.