What's a "leftist"? (1 Viewer)

[3leftsdoo]

So does Bernie Sanders. You can't be a leftist without being an apologist for communism.

This is sometimes true.

But there are many kinds of communism, and many kinds of leftists, relatively scarce as they are.

 

[3leftsdoo]

TO the OP this is the perfect example of a leftist.
Doesn't deal in logical or reasoned arguments.

makes false accusations and false assumptions and completely just proves incapable of any type of honesty.

No.

Liberal, not leftist.

 

[3leftsdoo]

There's a big difference between freedom loving liberals and leftism.
You've described the above fairly well. They really are a group that has no use for freedom and liberty for all people.

Leftism = A broadly used term which properly applied describes a tiny number of people

Liberals = Rarely freedom-loving, at least not for their fellow right-side up conservatives

Ignorant, self-loathing, self-righteous, dangerous & confused conservatives = Liberal

 

[AmNat]

Maybe you're saying that a rightist accepts the natural order of things, while a leftist is driven to "fix" nature. That's what I think.

Exactly.

Although I said I don't believe in "left" vs "right."

If a phenomenon enjoys broad recognition in a society, then it exists for all political intents and purposes. And the left-right dichotomy has been a feature of modern democracy for its entire lifetime (analogues also existed in ancient Greece, and to a lesser extent in ancient Rome).

 

[3leftsdoo]

Often the term leftist is used as a pejorative but that clearly isn't the O/P's intention for this discussion.

Like many, the OP doesn't seem to understand what a leftist is.

He objects to its use as a pejorative, but is unlikely to leave this conversation with greater understanding.

 

[RealityNow]

A leftist is someone who seeks government control over the most important issues and smallest details of others' lives on philosophical grounds.

They despise freedom by nature, despite paying lip service to it.

They despise Free Market Capitalism.

Communists.

Radical Enviromentalists.

Be not only wary but be concerned with the source, when such a response is presented

 

[3leftsdoo]

Interesting. Care to demonstrate some characteristics of the above group; left of liberal?

Being left of liberal is pretty easy.

Liberals = Ignorant & dangerously self-deluded totalitarian conservatives

Many independents, progressives and libertarians are left of liberal.

And leftists?

Leftists = Far left of liberal

 

[3leftsdoo]

"Left" and "right" are meaningless. Maybe they used to mean something, but now they don't.

Originally, AFAIK, "left" meant those opposed to the current government, and "right" meant those who support the current government. Well how does that work if the current government is "left?"

Well never mind, it's ridiculous.

Leftist roughly equates to "progressive" now. But that doesn't mean anything either. It used to be the conservatives were the conventional conformists who wanted to cling to the old days. But now that can be just as true of progressives. I think progressives are actually more tribal and conformist than conservatives now.

Our current political tribes are complex mixtures of various factions. Trying to mash everything into either "left" or "right" is just ridiculous.

And I have been saying this for at least 35 years. Obviously no one listens.

Some good points.

 

[3leftsdoo]

With regards to those who use the term in this forum, usually it’s the person with the correct/true answer that they are debating.

Rarely.

 

[3leftsdoo]

In my view a leftist generally supports heavy government intervention in markets, high taxes and redistributive social programs.

While the modern leftist seems to place an even higher priority on flinging about accusations of racism, bigotry, cultural appropriation, etc I don't consider these essential to earn the label. It's more of an term that describes economic beliefs.

Not necessarily inaccurate.

 

[3leftsdoo]

Hey, I'm listening! Preach it, brother! :thumbs:

Sister.

 

[3leftsdoo]

It's mostly nonsense. There of course is a gradient / gray area and a second axis of populist / elistist.

But absolutely there is a left and and a "right" in the country.

Just compare what AOC are her fellow leftists demand versus mainstream conservatives who support Free Markets and the Constitution as written.

The differences couldn't be starker.

AOC = Pandering moron

Token faux-leftist.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm seeing this term used a great deal in these forums. Certain people and arguments are regularly being dismissed because the proponent is deemed to be "leftist", anything suggested or proposed by a "leftist" can safely be ignored.

So the logic I'm seeing is just label the person as a "leftist" and there's no need for a reasoned argument or polite discourse, just dismiss and move on.

So tell me what is a "leftist"?

In the US, this is what we should be doing:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[3leftsdoo]

I'm amused by all of the definitions spewed forth by those who do not know.

Leftist is a nickname, often used incorrectly for Liberals and progressives. Maybe if it was Leftest, it would make more sense to the uneducated.

Tell me more about how a radical revolutionary wants the government to control everything.

Genius.

Leftest.

Yes.

:thumbs:

 

[3leftsdoo]

Chomsky is just one more person we should read and be aware of. But your using his name and picture is very misleading. Every time I see your posts I think of him, and how much I hate his extremist utopianism.

Chomsky is a leader of the far left -- they believe every single word his says like he was Jesus and they were born agains. I hate that.

Oh and by the way -- his contribution to linguistics was NOT NEARLY as great as everyone thinks. And his linguistics theories have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with politics. So it's crazy when far leftists think his political ideas must be correct because he's a great linguist. False and false.

Actually, despite the many ankle-biting attacks on Chomsky's groundbreaking linguistic theories, he was basically right about everything, including acquisition.

Our DP Chomsky is a liberal strangely using the name and image of the master linguist.

Kind of like a suburban high school freshman in a Che shirt.

 

[3leftsdoo]

"Leftist" is a primal alarm call howled out to make political allies aware of ideas and persons expressing them which/who do not conform to the ideological envelope of certain right-leaning persons or cliques. It is also construed as an insult in the minds of some dim-minded individuals on political forums. It is similar in its use to the left-leaning clique alarm call and insult of "fascist" levelled by intolerant folks at the other end of the spectrum. It all boils down to people screaming "other!" and verbally throwing scat at the other group because they can't be bothered or are not capable of having an intelligent conversation with people of different political view points.

On their own, these terms are rarely used in their proper context and have all but lost their original meanings.

Cheers and may all leftists and fascists be well.
Evilroddy.

:thumbs:

 

[3leftsdoo]

I think the biggest difference is that a leftist would champion universal public programs for a laundry list of items like healthcare, housing, job guarantees, or possibly even food or energy, etc. A liberal today might bite on one of those, but overall they support incremental change largely in the form of small pressures on private industries through things like taxes or regulations alone. The term leftist encapsulates a large spectrum of people from democratic socialists on the right end to anarchists on the left end.

:thumbs:

 

[3leftsdoo]

A leftist is someone who sees order as fundamentally opposed to truth, goodness, and right, while a rightist is someone who sees order as fundamentally coherent with truth, goodness, and right. Where "order" means order as it actually exists in the real world (and not an idealized utopia).

This is the only definition which correctly predicts which viewpoints are considered right-wing and left-wing *in dissimilar times and places*.

A little too high-minded for this discussion, but not untrue.

 

[3leftsdoo]

I would like to see that. I realize that Chomsky is a clever writer and a careful researcher. But he is an extreme extremist, and a fantasy-dwelling utopianist. Too many far-leftists idolize him. And they always say all his ideas MUST be correct because he is a great linguist. Well, that has absolutely nothing to do with it! I am a linguist, by the way, and I know there are many who do NOT admire his linguistic theories. I sure don't. And he does NOT make any connection between language and politics -- which is BIZARRE! Unforgivable from my point of view.

:shock:

Chomsky = BRILLIANT linguist

 

[Irwin Corey]

A leftist is someone who seeks government control over the most important issues and smallest details of others' lives on philosophical grounds.

They despise freedom by nature, despite paying lip service to it.

They despise Free Market Capitalism.

Communists.

Radical Enviromentalists.

Well, thanks for clearing that up; your "definition" excludes ANY and EVERY thing I believe in. Going forward if someone calls me a "leftist" or includes my beliefs as "leftist" and will use your definition to prove them wrong.

I don't want "government control over the most important issues and smallest details of others' lives on philosophical grounds.", or any grounds.

I love freedom and have fought to preserve every AmeriCANs freedom, including yours.

I don't "dispose" anything I can think of; including "Free Marked Capitalism". Unbridled Capitalism distills all wealth into the hands of a very few. In fact; Regulated Capitalism coupled with a strong Social Safety Net, Collective Bargaining and basic human rights for all men is what you and pResident Me-Me-Me have been "AGAINING" about.

I'm certainly not a communist or a radical environmentalist. I have nothing more to say about "communist" but I do want to preserve fresh air, clean water and a healthy world for my grandchildren, and their children's children, that's just common sense; nothing radical about it.

 

[Good4Nothin]

This is sometimes true.

But there are many kinds of communism, and many kinds of leftists, relatively scarce as they are.

If they're scarce, why do I know so many?

 

[Good4Nothin]

Exactly.



If a phenomenon enjoys broad recognition in a society, then it exists for all political intents and purposes. And the left-right dichotomy has been a feature of modern democracy for its entire lifetime (analogues also existed in ancient Greece, and to a lesser extent in ancient Rome).

I would like to know more about those ancient analogues of left vs right. Maybe it is just how our minds work? But still, it is a source of confusion today.

 

[Good4Nothin]

Actually, despite the many ankle-biting attacks on Chomsky's groundbreaking linguistic theories, he was basically right about everything, including acquisition.

Our DP Chomsky is a liberal strangely using the name and image of the master linguist.

Kind of like a suburban high school freshman in a Che shirt.

Oh no no no. He was right about acquisition, and that is how he became so famous! But his opponent, Skinner, was just being a ridiculous extreme behaviorist. All Chomsky had to do is apply a little common sense, and he won.

There have been many master linguists, and it's so sad and unfortunate that Chomsky overshadowed them in the US. Behaviorist linguistics was thrown in the trash because of him, with all their valuable insights.

Chomsky was right about acquisition, and he was right about recursive syntax trees. And that's about it!

He contributed NOTHING whatsoever to discourse analysis, or machine translation. You can't use his theories AT ALL to understand what people are really saying!

Damn, I was so frustrated back then when I was trying to figure out how to use linguistics in real life! Chomsky was a DEAD END.

I found lots of FASCINATING IDEAS, by searching through the whole history of linguistics. All that was over-shadowed by CHOMSKY. He killed American linguistics. Such a shame.

Please, if you have not really looked into linguistics, do not believe the BS propaganda about Chomsky.

 

[Bullseye]

"Leftist" is a derogatory term often used by those lacking in substantive argument, which greatly limits the responses the poster will receive to those of vile partisan nature.

It's not necessarily a derogatory term, IMHO. It certainly isn't on a par with "trumptard, trumpite, trump cultist" or the like. Problem is there are two tracks a leftist may follow.

The classic liberal believed in maximum freedom: free people, free markets and minimal government. People were expected to manage their own lives, make their own decisions and deal with the consequences of them. Government existed to ensure fair markets and civil society.

In the early 20th century the left became dominated by the progressive branch, which held, basically, that it was up to government using "scientific" principles and the skills of "experts" to guide and direct the lives of the people towards some perfect place. This is the genesis of "it takes a village . . ." and "for the greater good" style of governing; rather then eschew regulations as much as possible as the "classic liberal would" the progressives sought to enact laws to govern "for the good of society".

 

[Chomsky]

Yes better to read than listen to Chomsky. Ugh. And Buckley does have that uppity accent, but it's probably not intentional.

Oh Bernie. I can't STAND to listen to him. And by the way I am an educated east coast Jew. And really, I am very WARY of that type. Both Chomsky and Bernie think they know it all and understand life to its very core. NO THEY DO NOT.

No, Buckley was not pretentious in his speech, or anything else for that matter. He simply was a product of his era, his family, his education, and his circle. He learned English as a child in London, then off to Millbrook before going on to Yale. The man learned proper English!

But being American despite his English youth, I think his speech was similar to the Mid-Atlantic idiom. Think Cary Grant & Katherine Hepburn!

I read an awful lot of Chomsky's writing, so I must have enjoyed it. He does careful research, and digs up plenty of dirt. But after a while I realized it was one-sided and unfair, always siding with the losers, always despising power and success. And I realized that came from his utopian ideas, which are similar to Marx's.

Well, there is some truth in that. The fighting for the under dog does have an appeal for many, though.

Anyway, now I know how you got your name, it won't bother me anymore.

Gee, thanks! I think ... :2razz: