SHE ADMITS IT!
THE SCHOOLS! BRAINWASHING INTO LEFTY SHEEPLE
It was church though. Let’s do separation of church and state
Every True Christian™ that I know, including family, voted for Trump.
For what it’s worth, I’m a Christian who didn’t. Mainly because I read the book… he’s a textbook false prophet.
That book is just full of liberal talking points.
Empathy? Compassion? Sounds like more shit from the looney left!
Empathy is a sin, haven’t you heard?
What kind of weirdo thinks about others when they could be thinking about themselves?
Are they stupid?
Do conservatives treat others how they want to be treated?
Worse. They treat people how they think they are treated. They think it’s getting even, or not falling behind. Everyone in the world is going to try and grift you for something, so you’d be stupid not to try yourself.
Lie, cheat, steal, grift. That spells winning apparently
thatsthejoke.jpg
I thought the same thing when I saw the community at first but the post title mentions the “radical left”.
Ok cool cool, but it’s a satire of a conservative’s satire of leftists post so it’s still a stretch to say it fits. It doesn’t even mention conservatives at all. It’s not even really all that left, either, as it promotes radicalism.
Then why aren’t you nicer to Trump? Hmm?
Edit: /s
This is flying a little close to a serious conservative statement, please clarify if this is satire/sarcasm. It can be as simple as adding “/s” to your commentThank you!
Apologies, assumed it was implied by community rules. To be fair it is a serious conservative statement, and IMO one worth mocking.
Np, yea this comm is gonna be walking a fine line to prevent r/thedonald 2.0 and the shorter a comment is the harder it is to detect the sarcasm/joke lol
When in doubt /s it
I guess if you’re a serial pedo-rapist, liar, grifter, racist, bastard you’d treat Trump nicely.
I don’t think well known radicals are following this rule.
No tolerance for the intolerant.
Or the tolerant but different political tribe, apparently.
it’s a 2 way street.
respect is freely given and easily lost.
Okay but those radicals in question basically oppose everyone mainstream, so they’re definitely not giving respect by default.
Say who you mean.
Far Left Radicals in Europe and the Americas are generally defined as anti-establishment, anarchist, marxist-leninist, and/or maoist.
For just one of many examples, Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA) has a couple thousand members and… oh… look at that, they’re a militant group who oppose NATO. They were originally funded by the Joseph Stalin administration in Russia.
And this is like the best most centrist example of a legitimate radical group. They’ve got 105 year history and they avoided spoiling Democrat candidates in elections for over 30 years. But they’re still violent extremists who advocate for foreign dictatorships.
CPUSA is campist, which is a common tendency in every large political bloc. Those who dogmatically defend the US and NATO are not much different from those who dogmatically oppose them, intellectually speaking. When looking outside the overton window campists can seem like the only representatives of their ideological tendency, but they’re just the most visible. Campists who support the status quo fly under the radar due to their sheer number; it’s the default position for those who have not developed strong political opinions of their own.
There’s a pretty big fucking difference between those who oppose the world’s largest defence pact and deterrent to World War 3 and those who support it.
You’re misinterpreting what I said. I said that those who dogmatically support or oppose NATO are not much different, in that their reasons are similar. That’s why I referred to campism - the belief that the world is divided into large, competing political groups of countries (“camps”) and that people should support the camp that promotes their ideology. It’s a sort of lesser-evilism that people with all sorts of different ideologies fall into, and it can end up being used as a thought-terminating cliche. When you dismiss everyone with leftist ideologies by pointing to some campists who oppose NATO as the representatives of the entire “radical left,” you are doing this yourself. It robs the discussion of nuance and turns it into a contest between sports teams.
Yeah I’m radicalized and I don’t follow this.
I treat people how they like to be treated.
What kind of radical policy stances do you hold?
The people who conspired to suppress the known damages of fossil fuels and actively suppressed any forms of new material/energy development so that they could line their pockets should be tried for crimes against humanity and possibly executed
Nearly all governmental types (westminister system for example) are from a bygone era and antiquated, massive reforms need to happen to bring these systems in line with todays increase in population and technology advancement
Civil asset forfeiture should be applied to all those who have wealth well beyond the common person, this money should be put into a national trust and used for socialist improvements for the general populace
Publicly listed companies/shareholder systems need to be discarded entirely as they prioritise wealth generation over everything else
Infrastructure needs be nationalised in a transparent for the people way
Corruption on the political level should be penalized with execution
Land shouldn’t be commodified to prevent our current day neofeudalism
A conscription like service for battling climate change should be enacted, nearly all “bullshit jobs” should effectively be made redundant by economic restructuring and these people are recruited to work on the problem that affects literally all of us
We should have post-scarcity/UBI as a goal to work towards
Aand that’s why I’m just some guy not a politician :)
So your radical stances are that you advocate for capital punishment, the state’s authority to end human life, and that all resources and businesses belong solely to the state who can dictate all labor distribution at will.
Pretty much everything else you said seemed pretty normal.
Yeah, that’s definitely a good example. Thank you for sharing.
Nope, I support capital punishment specifically for politicians. If you don’t want to have the potential of being sentenced to death don’t become a politician and do corrupt shit
Crimes against humanity is a once off global trial, and economic restructuring would hopefully prevent this from happening again.
The state should be in charge of infrastructure (phone, electricity, roads, water etc) but not personal business, it should however have the power to intervene and break up monopolies (See RCA in America) these services should be free for all by using the public fund taken from the ultrarich
Economic restructuring would have to make people redundant since by default a lot of jobs are actually pointless, so a service that acts in the interest of everyone is a good foundation to make sure these people are cared for.
And not a problem, it’s all good for us to disagree but you’ve missed the forest for the trees here my friend.
