I mean, its not really a purity test. It’s just kind of definitions. The political terms “right” and “left” have meant the same thing since the French Revolution. Democrats are not left wing. We can have a whole bunch of ancillary discussions about whether that means people should or shouldn’t vote for them, which I’m not interested in having, but i struggle to see how one could argue in good faith that the Democrats are left wing. Its really not even clear that Ocasio-Cortez or Sanders are “left wing” since neither seems to oppose private property rights, nor do they advocate for the weakening or abolishment of capitalism - the traditional dividing line of left and right.
leftism is defined by opposition to the status quo. the french monarchy was capitalist as well as the status quo at the time; we still have monarchies and capitalism is unquestionably the status quo.
opposition to the status quo is the definition of leftism, but anyone can be forgiven for not understanding this since westerners define it in the same terms as classical liberalism due to monarchies still (barely) being the status quo back then (and still existing to this day); back then, liberalism was “left” of that.
now-a-days neo-liberalism is the dominant hegemony and it’s pro-capitalist; anything to the left of that is modern day leftism.
I’m being less than 100% precise here. The line I’m drawing is that abolition of private property rights is co-terminus with abolition of capitalism.
“Ask them ‘what’s more important, human rights or property rights’. If they reply 'property rights are human rights, they’re on the right”.
e: I’m just going to add explicitly, since there’s clearly some confusion looking at the other sister comments. It’s not about monarchism or any of that. Its two things: Property rights and social hierarchies. If you want em gone, you’re on the left. from that perspective you need not change the definition of left and right in 1799 and 1848, and all the same from Maréchal to Mélenchon.
Ok, this is making things more clear, although I get the impression I’d have to know way more about the Fr. Revolution, and maybe the following period in France to actually understand it. Was it really politically commonplace already in early 19th c. to demand abolishment of property?
i have to assume that this is genuine since i don’t see anything funny about it.
bernie insists the isreali main talking point: isreal has a right to exist and co-opts leftward fervor by lending his support to the party he doesn’t belong to.
aoc voted against marjorie taylor green’s attempts to block the iron dome’s re-inforcements several times as well a voted for the resolution for redefining antisemitism to isreali benefit; include speaking out against the genocide.
mamdani is not at the national level and cannot do anything about it.
Not to mention that MTG wanted that funding redirected to the fascist bullshit she supports at the U.S. border. It’s interesting that Thomas Massie also voted in favor of this bill given he and MTG are part of the Thiel dark money “progressive” team along with hypocrites like Ro Kahnna, who pretend to support Palestine, yet hold investments in fucking Palantir.
that tweet from aoc makes it clear that she values the lives of isrealis over gazans since she ignores the facts that 1) these weapons are going to the idf who doesn’t make a distinction between defensive and offensive where gazans are concerned and 2) the idf had re-appropriated weaponry from one use to the other.
also: nice deflection in ignoring her vote on the definition of antisemitism w a tweet showing a half truth.
Do you actually know what the iron dome is? Hint: it’s not a weapon.
Coincidentally, given that you’re ignoring everything else about the proposal redirecting funding, and especially the dark money that’s also funding the person that created the proposal, do you know who just happens to be in the process of building a competitor to the iron dome? And who also would be receiving that redirected money through the government contracts one of his companies has with U.S. immigration customs enforcement? The same company that is providing Israel with the AI being used to carry out genocide.
And yeah I do think it was a shitty thing for AOC to vote in favor of a definition that gives Israel too much protection, but it’s more than a bit of a stretch to call that greenlighting genocide, especially given what you’re criticizing her for not supporting.
Pointing out the truth behind her not voting to stop funding going into the iron dome, given that the funding would be directed back to Palantir isn’t a deflection. It’s just the reality of what’s beneath the surface of the bullshit that you’re apparently falling for.
the weapons that were earmarked for the iron dome were used against the gazans and the iranians. it doesn’t matter what their stated purpose is like it doesn’t matter if you give full or partial political cover for genociders like aoc is doing; you’re still helping genociders.
The iron dome is a fucking dome that keeps weapons fired from outside of Israel from entering Israel.
It really doesn’t matter how you try to rationalize it. The funding would have gone back into the company that has enabled genocide to happen.
You’re supporting something that was meant to redirect money to Peter Thiel, but disguised as somehow being helpful for Palestine because it was taking money from the Israeli defense shield that Peter Thiel is in the process of copying.
It’s a fucking scheme. More money for Thiel/Palantir means more money for the campaign contributions and/or the investments of the hypocrites in congress (MTG, Massie, Kahnna, probably many more) that do his bidding by peddling this bullshit. AOC may be guilty of indirectly helping Israel avoid deserved criticism, but every time you fall for this dumb shit you’re being sold, you’re directly helping Peter Theil continue to enable the fucking genocide to happen. And since he continues to be so successful, it’s not stopping with Israel and Gaza. It’s spreading around the fucking globe like a disease. Congratulations 👏
I swear that even full trumpists are less obnoxious on the internet than you blue magas because while they try to choke me with the same capitalist nonesense, they are at least more honest and don’t pretend to be on the left.
So they don’t pass your purity test, and “nobody should support them.”
But according to right wing and right of center propaganda they’re radical leftist, and “nobody should support them.”
It’s pretty neat that you and the right have the exact same messaging.
Purity testing is good, you’re just mad because you don’t pass
I mean, its not really a purity test. It’s just kind of definitions. The political terms “right” and “left” have meant the same thing since the French Revolution. Democrats are not left wing. We can have a whole bunch of ancillary discussions about whether that means people should or shouldn’t vote for them, which I’m not interested in having, but i struggle to see how one could argue in good faith that the Democrats are left wing. Its really not even clear that Ocasio-Cortez or Sanders are “left wing” since neither seems to oppose private property rights, nor do they advocate for the weakening or abolishment of capitalism - the traditional dividing line of left and right.
Wasn’t the French revolution just abolishing feudalism and the monarchy?
Under feudalism: Left is about abolishing feudalism and the monarchy. Right is about preserving them.
Under capitalism: Left is about abolishing capitalism and the bourgeoisie. Right is about preserving them.
leftism is defined by opposition to the status quo. the french monarchy was capitalist as well as the status quo at the time; we still have monarchies and capitalism is unquestionably the status quo.
You’ve just introduced a whole other definition of leftism. Also it seems to mean that no leftist society could exist in practice.
From what I can figure out, it was still in principle feudal but moving towards capitalism due to the growth of the bourgeois class. Is that correct?
opposition to the status quo is the definition of leftism, but anyone can be forgiven for not understanding this since westerners define it in the same terms as classical liberalism due to monarchies still (barely) being the status quo back then (and still existing to this day); back then, liberalism was “left” of that.
now-a-days neo-liberalism is the dominant hegemony and it’s pro-capitalist; anything to the left of that is modern day leftism.
I’m being less than 100% precise here. The line I’m drawing is that abolition of private property rights is co-terminus with abolition of capitalism.
“Ask them ‘what’s more important, human rights or property rights’. If they reply 'property rights are human rights, they’re on the right”.
e: I’m just going to add explicitly, since there’s clearly some confusion looking at the other sister comments. It’s not about monarchism or any of that. Its two things: Property rights and social hierarchies. If you want em gone, you’re on the left. from that perspective you need not change the definition of left and right in 1799 and 1848, and all the same from Maréchal to Mélenchon.
Ok, this is making things more clear, although I get the impression I’d have to know way more about the Fr. Revolution, and maybe the following period in France to actually understand it. Was it really politically commonplace already in early 19th c. to demand abolishment of property?
Who’s Maréchal?
since when are red lines genocide & ethnic cleansing just simple purity tests?
Since when did AOC, Sanders, and Mamdani give the greenlight for genocide & ethnic cleansing?
i have to assume that this is genuine since i don’t see anything funny about it.
bernie insists the isreali main talking point: isreal has a right to exist and co-opts leftward fervor by lending his support to the party he doesn’t belong to.
aoc voted against marjorie taylor green’s attempts to block the iron dome’s re-inforcements several times as well a voted for the resolution for redefining antisemitism to isreali benefit; include speaking out against the genocide.
mamdani is not at the national level and cannot do anything about it.
Not to mention that MTG wanted that funding redirected to the fascist bullshit she supports at the U.S. border. It’s interesting that Thomas Massie also voted in favor of this bill given he and MTG are part of the Thiel dark money “progressive” team along with hypocrites like Ro Kahnna, who pretend to support Palestine, yet hold investments in fucking Palantir.
that tweet from aoc makes it clear that she values the lives of isrealis over gazans since she ignores the facts that 1) these weapons are going to the idf who doesn’t make a distinction between defensive and offensive where gazans are concerned and 2) the idf had re-appropriated weaponry from one use to the other.
also: nice deflection in ignoring her vote on the definition of antisemitism w a tweet showing a half truth.
Do you actually know what the iron dome is? Hint: it’s not a weapon.
Coincidentally, given that you’re ignoring everything else about the proposal redirecting funding, and especially the dark money that’s also funding the person that created the proposal, do you know who just happens to be in the process of building a competitor to the iron dome? And who also would be receiving that redirected money through the government contracts one of his companies has with U.S. immigration customs enforcement? The same company that is providing Israel with the AI being used to carry out genocide.
And yeah I do think it was a shitty thing for AOC to vote in favor of a definition that gives Israel too much protection, but it’s more than a bit of a stretch to call that greenlighting genocide, especially given what you’re criticizing her for not supporting.
Pointing out the truth behind her not voting to stop funding going into the iron dome, given that the funding would be directed back to Palantir isn’t a deflection. It’s just the reality of what’s beneath the surface of the bullshit that you’re apparently falling for.
the weapons that were earmarked for the iron dome were used against the gazans and the iranians. it doesn’t matter what their stated purpose is like it doesn’t matter if you give full or partial political cover for genociders like aoc is doing; you’re still helping genociders.
The iron dome is a fucking dome that keeps weapons fired from outside of Israel from entering Israel.
It really doesn’t matter how you try to rationalize it. The funding would have gone back into the company that has enabled genocide to happen.
You’re supporting something that was meant to redirect money to Peter Thiel, but disguised as somehow being helpful for Palestine because it was taking money from the Israeli defense shield that Peter Thiel is in the process of copying.
It’s a fucking scheme. More money for Thiel/Palantir means more money for the campaign contributions and/or the investments of the hypocrites in congress (MTG, Massie, Kahnna, probably many more) that do his bidding by peddling this bullshit. AOC may be guilty of indirectly helping Israel avoid deserved criticism, but every time you fall for this dumb shit you’re being sold, you’re directly helping Peter Theil continue to enable the fucking genocide to happen. And since he continues to be so successful, it’s not stopping with Israel and Gaza. It’s spreading around the fucking globe like a disease. Congratulations 👏
no, they don’t pass the definition of what left wing means
Why the fuck should I care!?
I swear that even full trumpists are less obnoxious on the internet than you blue magas because while they try to choke me with the same capitalist nonesense, they are at least more honest and don’t pretend to be on the left.
Removed by mod
Yes, you certainly do seems to think that, thx for confirmation.
Sick burn.