Lemdro.id

3 points

3 days ago

I don’t think any both siders are around right now in America that aren’t right wing.

In saying that, this post and your comment are examples of the left today being excessively socially authoritarian which labels anyone who doesn’t completely conform the enemy.

report

[ - ]

SparroHawc@lemm.ee

1 point

3 days ago

The problem is that we see that sort of argument all the time on the internet, which gives us a skewed view of Republicans. The right wing is loud, even leaving out the shills trying to stir the pot.

report

[ - ]

Michael@slrpnk.net

13 points

2 days ago

Both political parties in America represent capital instead of people.

I align with Libertarian Socialism, a left ideology. This is also a leftist/anarchist instance and community. We aren’t Republicans in disguise.

One would have to have some serious bad faith or cognitive dissonance to be able to argue that both sides are the same as a person who firmly aligns with right-wing, capitalist ideology. Republicans thrive on promoting their differences in contrast to Democrats.

Left = Socialism, Right = Capitalism.

If you look at the Political Compass you will see that there are also authoritarians and libertarians (not the right-wing, capitalist ideology) on the Y axis.

Left authoritarians or left libertarians both are well educated on what the left represents. They are able to see the stark contrast between capitalistic parties and socialism.

Democrats are not left-wing or leftist — they most certainly aren’t socialist. They only tease at being socialist.

report

[ - ]

-2 points

2 days ago

“bothsides” is by the majority of people in reference to the two political parties (in reference to america), not left wing and right wing in a political ideological sense. As you said both political parties operate within a system of opperssion fighting for control of power. Neither side is good, but one could say that one side is definitley more damaghing than the other in a realist sense.

i think though from my experience, today the left, specifically, moderern progressisvism has become far too socially authoritarian, as an arnarchist type i cant abide by any authoritarianism and the left is no stranger to it.

report

[ - ]

Michael@slrpnk.net

11 points

2 days ago

Neither capitalist party is preferable and capitalism is destroying the planet.

Democrats are not able to fight extreme authoritarianism, fascism, and oligarchy. They have no power or political gravitas. They can’t even take a stand for universal health care…

Value judgements of which side is better are irrelevant: the capitalist US economy relies on various forms of slavery (even child slavery) and third-world exploitation. An estimated 40% of US agricultural workers are undocumented immigrants.

Modern slavery must be abolished. Neither party is calling for the end of slavery, let alone addressing it — it’s a carefully veiled reality.

report

[ - ]

1 point

2 days ago

I agree that neither party is preferable in the sense that the democrats should be praised or idealised and i definitely agree that the democrats and in my opinion “modern progressives” have no ability to combat facism. As they are both the product of eating with a silver spoon for too long and both dont want to change the system of power, they just want to seize control of it and weild for themselves.

The left today is just too scattered to compete with facism. Either you’re a social authoritarain who seeks power but cannot take any tangile steps like facism or you are leftist like many people on this plastform and get stuck in semanticallyu intel;ectualising bygon theories and hyper spefici idealogical labels

report

[ - ]

Michael@slrpnk.net

6 points

2 days ago

I am focused on solutions, not ideology. I do my best to not flaunt the label that most accurately aligns with my ideals (unless relevant) and my ideas generally resonate with Democrats and even some Republicans. People want change and people want progress, no matter where you fall on the political spectrum.

Everybody, regardless of ideology, should be able to focus on solutions and the change we’d like to see — on what kind of world we want to live in. I want to live in a free and kind world, preferably without slavery. The vast majority of people likely feel similarly.

Even authoritarian socialists tend to resonate with that. They want to forcefully centralize power, resources, and control so eventually a more gentle world is born and the state is shed. They think force is necessary, I’m confident we can convince them otherwise.

Maybe it’s naive, but I can see a world that unifies under the banner of change and common sense solutions — a world that is able to cut past the propaganda and polarization and moves forward.

report

[ - ]

0 points

2 days ago

Yeah sorry i didnt intent for any of that to come accross like it was targetted at you.

To clarify i dont mean authoritarian socialists - i mean modern progressives who focus on social issues (not socialism) being overtly authoritarian within the realm of social dynamics in society.

I do think you are naive, but i think its a comendable mindset and just because i think you are naive does not mean anything other than that i dont share the same faith in people as you do. Maybe im too nihilitistic.

report