|
Oh there it is
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:50 |
|
|
I am not a book posted:My main concern with GMOs was the genetic patents, are those like 100% absolutely gone now?  I eat McDonalds all the time. GMO's don't scare me!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:Also, being left on social issues without having the economic issues to back them up is basically saying "Wow it sucks that your life is hard...Well see ya!" I think a better way to phrase it is that you can't really be 'left' on social issues without progressive economics, because of the intersections between social oppressions and capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Oh there it is Clinton's glorious future spelled out for everyone, a mixture of minorities sold to us by corporate overlords that now have cover to do what they want because accusing them of wrongdoing would make you a bigot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
proletarian_pixie posted:I think a better way to phrase it is that you can't really be 'left' on social issues without progressive economics, because of the intersections between social oppressions and capitalism. There is no social justice without economic justice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
I feel that this is the biggest divide between the Blue Left (Clinton Era Democratic supporters) and the Neo-Left (Democratic Socialist/Bernie supporters). One believes economic policies are a huge key tenet while the other feels it should go in the backburner besides welfare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I feel that this is the biggest divide between the Blue Left (Clinton Era Democratic supporters) and the Neo-Left (Democratic Socialist/Bernie supporters). One believes economic policies are a huge key tenet while the other feels it should go in the backburner besides welfare. "Im socially liberal and economically conservative. The problems are bad, but their causes...their causes are very good." -every neolib shitstain ever
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I feel that this is the biggest divide between the Blue Left (Clinton Era Democratic supporters) and the Neo-Left (Democratic Socialist/Bernie supporters). One believes economic policies are a huge key tenet while the other feels it should go in the backburner besides welfare. The Neo-Left are NeoLiberals, which are the antithesis for Bernie supporters. Nice CTR shifting Neoliberal to Blue-Left  srsly though labels are dumb
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
ThndrShk2k posted:The Neo-Left are NeoLiberals, which are the antithesis for Bernie supporters. Labels are idiotic, but I'm just trying to figure out what to call the new crop of the young Democratic voters. There does seem to be a difference between them and the old dog Democrats, even if it is moderately.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
I'm actually a fan of Blue Left, but I don't like Neo-Left because Neoliberalism is an established ideology that could easily get confused by people with less familiarity.  And labels are really important. It helps people identify and classify the people they want to vote for or support. It's why protecting the integrity of those labels is something we should actually try to do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I feel that this is the biggest divide between the Blue Left (Clinton Era Democratic supporters) and the Neo-Left (Democratic Socialist/Bernie supporters). One believes economic policies are a huge key tenet while the other feels it should go in the backburner besides welfare. My impression is that the blue "left" uses identity and intersectionality to attack and discredit any attempts at progressive solutions for economic issues and give a thin veneer of progressivism by fighting on issues that won't disrupt corporate control. Also it's useful in putting certain people in high positions that will be just as lovely as their predecessors, but because they aren't straight white men they'll somehow be above the corrupting influence of power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:I'm actually a fan of Blue Left, but I don't like Neo-Left because Leoliberalism is an established ideology that could easily get confused by people with less familiarity. Calling the berniecrats/progressive left Blue Left fits in with the purity complaints from the other side. Basically calling it a more pure left in comparison to liberals. But you know if you get a good but unspecific label someone will try to invade it and warp it. Look what happened with the Tea Party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Labels are idiotic, but I'm just trying to figure out what to call the new crop of the young Democratic voters. There does seem to be a difference between them and the old dog Democrats, even if it is moderately. If you're going to call liberals the Blue Left call social democrats the Red Left
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:If you're going to call liberals the Blue Left call social democrats the Red Left 'Bernie supporters are 80% republican anyway.' ThndrShk2k has issued a correction as of 21:19 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Yeah, it probably wouldn't work. I'd like it though...
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Green left Although green party historically has just been fygm neo libs who just happen to also care about the environment. Oh here's a label to differentiate us from establishment shitheads: Everyone Else As in Everyone else supports living wages, shutting down fascist and imperial actions, guaranteeing healthcare, housing, and education to everyone, especially workers and other marginalized folks. You've got your Republicans, your Democrats, your Greens....and Everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
99%
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Labels are garbage, agreed, but how else can we identify our enemies??? Well here is one way:  
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
empireofcrime posted:My impression is that the blue "left" uses identity and intersectionality to attack and discredit any attempts at progressive solutions for economic issues and give a thin veneer of progressivism by fighting on issues that won't disrupt corporate control. Also it's useful in putting certain people in high positions that will be just as lovely as their predecessors, but because they aren't straight white men they'll somehow be above the corrupting influence of power. To me, the blue left is classified as being highly loyal to the Democratic Party, pro-LGBT and racial equality, and subscribing to third wayism. I don't know what to call the new left. "Red left" would be a nice contrast, but they aren't really about that socialist life. "Next left" sounds stupid. "New left" is good, but taken. NumberLast posted:If you're going to call liberals the Blue Left call social democrats the Red Left Yeah that's what I thought off. But they aren't exactly socialist socialist if you know what I mean. Maybe "green left"? But that could be confused with the green party and environmentalism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Probably best to insist on segregating Liberal Left and Progressive Left,
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:To me, the blue left is classified as being highly loyal to the Democratic Party, pro-LGBT and racial equality, and subscribing to third wayism. I don't know what to call the new left. "Red left" would be a nice contrast, but they aren't really about that socialist life. "Next left" sounds stupid. "New left" is good, but taken. What new left are you even talking about? The small minority of sanders supporters that fancy themselves part of something unique and new?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:What new left are you even talking about? The small minority of sanders supporters that fancy themselves part of something unique and new? The younger, more radical, more economically focused left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
You mean those people who, after years of being inundated with messages telling them that voting is pointless and that their involvement can accomplish nothing, don't vote? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:You mean those people who, after years of being inundated with messages telling them that voting is pointless and that their involvement can accomplish nothing, don't vote? That is an unfortunate reality to the youth demographic. To be fair, it isn't like the blue left has the highest voting rate out there. To also be fair, it probably aren't those who are gun-ho about politics that don't vote. It's usually the "moderates".
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:The younger, more radical, more economically focused left. Ah, the nonvoting left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Ah, the nonvoting left. As said before, the people who are gunho about these things vote. It's mostly those who don't care about politics but just merely lean one way or the other who stay away from the polls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:The younger, more radical, more economically focused left. I would look more closely at quantitative and qualitative data on Sander's supporters. The idea that there is a new vanguard with strong ideological commitments to economic left leaning politics is not the reality. In short, there is no "new left"
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:I would look more closely at quantitative and qualitative data on Sander's supporters. The idea that there is a new vanguard with strong ideological commitments to economic left leaning politics is not the reality. In short, there is no "new left" This is true to a point. They aren't as different from the old guard as most think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:This is true to a point. They aren't as different from the old guard as most think. Yea, I think the US is going in a "my team is great and gently caress your team" direction from now forward. Even if the two democratic candidates were virtually identical there would be greater divisions between supporters of each candidate than in the past, with perhaps one side still suggesting they are 'a new and fresh perspective for the left'
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Yea, I think the US is going in a "my team is great and gently caress your team" direction from now forward. Even if the two democratic candidates were virtually identical there would be greater divisions between supporters of each candidate than in the past, with perhaps one side still suggesting they are 'a new and fresh perspective for the left' On the other hand, eat the rich and slaughter the plutocrats.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:The younger, more radical, more economically focused left. i think people farther to the left than social democrats have always included economic justice in their ideology. it's not new, it's just something that has resurfaced. ofc some will argue that the left focuses on economics -too- much, and some ppl might do that, but economic justice should certainly have a place in one's activism and politics or else it's pretty drat flawed imv (and the same goes for the vice-versa-- if u care about economic justice u also have to care about social justice and recognize those intersections).
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Yea but the people allegedly espousing these radical left leaning economic ideologies don't support many radical left leaning economic policies, so that paradox means the 'new left' is less about ideology and more about maybe identity and other things
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Yea but the people allegedly espousing these radical left leaning economic ideologies don't support many radical left leaning economic policies, so that paradox means the 'new left' is less about ideology and more about maybe identity and other things [citation needed]
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:To me, the blue left is classified as being highly loyal to the Democratic Party, pro-LGBT and racial equality, and subscribing to third wayism. I don't know what to call the new left. "Red left" would be a nice contrast, but they aren't really about that socialist life. "Next left" sounds stupid. "New left" is good, but taken. How about, "The Real left" since from what I can read, the blue left are pretty much centrists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Yea but the people allegedly espousing these radical left leaning economic ideologies don't support many radical left leaning economic policies, so that paradox means the 'new left' is less about ideology and more about maybe identity and other things Jesus how much can you talk out of your rear end in one post?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:[citation needed] You can do some research of your own. It's all out there. Sander's supporters say they want universal healthcare more frequently but they are less willing to pay it; they overwhelmingly support free education initiatives when asked but are less likely to pay for them; and the same goes for other vital services (infrastructure construction). Sander's supporters have conflicting approaches to supporting, internally and externally, the minimum wage and how to raise it. Most of the "new left" as we're calling it here is centered around an anti-wallstreet "do something to them so that they don't gently caress us again" perspective (a perspective that isn't new and isn't novel or unique to the left) Internet Explorer posted:Jesus how much can you talk out of your rear end in one post? You don't have to like it, frankly I am glad that you don't. Being part of something is an enormous part of what the Sander's movement is about. Similarly, if you supported Obama in 2008, a big part of his appeal was "Bush was loving awful and let's try something new and hopeful" rather than actual, concrete policy initiatives that can become law. The worst part of the Sander's movement is that it is basically Obama's (more substantial) movement minus the fear of uncertainty and self-doubt. In 2008 posters here were optimistic for big changes, but worried at what an American electorate could be trusted to do. There was lingering doubt in absolutely every second post (hence "arzying"). In the Sander's posts, there is just this arrogant "we are the true left" and "we easily can win and implement these major changes" without any real or necessary fear that maybe you won't, like, at all. Shammypants has issued a correction as of 04:07 on Jul 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
stop putting an apostrophe in Sanders you stupid gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Sander's supporters say they want universal healthcare more frequently but they are less willing to pay it; they overwhelmingly support free education initiatives when asked but are less likely to pay for them; and the same goes for other vital services (infrastructure construction). Sander's supporters have conflicting approaches to supporting, internally and externally, the minimum wage and how to raise it. I haven't seen this at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Thats a lot of words to say you don't actually know and your assertion was an asspull.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:50 |
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:I haven't seen this at all. http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/4/14/11421744/bernie-sanders-tax-revolution
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:22
|
|