For extremely different reasons and purposes, and with what I mean, why are they akin to a religion, but you aren’t? Because from my perspective it seems like one is a religion centered around a cult of liberty, and the other a cult of equality. I think human beings need and gravitate towards religion, and when you try to erase that you just end up with something that fills the exact same role and same thing but often with more problems than the religion had in the first place. I also don’t think they hate the enlightenment as much as you think. You can trace much of what they believe directly to Rousseau after all, and I personally don’t hate the enlightenment. I quite like Hobbes. The enlightenment was not one track or remotely uniform.With what? The regressive left certainly doesn't believe in liberty or equality, and they actively attack the enlightenment. So they are kindred spirits with you in a way.
Horseshoe theory strikes again, and the evidence just keeps mounting that it comes down to a certain type of personality.With what? The regressive left certainly doesn't believe in liberty or equality, and they actively attack the enlightenment. So they are kindred spirits with you in a way.
And there’s a good chance you’d be a Marxist if you were born to hardline Soviets. That’s how families and raising a human being work lol.Because dollars to donuts, a lot of Bible Thumpers would be pushing Marxist theory if they had been born in a family with a different political alignment. The Auth-Left and Auth-Right are the ends of the horseshoe, and hate when people point it out.
You're wrong on both counts there. I shouldn't even have to explain how the regressive left doesn't believe in equality. They are very cult-like in their actions, but their dogmatism is based more on their idea of "intersectionalism" and "the personal is political" identity politics, and absolute adherance to it, even as the party line constantly changes. Referring to libertarians as a religion/cult based on liberty is laughable, but it does just go to show how entrenched your viewpoint on religion is and how it puts blinders on you, which the rest of what you said goes on to illustrate.For extremely different reasons and purposes, and with what I mean, why are they akin to a religion, but you aren’t? Because from my perspective it seems like one is a religion centered around a cult of liberty, and the other a cult of equality.
They literally attack it at every opportunity. It is the basis for Western civilization post-dark age, and for them Western civilization is evil.I also don’t think they hate the enlightenment as much as you think. You can trace much of what they believe directly to Rousseau after all.
It’s equality above all else. Every last font and focus is on inequalities and how they must be corrected and how each and every one is a product of some inequality of society or of government.You're wrong on both counts there. I shouldn't even have to explain how the regressive left doesn't believe in equality.
post-dark age? What the hell are you talking about? The medieval era, the Renaissance, you think all of that was a dark age? You think a bunch of philosophers with wildly different ideas were the basis of all western civilization?They literally attack it at every opportunity. It is the basis for Western civilization post-dark age, and for them Western civilization is evil.
Elaborate. Why is it laughable? Why are you not dogmatic? I’d also say that’s hardly a blinder, but me reflecting on when I WAS a libertarian and would be making damn near every argument you’ve made here, with the same mindset and same set of beliefs. You haven’t said a single thing here I wouldn’t have once said at some point, and in reflection back it seemed to me as if I substituted political theory and the concept of liberty and the founding fathers and all of that for a God. What’s weird to me is that you think all your opponents are in effect religious, whether pseudo or actually so, but yet you are somehow immune to this and it’s a joke to even think about that as a possibility.Referring to libertarians as a religion/cult based on liberty is laughable, but it does just go to show how entrenched your viewpoint on religion is and how it puts blinders on you, which the rest of what you said goes on to illustrate.
Maybe in the same sense as TR was. Actually I'd really love to reform the Progressive Party with the Bull Moose as its symbol, just to piss off the crowd that likes to call themselves Progressive.
Which pretty well just proves my point. Both sides hate moderates because they see us as enabling the other side.
As for Trump and Christianity, he very much appealed to them, but you'll notice he never even came close to talking about repealing same-sex marriage or trying to roll back LGB stuff. In fact he fought to decriminalize homosexuality across the world, and had the first gay cabinet member.
So however religious Trump is, he is not so hardcore as to think advocating some of the anti-LGB positions I've seen in this thread is remotely a good idea or socially acceptable by many on the Right.
They are fringe, within the coalition Trump built, and that coalition is more than just the GOP members you keep acting like are the majority. They are a slim majority inside the GOP, and Trump's base is more than just the GOP.
You keep acting like a third party has to be a 'Never-Trumper' party, or 'system-trusters', when a real, useful third party would be designed to take the center and moderates from both parties.
Hell, we can see that in the world of fauna in Africa, where people had to deal with elephant youths that assaulted animals and people and generally behaved like arseholes. It was only when they imported older elephants in that said youths stopped acting like vicious teenagers, because said matriarch showed them to act like an adult and punish them when they did not.
That's just the rhetoric they use to justify their bullshit to people who ought to know better. Their actions show that they clearly believe that some should be "more equal" than others.It’s equality above all else. Every last font and focus is on inequalities and how they must be corrected and how each and every one is a product of some inequality of society or of government.
The medieval era is generally referred to as the Dark Ages, because they really did represent that in a lot of ways.post-dark age? What the hell are you talking about? The medieval era, the Renaissance, you think all of that was a dark age?
Because the closest I would ever come to forcing others to obey my ideology would be to simply enforce the idea that they have to play nice with others. I am perfectly okay with others believing differently as long as they don't try to force those beliefs on others.Elaborate. Why is it laughable? Why are you not dogmatic?
Because where it comes to you and others like you, it's just a reflection of your own outlook rather than of reality. It's akin to how the leftists accuse others of being doing things that they themselves are guilty of.What’s weird to me is that you think all your opponents are in effect religious, whether pseudo or actually so, but yet you are somehow immune to this and it’s a joke to even think about that as a possibility.
Which would be exactly what I'm getting at (or were you unaware of his Progressive Party?). This is also why I refuse to call the regressive left liberal or progressive. They constantly play word games and appropriate names for themselves which they think make them look better.TR, and really most non-socialist historical figures would be so far right compared to modern moderates that they'd be over the horizon.
You have certainly indicated that you believe we enable the other side.I don't hate moderates, nor do I think I've been nasty. I just think they're misguided, and it doesn't have any staying power.
As like, pure political propaganda.The medieval era is generally referred to as the Dark Ages, because they really did represent that in a lot of ways.
do you want your ideology legislated? You clearly want to enforce it here.Because the closest I would ever come to forcing others to obey my ideology would be to simply enforce the idea that they have to play nice with others. I am perfectly okay with others believing differently as long as they don't try to force those beliefs on others.
you still aren’t explaining how one is and one isn’t. ThatsBecause where it comes to you and others like you, it's just a reflection of your own outlook rather than of reality. It's akin to how the leftists accuse others of being doing things that they themselves are guilty of.
I mean, it’s still the basis though. It’s not the rhetoric, it’s the driving force. It’s why it’s able to gain ground, because of perceived or real inequalities and wanting these all eradicated. It gets to the point that it’s at because inequality is inherent, natural, and very often good and in order to fulfill this idea of equality you need to take things further and further.That's just the rhetoric they use to justify their bullshit to people who ought to know better. Their actions show that they clearly believe that some should be "more equal" than others.
There is some of that, but when you compare them to what came before, and what came after. Most of us aren't wannabee tyrant monarchists after all.As like, pure political propaganda.
And really what your entire argument comes down to is "NO U" while ignoring everything else that differentiates mt ideology from yours. My ideology is about extending greater freedom to as many people as possible, and yours is about turning back the clock, so accusing me of being the same as you is just pathetic.do you want your ideology legislated? You clearly want to enforce it here.
No, it really is just rhetoric. Again, actions speak much louder than words. These are pro-segregationists who want to judge people based on things like race and sex, which is another thing they have in common with you, I guess. The reason they have gained ground is due to well-meaning idiots and chickenshits who are too worried about being called racist or sexist.I mean, it’s still the basis though. It’s not the rhetoric, it’s the driving force. It’s why it’s able to gain ground, because of perceived or real inequalities and wanting these all eradicated. It gets to the point that it’s at because inequality is inherent, natural, and very often good and in order to fulfill this idea of equality you need to take things further and further.
Pretty much.
Hell, we can see that in the world of fauna in Africa, where people had to deal with elephant youths that assaulted animals and people and generally behaved like arseholes. It was only when they imported older elephants in that said youths stopped acting like vicious teenagers, because said matriarch showed them to act like an adult and punish them when they did not.
Studies aren't the only source of evidence. I want something that you think should be sufficient to convince someone who doesn't already agree with you. Please note that this would rule out arguments based on a religious faith that I do not share with you.It’s inherent to it. Fathers and mothers aren’t the same and perform different roles in raising children. I also just don’t trust studies and fucking hate the “do you have a study to support that claim” mentality of the cult of expertise. So yeah, I know this is going to get a bunch of replies with the studies that say “oh no difference at all!” But I really couldn’t care less.
Well, remember, Bacle wants to decouple the non-hetero alliance from trans stuff, so the bathroom stuff and trans stuff wouldn't bother him. I didn't closely follow Trump's administration's actions on that front but I don't recall much in the way of headlines mad about LGBT stuff that wasn't trans stuff. Other than when he gutted some HIV/AIDS governmental organization(s) but that could have been coincidental.Trump did press the social conservative position on the LGBT issue fronts that were being debated when he was president, namely, the military and bathroom stuff.
Our god’s bigger than your god,
Nicer than your god, wahoooo!
Our god’s brighter than your god!
Exciting-er than your god, wahoooo!
Our god’s fresher than your god,
Cleaner than your god, wahoooo!
Our god’s clapper than your god,
More groovy than your god, wahoooo!
Our god’s sweeter than your god,
Sexier than your god, wahoooo!
Our god’s tougher than your god,
More superior than your god, wahoooo
this seems to be what this whole thread is boiling down to.
Horseshoe theory strikes again, and the evidence just keeps mounting that it comes down to a certain type of personality.
Because dollars to donuts, a lot of Bible Thumpers would be pushing Marxist theory if they had been born in a family with a different political alignment. The Auth-Left and Auth-Right are the ends of the horseshoe, and hate when people point it out.
You mean how life expectancy skyrocketed with the collapse of the Roman Empire, or how the end of the middle ages and the transition to the Early Modern period was accompanied by an increase in the scale of warfare, less protection for civilians during wars, etc.? And I think you'll find absolutism more common both before and after the middle ages than during them?There is some of that, but when you compare them to what came before, and what came after. Most of us aren't wannabee tyrant monarchists after all.