Curious question, does the Left have any enemies to the Left anymore? I know there are anti-woke liberals who refuse to believe that wokeness is the logical outcome of liberalism (see Deneen on this). But in general, does the Left eschew anyone as too extreme?
That might be an indication of whether we have truly devolved into friend-enemy politics.
Curious question, does the Left have any enemies to the Left anymore? I know there are anti-woke liberals who refuse to believe that wokeness is the logical outcome of liberalism (see Deneen on this). But in general, does the Left eschew anyone as too extreme?
That might be an indication of whether we have truly devolved into friend-enemy politics.
In 2020, they let the guardrails down. But in the past year, the center-left has started to reassert itself and marginalize some of the more extreme BLM factions.
I have also read articles by gay people criticizing the trans movement. I think the coalition that needs uniting is the one in the abandoned center. I know a third party has never succeeded in the US. But we also have never been more politically divided and the fringes have never been more powerful within their parties. Under the right leader, it may be possible now to have a winning third party. It would be far more palatable for many to compromise with center left than far right.
Those aren't "enemies too extreme to the Left". Instead those are people the faction in control of the Democratic Party (the political vehicle of the Left in America) views as "not extreme enough".
I guess it hinges on how you view the Democrats. Are they a party dominated by the far-Left extremists? Or are they a party of centrists with some very loud, far-Left voices? For many years I believed the latter. I'm honestly not sure at this point. The Democratic leadership of the US Congress kneeling in worship of a racist, communist organization (BLM) was kind of an eye-opener for me about who's really in charge. To be fair, the Right's Jericho Rally in Dec 2020 was also an eye opener to me. The difference I see is, while there's plenty of crazy on both sides, the Left's crazy is in control most of the institutions in America.
Biden ran on being centrist and unifying the country- yet he's pursuing a new basis of "unity" - see: James Lindsay on Maoist America. A bit of an ah-ha for me on that one.
Perhaps another way to put this is that they are attempting to re-found the country on an entirely new basis. They are attempting to give it an explicitly theological (ideological) basis.
But what is the "Center?" It is a principled position, or some compromise with...whatever?
Re: your post above on Ukraine - just how much dissent from your opinion until those who do not agree with you (I do not) are "villifiers" and no better than the race-revivalists?
I can't speak for Lucy, but for me victim blaming Ukraine by saying its wanting to align with the West to defend against Russian aggression (and hopefully reduce corruption) justifies the Russian aggression isn't acceptable.
"Victim-blaming Ukraine by its wanting to align with the West to defend against Russian aggression" is pretty loaded, Eugine - it presumes all the answers to questions it really does not ask. As to "hopefully reduce corruption," perhaps that is better left unsaid...
How about Russia having been a defensive power for centuries, and "the West" (the American Govt.) having broken every promise and expanded aggressively; how about "our" empire having become what Athens became when they told their own allies, the Melians: "The strong do what they will, the weak do what they must" - and then slaughtering them. That our leaders openly talk about "killing Russians" (and every Ukrainians man - and woman - near-to fighting age) rather echoes that sentiment (Thucydides. Peloponnesian Wars).
I have yet to see a moralistic "take" on foreign policy that did not urge maximum bloodshed to..."end all wars." The American Govt. has not even tried to craft an enforceable peace - by its own admission.
All of this is directly related to what you dislike here at home - why you are here; your citizenship has been degraded to the point where you are nearly - and I say nearly, or I would not be here - an imperial subject. You don't think that we could become subject to domestic drone warfare, here? This will "come home" - just like the "War on Terror" has.
I will add - lest we degenerate into régime/party talking points - that I don't need to sympathize with "Russia" to say what I have said - never mind their invasion/war.
Imperialism always carries moralistic...justifications - and that includes domestic imperialism - the source of our complaints on this forum.
> How about Russia having been a defensive power for centuries,
Having defensively conquered a huge empire.
> and "the West" (the American Govt.) having broken every promise and expanded aggressively;
Where by "expanded aggressively" you mean didn't forbid former Russian satellites from joining NATO.
> how about "our" empire having become what Athens became when they told their own allies, the Melians: "The strong do what they will, the weak do what they must"
Funny, all the people I've heard endorse that sentiment have been anti-Ukrainian.
> I have yet to see a moralistic "take" on foreign policy that did not urge maximum bloodshed to..."end all wars."
Periods of peace have only ever happened under the protection of a dominant power. Hence, the tendency to name them after that power, e.g., Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, Pax Americana.
> All of this is directly related to what you dislike here at home - why you are here; your citizenship has been degraded to the point where you are nearly - and I say nearly, or I would not be here - an imperial subject.
Do you have any idea what kind of rights citizens of other countries have? Hint: less than Americans.
What was the post-scriptum which Mr. Kurtz left in the margins of his report to the International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs? "Exterminate the brutes!"
Curious question, does the Left have any enemies to the Left anymore? I know there are anti-woke liberals who refuse to believe that wokeness is the logical outcome of liberalism (see Deneen on this). But in general, does the Left eschew anyone as too extreme?
That might be an indication of whether we have truly devolved into friend-enemy politics.
In 2020, they let the guardrails down. But in the past year, the center-left has started to reassert itself and marginalize some of the more extreme BLM factions.
There are liberals have loudly criticized the woke left. See e.g. https://thehub.ca/2023-06-02/patrick-luciani-you-dont-have-to-be-a-conservative-to-be-anti-woke/
I have also read articles by gay people criticizing the trans movement. I think the coalition that needs uniting is the one in the abandoned center. I know a third party has never succeeded in the US. But we also have never been more politically divided and the fringes have never been more powerful within their parties. Under the right leader, it may be possible now to have a winning third party. It would be far more palatable for many to compromise with center left than far right.
Those aren't "enemies too extreme to the Left". Instead those are people the faction in control of the Democratic Party (the political vehicle of the Left in America) views as "not extreme enough".
I guess it hinges on how you view the Democrats. Are they a party dominated by the far-Left extremists? Or are they a party of centrists with some very loud, far-Left voices? For many years I believed the latter. I'm honestly not sure at this point. The Democratic leadership of the US Congress kneeling in worship of a racist, communist organization (BLM) was kind of an eye-opener for me about who's really in charge. To be fair, the Right's Jericho Rally in Dec 2020 was also an eye opener to me. The difference I see is, while there's plenty of crazy on both sides, the Left's crazy is in control most of the institutions in America.
Biden ran on being centrist and unifying the country- yet he's pursuing a new basis of "unity" - see: James Lindsay on Maoist America. A bit of an ah-ha for me on that one.
Perhaps another way to put this is that they are attempting to re-found the country on an entirely new basis. They are attempting to give it an explicitly theological (ideological) basis.
What do you mean by "centrist"? A centrist from a decade ago would be considered "far right" today.
But what is the "Center?" It is a principled position, or some compromise with...whatever?
Re: your post above on Ukraine - just how much dissent from your opinion until those who do not agree with you (I do not) are "villifiers" and no better than the race-revivalists?
I can't speak for Lucy, but for me victim blaming Ukraine by saying its wanting to align with the West to defend against Russian aggression (and hopefully reduce corruption) justifies the Russian aggression isn't acceptable.
"Victim-blaming Ukraine by its wanting to align with the West to defend against Russian aggression" is pretty loaded, Eugine - it presumes all the answers to questions it really does not ask. As to "hopefully reduce corruption," perhaps that is better left unsaid...
How about Russia having been a defensive power for centuries, and "the West" (the American Govt.) having broken every promise and expanded aggressively; how about "our" empire having become what Athens became when they told their own allies, the Melians: "The strong do what they will, the weak do what they must" - and then slaughtering them. That our leaders openly talk about "killing Russians" (and every Ukrainians man - and woman - near-to fighting age) rather echoes that sentiment (Thucydides. Peloponnesian Wars).
I have yet to see a moralistic "take" on foreign policy that did not urge maximum bloodshed to..."end all wars." The American Govt. has not even tried to craft an enforceable peace - by its own admission.
All of this is directly related to what you dislike here at home - why you are here; your citizenship has been degraded to the point where you are nearly - and I say nearly, or I would not be here - an imperial subject. You don't think that we could become subject to domestic drone warfare, here? This will "come home" - just like the "War on Terror" has.
I will add - lest we degenerate into régime/party talking points - that I don't need to sympathize with "Russia" to say what I have said - never mind their invasion/war.
Imperialism always carries moralistic...justifications - and that includes domestic imperialism - the source of our complaints on this forum.
> How about Russia having been a defensive power for centuries,
Having defensively conquered a huge empire.
> and "the West" (the American Govt.) having broken every promise and expanded aggressively;
Where by "expanded aggressively" you mean didn't forbid former Russian satellites from joining NATO.
> how about "our" empire having become what Athens became when they told their own allies, the Melians: "The strong do what they will, the weak do what they must"
Funny, all the people I've heard endorse that sentiment have been anti-Ukrainian.
> I have yet to see a moralistic "take" on foreign policy that did not urge maximum bloodshed to..."end all wars."
Periods of peace have only ever happened under the protection of a dominant power. Hence, the tendency to name them after that power, e.g., Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, Pax Americana.
> All of this is directly related to what you dislike here at home - why you are here; your citizenship has been degraded to the point where you are nearly - and I say nearly, or I would not be here - an imperial subject.
Do you have any idea what kind of rights citizens of other countries have? Hint: less than Americans.
"Do you have any idea..." "Hint..."
Really?
Do you have any substantive response.
To what, Eugine? Have I been...refuted?
What was the post-scriptum which Mr. Kurtz left in the margins of his report to the International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs? "Exterminate the brutes!"
Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Libya etc. etc. ad nauseum...
Might as well carry on, Eugine - to the end.
You are aware that Mr. Kurtz is a fictional character from a work of propaganda?
Ok, Eugine.
I must have missed that.