Comments by "josh fritz" (@joshfritz5345) on "Ryan Chapman"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tuubi2783 The modern western urban monoculture is probably the furthest left wing culture in all of history. On social issues, the modern left is quite literally to the left of Stalin or Mao. You can try to frame yourself as the moderate position and everyone else as "far right", but it comes off as either closed minded or disingenuous when just about anyone outside of the urban monoculture bubble sees you as being crazy leftists.
It is true, it is possible to be further left on economics than the modern left wing establishment. Corporatism is a left of center system, occupying essentially the same space as fascism on the left-right spectrum, but it is to the right of fully socialist systems which seek to abolish private property and make corporations into government entities rather than have them be simply subservient to it. This isn't a disingenuous description of the socialist left's goals, it's an accurate description of what it seeks to do. The socialist left see the corporations as enemies only because they are not directly controlled by the government. If Amazon were a government service, nobody on the socialist left would be critical of them even if they were worse at providing services than they are currently.
If you look at anywhere else in the world today, or anywhere at any point in history with a tiny handful of exceptions (France and Weimar Germany were quite far left socially), nearly every other culture is to the right of our current neoliberal establishment. Culturally far left societies tend to adopt the concepts of "total equality" and "total liberation". Practically speaking, their goal is to remove all stigma from people for attributes and actions. This means the abolition of racism, the acceptance of gay rights, and also recognizing the rights of "child lovers", "animal lovers", refusal to punish criminals, and many other things.
The only consistent moral standard the cultural far left still have is "consent" where anything is permitted as long as both parties consent to it. They also choose to disbelieve that people can be born different despite all evidence to the contrary. This means a total rejection of genetics as a field of study, with the only exception being if genetics as a field is butchered to comply with the ideology's claim that everyone is equally capable. Obvious examples of this include the denial that men and women's bodies are different. This leads to the abolition of women's sports, and further promotes transgender ideology, who are already supported by virtue of being a repressed group.
Being a "total liberation" ideology, the cultural far left sees any repression as its enemy, and anyone who is or claims to be repressed is a victim to be saved and elevated. The abolition of many forms of bigotry can easily be seen as a positive, but it leads to problems where groups compete to be the most repressed due to the benefits granted to them for the reason of them being repressed. It also incentivizes self interested, successful people who are members of that group to prolong the problems which allow them to identify as repressed since they disproportionately benefit from the aid compared to other members of their group who gain comparatively little benefit from this aid.
1
-
@yordideleon6627 Republicans are only really liberal because they're trying to conserve the liberal values of the US.
I'd disagree with you on the last part. The progressive movement is quite openly illiberal. They espouse racial discrimination, the abolition of equal opportunity, censorship of "offensive" speech and try to force others to live how they live. Just a few years ago, they represented a small minority of the democrat party, but recently they've gained enormous cultural power. Woke progressivism has become the new political establishment, and evidence of this is that corporations change their logos to black squares and rainbows for the respective progressive holidays. Further evidence is the blatant left wing bias of most mainstream media as well as the court system (with the exception of the supreme court.)
Part of the problem is that the center-right faction only asks for their not to be censorship, for their not to be bias. The left demands the censorship of non-left establishment voices. If only the left is calling for censorship, every single compromise will result in the censorship of the right.
We see a similar problem with courts. Very few courts, even in deep red areas, have blatant conservative activist judges. Conservative justices tend to be fair and rule on the letter of the law. Leftist judges and prosecutors tend to be activists who will let rioters and looters go free, but will lock up conservatives, and even politically neutral individuals for putting up any sort of resistance. Gun control only affects the generally law abiding centrist and right leaning citizens (and in blue areas, the penalties for violating gun laws is very harsh. Having a 15 round magazine in a place with a capacity limit is a serious felony.) Criminals who commit serious violent felonies, even murder, are often let out on parole, while anyone trying to defend themselves are locked up for decades and have their rights violated.
I live in a blue state, and I see the kind of unequal treatment that people such as myself (anyone who isn't a leftist) are regularly subject to.
1
-
@yordideleon6627 Kyle Rittenhouse. George Floyd. There are a few others I can recall but don't remember the names of the men involved. In one, three men tried to stop a burglar, and when the burglar attacked the three men and one of them shot him, all three men were arrested, charged and sentenced to prison, including the man whose only form of participation was filming the event.
Democrats have become increasingly far left, and increasingly illiberal. Far left activists have infiltrated the Democrat party and have mostly taken it over by now. More moderate Democrats are being pushed out of the party. The courts have not been thoroughly infiltrated yet, but there are a number of rulings that have been made by activist judges. The biggest disparity is in media. Mainstream media is almost entirely controlled by the progressive establishment. This can affect court rulings, and it encourages activists everywhere to engage in street violence over things they don't even understand.
Most leftist activists who were rioting over Roe vs. Wade being overturned don't even realize that abortion remains legal in blue states. It's an army of brainwashed NPCs, incapable of independent thought. Orwell had a different word for such people, but he recognized the same phenomena. He called them something to the effect of "phonograph minds", people who will play whatever record is installed onto them by the media.
1
-
1
-
@yordideleon6627 I think clarifying classical liberal is very important in modern politics. In the US, and to some extent, other western countries, liberal has come to be synonymous with left wing. Socialists are left wing, but they are very much opposed to classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is capitalistic in nature, and in the context of the US, it also tends to favor upholding constitutional rights. The neo-liberal establishment (of which there is much overlap with the neo-conservatives) is a warmonger party which wages war for profit and to spread liberal values around the world.
To be fair, that wasn't meant to be a complete demographic analysis. It was a brief breakdown based on common stereotypes, which tend to have some truth in reality. Anyone of any political affiliation has the potential to be mis-informed, but in my experience, the modern left regularly and consistently gets so very much wrong. This really kicked off with non-stop lies about Trump and Covid. Before that point, the left didn't seem any more prone to blatant lying than the right, but something about Trump broke the left, caused them to adopt a more extreme ideology that rejected morality and embraced the idea of gaining power at any cost. It's a sort of "the ends justify the means" approach. Seize power no matter how many lies need be told and rules broken, then implement your party's policies which will fix everything, allegedly.
The problem is how utterly useless the establishment has been in implementing policies to benefit the general public. They are almost entirely beholden to the desires of corporate special interests with little concern at all for the wellbeing of the middle and working class. There are Republican establishment politicians, and I'd say they're even a majority. But the Democrat party is, more so than the Republican party, almost entirely establishment in nature. This is backed up by polls.
Middle and working class (of which there is overlap) Americans tend to vote Republican. There are exceptions such as state employees and union workers, but that's not important for this breakdown. Democrats tend to draw votes, and importantly, funding, from the unemployed poor and the very rich (top 1% people as well as corporations.) Tech giants, billionaires and upper middle class working non-labor jobs want stronger government either for political virtue signal reasons, or because they want more regulation in their industries to impair their competition. Tech giants lobby regulators to create laws that harm tech upstarts for example. The same is true of other industries like medicine and food. The unemployed poor want stronger government because they want to keep getting welfare checks.
On that we disagree. America is too divided to mend itself through non-violent means. We have politically motivated violence in the streets and activists infiltrating every branch of government, including schools. There are talks of secession on both sides, and frankly, it might not matter if a majority oppose a violent civil war. When states openly defy the authority of the federal government under the belief that they are wholly justified in doing so, nothing can prevent the fracturing of the nation. We are very clearly split into two factions. The US is no longer one nation, it is two separate nations grasping for control of the country and it's institutions. Some on both sides actively seek to force others to live how they do. Issues like abortion and election integrity are driving a wedge through this nation, and when we finally split apart, people will suffer and the damage caused will take years, maybe decades to mend.
1
-
@yordideleon6627 1. Classical liberalism is about, in large part, individual rights. If you don't have a right to private property, you can't have classical liberalism.
2. I'm sure there were crazy elements of the left, but Trump getting in completely broke the establishment left. There was a general sense that he shouldn't have won. Everyone knew Hillary was next in line, and when Trump won, everyone aligned with the establishment (including large sects of the Republican party) lost their shit.
3. Well, that's part of it. But there are studies that show that politicians have basically zero consideration for the voters. They only pass laws to help special interest groups. Also, mass shootings are an issue blown out of proportion and used as a political talking point. They account for a tiny fraction of violent crime in the US, unless you take what are basically falsified statistics from an activist group. Mass shootings are allowed to continue because they're a useful political tool.
4. I agree. I'm just breaking down that the Democrats are the party of the ultra rich and their serfs, while the Republicans are, to a degree, the worker's party.
5. You misunderstand, completely. I'm not calling for violence. I'm saying that violence is not only inevitable, it's already happening. The BLM riots, the January 6th capitol riot, the 2018 feminist capitol riot, several instances of domestic terrorism including running vehicles through crowds of people, politically motivated mass shootings, etc. I wish there was a peaceful solution, but it's too late for that. I really hope that I'm wrong and that everything simmers down, but I seriously doubt that it is possible to reunify at this point. The two factions in this country are split, and there is no way to reconcile them.
1
-
@user-tz6xl4yb4n Not necessarily. Not all populist movements are violent in nature, although as a revolutionary force, violence is a constant risk for populist movements. Fascism is a far right ideology that shares much in common with socialism. It seeks to nationalize large parts of industry, similarly to how communism does the same. A far right populist movement has the potential to turn fascist if it takes power, but inversely, a far left populist movement is likely to implement socialism or communism if it takes power. Also, not all populist movements are authoritarian in nature, libertarian populists are quite steadfast in their opposition to socialist and fascist movements even if they share a common enemy in the current political establishment. Personally, I identify as a libertarian populist, and if you're curious, I'm more than happy to share my side and have a discussion. I welcome all outside perspectives, even if I might not agree with them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1