Exh grbytbtrfgytff
The views on our political system, political parties and ideologies ,bi/partisanship and similar polemic things are written in the book Mediations of a Militant Moderate https://books.google.com/books?id=VMZHuyK5NTsC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q&f=false are an outline for at least some of my polemic views
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/jvu8to/i_used_to_be_a_liberal_4_years_ago_but_im/ and
The vast majority of politicians in the US, Europe etc are whites and that is an injustice
So with so many white politicians , it is a hard truth that naturally whites to have control of the political system. Whites have been major players behind relevant decisions .
Even in countries made up of mostly BIPOC politicians, whites are then promoted into power positions as advisers and ministers by these officials.
This injustice is why I support more political diversity as seen throughout this blog
I am against politicians being corrupt.
Liberal 2.0ers and their political views are on a higher hierarchy than non Liberal 2.0ers on the left and right and their political views and I am against hierarchies.
I am against both partisan extremes along with Liberalism 2.0.
If I sound partisan/too partisan on issues ,blame the polarizing politicians ,MSM, and political system itself for me having to be non partisan/too partisan on said issues. I , along with most Americans are victims of this polarizing/partisan political tug of war between the left and right for too long where me being a ‘militant moderate’ is getting harder by the day
Democrats exist to be a foil to the Republicans. The two parties were similar for so long but the Democrats chose to be the more ‘liberal party’ to differentiate itself from the Republicans. The Democrats embrace Liberal, Liberal 2.0 and progressive (and extremely rare leftist) views more to differentiate themselves from the Republicans than to naturally or truly have said views
Not left , not liberal 2.0, not right but Forward.
Beyond/transcend the left, liberal 2.0 and right but against the center.
Reject the left , liberal 2.0 and right.
To people who say we Leftists should “should stand up for the weak and vulnerable” , my response is, enjoy your ‘Left’ (though really Liberal 2.0 if you think about it), built on weakness and a collective inability to criticize each other another. I will be over here building my Left, which isn’t full of lame snowflakes frantically carving out safe spaces and whining about criticism. Debate it if you want, otherwise bless your heart
I don't see politics along a Left/Liberal 2.0/Right divide, I see politics along a Top/Bottom divide.
We can’t go back to the middle ages or even back a few decades like right wingers and reactionaries want (due to the system being stacked against them) and we do not want to go in the Liberal 2.0 misdirection so we might as well go way way Left .
Maybe by going that far left we can discover a new political spectrum wing that can please all Left Wingers, Libleft and AuthLeft alike, non extremist right wingers and reactionaries and maybe even Liberal 2.0ers at the same time (possibly a new political spectrum wing that is the closest approximation of what Fourth political positionism, Fifth political positionism, Sixth political positionism, Seventh political positionism would look like in our universe with our laws of nature)
I could be described as a double fishhook theory triangulation Centrist (extreme upper center)
We need healthy ideas from the left and right to unite us. People should build strategic alliances with political, cultural and ideological opponents
I support developing and improving directly with autonomous citizen councils and municipal spaces
Our political parties should attend to the conciliation needs of each person who participates in our political parties that is based on the commitment of the political parties’ regulations and protocols to attend to those needs and also when appropriate in the exercise of his public function.
We should ensure free, voluntary and open participation in our political parties to all people of all backgrounds, share the defense of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the democratic method of citizen participation and direct. We should also honestly discuss and respect all opinions, an objective for which we’ll always attempt to promote dialogue and the search for consensus
Our political ideologies should be rooted in protocols of loyalty, respect, and understanding. This should management should have a necessary and fundamental that had a clear feminist focus
Political parties should be structured like Podemos. Our current political parties are part of a political caste and we must end this political caste system
Politicians should not be into careerism and ambition
Ordinary people should have control of our political organizations
Politicians need to have a presence in social organizations and be among the people
I am fine with political parties not having trade union power within them
I am part Austromarxist because Austromarxism is relevant today due to the growing complexity of the new contexts of global society and the multiplication of migrations and refugees. Austromarxism is also relevant today due to the need to respond to minorities through accommodation via mechanisms of territorial and non territorial autonomy.
I support the creation of a caucus thats values include providing Tripartisan, Triangulation and paricpatory ideas on illegal immigration , ending wars or finding better alternatives to wars and and warmongering by the US, and promoting fair trade that benefit American workers
Congress should adopt a series of measurements and goals that can be modified and reexamined over time.
Representatives should select from these measures based on what they believe their constituents would care about then suggest how the laws they are passing will improve them.
I feel these measurements such as, but not limited to should be used to measure our GDP: Poverty rates, Life expectancy, Rates of Business formation, Clean Water, Crime Rates, Overdose deaths, Government Efficiency, Mental Health, Income Growth & Average Incomes, Affordability, Environmental Sustainability, Recidivism, Labor-force participation Rate, Military Readiness, Marriage Rates, Quality of Infrastructure, Rehabilitation Rates, Civic Engagement, Education Rates
I support Defensive Democracy in some cases when I deem it justified (and I would never support Defensive Democracy in situations where it excessively repressed of civil rights).
Defensive democracy is a collections of laws, legislation that is delegates and court rulings which limit specific rights and freedoms in a Constitutional Republic Democracy in order to protect the existence of the state and its character, human rights and institutions.
Defensive Democracy refers to major conflict that could come about in a Democratic Constitutional Republic country between adherence with such country’s values, (like freedom of association, the right to be elected, and between preventing parties, groups and peoples who are anti democratic from abusing these principles.
I repudiate the modern Republican GOP. I reject modern conservativsm as corrupt and decrepit
People on both sides have a common tendency to exaggerate the viewpoints of their ideological opponents They usually see on average, twice as much difference as actually exists. See this meme and post for a little more on this
According to Glenn Grunwald : “I would be on [Fox News] every day if I didn’t say no sometimes. Why is that happening? It’s bizarre. You look at any article on my work and it’s “far leftist Glenn Greenwald” and now I’m the most frequent guest on Tucker Carlson’s show. How did that happen? I think the reason is so many people on the left and on the right . . . have so much more in common in terms of their political views and their common enemies than either want to recognize. . . . Those old labels [left and right] don’t really tell us much anymore.”
There are also imagined extremism. This comes in a via conflicts over abortion rights, the interpretation of a racial-ethnic incident, the attitudes of certain social viewpoints etc . Most Democrats see Republicans as fascists , most Republicans see Democrats as Socialists
Like saying someone who is against someone saying that Transgender women shouldn’t compete in Women’s sports ‘doesn't want Transgender people to exist’. or saying that someone who is against the 1619 project being taught in schools is ‘against students in schools learning about slavery’. or saying that supporting states requiring id to vote is trying to prevent minorities from voting or that those laws are ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
In disputes on politics, everyone seriously overestimates the polarization between both sides. This is due to demonization by each side toward the other
To quote William Mckinley “our differences are policies our agreements are principals”
Democrats-Liberals don't embrace Republican-Conservative views because they feel Republican-Conservatives aren't on the same team so their views are bad due to them being associated with Republicans-Conservatives. Republicans-Conservatives don't embrace Democrats-Liberals views because they feel Democrats-Liberals aren't on the same team so their views are bad due to them being associated with Democrats-Liberals (which is why Republicans and Conservatives rejected former President Barack Obama’s policies they should have embraced since Obama was almost like a Democrat version of GWB).
Anarcho Libertarianism is good because it (along with Anarchism as a whole) has a unique focus on community and collaboration that goes deeper than hollow tone deaf ,inclusive Capitalism
We should advance detailed arguments for workplace democracy rooted in such natural law principles as subsidiarity, which we defend as morally desirable and as a probable outcome of the elimination of injustice rather than as something that is mandated by the state.
Natural law approaches to land reform and factory occupation by workers. Rejecting natural law that grounds to intellectual property protections, while building on property rights more general and developing a general natural law account of boycotts.
Rudolf Rocker echoes my views on the relation between Anarchism and Liberal Socialism : “Modern anarchism is the confluence of the two great currents which during and since the French revolution have found such characteristic expression in the intellectual life of Europe: Socialism and Liberalism. The classical liberal ideals were wrecked on the realities of capitalist economic forms.
Anarchism is necessarily anti-p capitalist in that it opposes the exploitation of man by man. But anarchism also opposes the dominion of man over man. It insists that socialism will be free or it will not be at all. In its recognition of this lies the genuine and profound justification for the existence of anarchism. From this point of view, anarchism may be regarded as the libertarian wing of socialism.
It is in this spirit that Daniel Guérin has approached the study of anarchism in Anarchism and other works.” This is also touched upon by Noam Chomsky here
The Republicans and some progressive or liberal conservative populists were the inclusive political party to at least the late 1960s (non racist, non antisemetic) . Those ideals were what the Republican party was founded on in the 1850s. The Republicans need to get back to being like that
I know that the party switch really happened, since why would political historians and scholars ever lie about something as important as that fact when doing so would hurt the Democrats and prop up the Republicans?
But if this ‘no party switch’ myth by extreme Republicans at Conservapedia about how the party switch never happened was actually true instead of being alternative facts (blatant lies) and Republican propaganda , I would in that warped world, be much less hard on Republicans than I try to be now and I would in that strange world actively support the Freedom Caucus . But as it is in our world, nope.
What really happened between both political parties can be found here
The Republicans of the 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s were a GREAT political party and I am fine with that incarnation of them. In particular the Rockefeller Republicans and Richard Nixon, who actually had some Progressive traits. https://www.wsj.com/articles/richard-nixon-progressive-president-epa-title-ix-detente-cancer-desegregation-11636671414
The Democrat Conservatives of the 1960s were a lot better than the Republican Conservatives from the 1970s onward. This is why I am a supporter of 1960s Democrat Conservatism
The Republicans in the 1980s were a fairly good political party. Back then Republicans were seen as go getter yuppies and business people.
On Family Ties for example, Alex, who was a Republican was a small-government, pro-capitalist libertarian at heart was a great person unlike some of the Republicans of today. Alex was hip and cool. This article puts it better than I can http://web.archive.org/web/20191011195307/https://www.cracked.com/article_26594_the-classic-sitcom-that-looks-completely-insane-in-2019.html
The Republicans in the early to mid 1990s were also a good party. Uncle Phil from the Fresh Prince of Bel Air was a great Republican. He rightfully belived in Affirmative action and fair housing for his community and he was moderately conservative on other issues while rightfully having faith in institutions like the courts.
In another world, in the 2010s, 2020s etc, I would support this Fantasy world Republican Party (ONLY when they are in a coalition with a reinstated National Union Party ,newly formed American version of the Labour Party UK or a national version of the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party since in that world those political parties would be major political parties in the US)
In some ways I feel (from a far left Tankie perspective) that anti authoritarianism is fascist (or at least the type directed at the USSR, China in the last half century, and similar Tankie countries)
I wouldn’t mind seeing political machines make a comeback, but only if they were organized like Podemos
Liberal 2.0ers , Radical Right Wingers, and far rightists today are an angry opposition that are no longer capable of participating constructively in political debate with relatively level headed opposition
This article contrasts how Liberal 2.0ers are on hot button issues with how former President Abraham Lincoln was on hot button issues
Why can’t they debate using politeness, reason, and conviction (and maybe humor and charm)?
“It is harder, but not less important, for us to try and communicate with those who do not agree with us on every issue. And it is important to see where if possible, and I do believe it is possible, we can find common ground." Bernie Sanders
In terms of views, Liberal 2.0ers , Radical Right Wingers, and far rightists today are so unmoored from the reality of other views that they take on the paranoid style. I am sure most of them are capable of being reasonable .
Republicans and Conservatives need to drop the us vs them populism and find reasons to unite with the other side instead of fight with them.
Similarly the Liberal 2.0ers and some non Liberal 2.0 Democrats take a page straight out of the revisionist /International Communism (anti Individualist and anti Liberal revisionist International Communism only) playbook and the Fascist playbook which is to label anyone that doesn't think like them as the enemy
I think free as I wish... so I must be a total pos to them huh? I just don’t want people to hurt other people in their choices.
Both types of us vs them thinking by the Republicans and Democrats are disabling , everywhere you go you feel like people are judging you simply due to you believe in liberty/equality for everyone.
Politicians should not make decisions based on emotions but based on rational thinking. Being compassionate is good but there needs to be a balance with decision making
Democrats, Progressives and Liberal 2.0ers should drop the purity tests. People should support views based on research and independent thought not party lines)
I support political leaders who don't force their will upon people
Since an America socialistic Revolution is very likely not happening within the near future, I tepidly give extremely cautious and unenthused support to some Squad members who are populists (like AOC unironically)
AOC and her Squad populists literally can’t enact our Left wing policies /non Liberal 2.0 policies herself themselves since AOC and her populist Squadron are working in a system stacked against NON Liberal 2.0ers (AOC teeters on Liberal 2.0 and non Liberal 2.0 left).
I realize that Republicans and corporate Democrats are far worse on imperialism than progressives like AOC and the Squad populists.
AOC and the Squad populists are not perfect, but they’re the best types of non Liberal 2.0 politicians to the left of Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema and most practical politicians between both parties that we can use to defeat Liberalism 2.0 now and usher in a socialistic revolution.
AOC wants to reform the Democrats to make them go left of Liberalism 2.0 which is great with the added bonus of the Democrats shedding themselves of Liberalism 2.0 , Capitalism and corporatist fascism
For example while working as a bartender, she auditioned with Justice Democrats (.com) when she heard that a new PAC, started after his failed 2016 Presidential run by disgruntled Bernie Sanders campaign staffers and leaders, who were looking for people to “audition” as candidates to run against incumbents for Congressional seats, with the goal of the take over of Congress by Progressives committed to the JD/BNC platform.
The Justice Democrats’ (JD) purpose is the takeover of the Democratic Party, because in order to save the soul of the Democratic Party the Justice Democrats will board the Democratic Party ship and take it over. (This is the proper definition of “mutiny”)
Cenk Uygur also said that the Justice Democrats will run strong progressives (hopefully non Liberal 2.0 ones only) from now on and they will be the new wing of the Democratic Party. Maybe this can include getting an intellectual fringe to seize key positions of authority and power within the Democrat Party and eventually bring large numbers of people around (similar to what the Koch brothers did with their pro-business libertarianism)
This political ideology was greatly influenced by Subhas Chandra Bose who in the 1930s advocated a aggressive revolution against the British Empire to gain total independence for India.
However, sadly DSA are “woke-cialist,” so they are a bit Liberal 2.0 too (if the DSA wrongfully moves right, I would rather the DSA become Blue Dog or New Democrat or maybe even center right instead of becoming Liberal 2.0) . But the only place I want the DSA to be is Left wing (and thus non Liberal 2.0 which means NON wokecalist)
DSA just keeps woke young people in particular voting Democrat. The DSA are sadly and essentially a recruiting wing of the DNC for young people at this point.
It is not common for so called ‘Socialist’ organizations to be primarily focused on wokeness but unfortunately, the DSA seems that they focus on that more than economics instead of balancing the two properly like I outline in this blog
The DSA seems to function as a way to capture economic Leftist sentiment and redirect it to idpol and therefore the Democrats.
Why lesser of two evils (Democrats) has drawbacks, like here, here and here. Also see my post here, and the case for Dem Exit blog here. At minimum I echo the general sentiment in this post
This post here, shows that a Third Party can be successful , and that post destroys the ‘Democrats are lesser of two evils’ rhetoric. That post says that voting for the Democrat Party is like voting for the New Republican Party. The Democrats play the ‘good cop’, while Republicans play the ‘bad cop’
While it would be base to see the Democrats become non Liberal 2.0 and you would think them becoming the New Republican Party would move them right of Liberalism 2.0, thus becoming non Liberal 2.0 , however…..
Unfortunately seeing how that type of ‘shift’ by the Democrats to become the New Republican party only involves them staying where they are on the political spectrum while Democrats take some non Liberal 2.0 policies right of Liberalism 2.0 and make those particular non Liberal 2.0 policies become Liberal 2.0 by sanitizing them (like making Neoconservatism be used to spread western morality, abusing entrapenaurship to spread wokeness, using the FBI to go after Leftists , moderates and Conservatives instead of how they used to be used etc) .
And so, that type of ‘shift’ won’t move the Democrat to become non Liberal 2.0 to the right of Liberalism 2.0. Thus the Democrats will still be Liberal 2.0 and closer to being negative than positive in my eyes even if they make that pseudo shift to become the New Republican Party
The Democrats becoming the New Republican Party is happening, as the Democrat strategy is to 1) win REPUBLICAN voters, and 2) lose voters who have been loyal Democrats. Chuck Schumer said “For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin”
To people who claim that Joe Biden is a ‘lesser of two evils’, which Joe Biden is your favorite? Alleged rapist Joe Biden?, war criminal Joe Biden?, or segregationist Joe Biden?"
If not voting for Joe Biden is a vote for Donald Trump, then not voting for Donald Trump is a vote for Joe Biden.
If Bernie Sanders tells me to vote for a rapist who touted his work with segregationists and who said that he would veto Medicare for All, then I'm going to tell Bernie to fuck off
Did Joe Biden release kids from cages since 2021? Nope. Read State and Revolution
If we decide to reject the lesser of two evils method, then we can use the Anti partyarchy method. Anti Partyarchy, is against pursuing libertarian ends through statist means, especially political parties (since Libertarians aren’t likely to win elections).
Libertarianism is not an eternal or timeless thing. If you have an very well functioning government and politics, libertarian principles seem less relevant.
This Anti Lesser of Two evils method is to not support political engagement (i.e political party promotion) which can be a way to transition to a left wing society without having to settle for the lesser of two evil Democrats.
If we choose to oppose electoral voting and political reform we can instead use alternative strategies outside of the political systems in order to achieve a free society.
I feel that such a society could be freed more readily if we employ methods like education, direct action, alternative currencies, self sufficiency, civil disobedience ,entrepreneurship and counter economics.
I also support Deep Organizing, see here, here, here, here, here and here for background and how to do that . Also see this post for tangible steps we can take toward building a better tomorrow. This post is primer on political strategy, which uses the great example of MLK Jr and African Americans during the Civil Rights movement (and a less SJW way to boycott too)
The case for running spoiler candidates (see here)
Or maybe try this strategy for elections. If it's a swing state, keep the worst politicans out. If it's another state, do what you feel like.
I like using this strategy to put unelectable MAGA candidates on the main election tickets so they can be easier to beat for the Democrats
Some leftists (not me) feel that Republicans in power is actually preferable to Democrats in power even if we discount the Liberalism 2.0 element of the Democrats.
To them, with Democrats in power it softens the blows of big capital while promoting illusions among the working class.
These leftists say that with a Republicans in power, they takes off the gloves, increasing exploitation and thus driving the mass movement towards anti capitalist conclusions. Basically left acceleration. Eventually we may have to do something drastic as this to create a truly Left Wing society .
Like get the root canal now (Republicans) instead of downing pain killers (Democrats) for years or decades. Democrats make us complacent but they are not left wing and we cannot keep settling for trash. We will never have a socialistic ,left wing egalitarian society if we do that, ever . Look at the USSR and the October Revolution for inspiration.
Maybe Retiring All Government Employees (RAGE) and draining the deep state would be a good place to start (Chile’s Left says politicians shouldn’t be politicians for more than a few years as to keep things fresh). No one would direct this system, and barely anyone who participates in it says that it’s a system at all.
I am open minded to supporting, in a Joseph of Arithmea type way politicians who are part of Peter Thiel’s New Right (i.e JD Vance, Blake Masters) . My reason would be they are as Anti Liberal 2.0 as I am and they have neat ideas
I would not believe that those type of Republicans who I vote for would be able to pass any of their right wing legislation that goes against my values since most Republicans who are socially like those Republicans are all talk and no action on getting their policies passed. If I had doubts about this for a second however, I would instead abstain from voting in said election
I was back and forth between Tim Ryan and New Right’s JD Vance in their 2022 Senate battle since August, but started to lean in the direction toward JD when the election was called for him. This article gives some good points on Vance
The Liberalism 2.0 of the US will stop eventually, but it won’t “level out” so to speak. The pendulum will swing in the opposite direction (to the radical right). When that happens it is gonna look a lot worse than what we have now with Liberal 2.0ers
I apolitically symbolically and morally (as in moral victory) see the ‘US Color Revolution’ from 2020 as badass and a bold way to create something new . It was an effective revolution for the Democrats
https://www.conservapedia.com/2020_Leftwing_insurrection. I like reading Conservapedia because I consider Conservapedia to be alternate history/fan fiction
Comments
Post a Comment