What’s “leftist” to you? Socialist? Communist? Democrat? Progressive? Liberal? Anarchist?

What’s “leftist” to you? Socialist? Communist? Democrat? Progressive? Liberal? Anarchist?

===

I’ll do my best, although you already stated that I won’t be able to bring you evidence or data that will convince you.

==

It’s almost better to leave you in your thought bubble.

====

The Republican Party in 1912 split into Republican (conservative) and Progressive wings.

The conservative Republican party basically died in 1912.

====

Progressive Republicans were strong until 1976. So, 1912-1976, the Republican party was a much different thing than you see now.

===

Since then, the Republican party is usually identified by the “Reagan coalition”:

“Reagan coalition in the Republican Party originally consisted of five factions: the libertarians, the traditionalists, the anti-communists, neoconservatives and the religious right.”

====

what’s “actual conservatism”?
libertarians or the traditionalists?

====

Another name for traditionalist republican is:
Paleoconservatist.

====

Now I can interpret your stances better.

So, it’s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism and if it’s not, it’s leftist.

=====

 

Paleo-conservatist journalists:
Journalists
Tucker Carlson (born 1969)[152]
Samuel T. Francis (1947–2005)[153]
Laura Ingraham (born 1963)[154]
Robert Novak (1931–2009)[132]
Steve Sailer (born 1958)[155]
Joseph Sobran (1946–2010)[156]
Jared Taylor (born 1951)[157]
Ann Coulter (born 1961)But I would call them pseudo conservatives.

=====

  If you’re a paleo, she’s right there with Bannon and Miller. You might not like her but its’ in the same family.
=====
 ‘m basically a democratic socialist progressive commie liberal leftist and don’t like everything they say.
=====
  I got called so much crap over the past three years, I just accept all of it now.
====
 Dude, you’re so far right, there’s not much right left.
====
  I didn’t say you were “far right”, just that you are far to the right, if you’re indeed a paleo conservative.
======
 so far [to the] right. It was implied but I hit upon trigger phrase and I apologize.
=====
  I’d have to turn off what little conscience I have to live in an ancap society. That’s why I focus so much on it: it needs all the boost it can get.
=====
  I took it again in 2016 and only shifted a little sq up and a little sq to the right. But I think if I took it now in 2018, I’ll probably be back to where I was in 2014.
====
  That makes sense. I didn’t *think* you were a paleo-conservative, although I’d imagine you like some of it as it’s ‘near you’, just as I don’t mind some Progressive Anarchist even though it’s not mine.
=====
 Well, I take that political compass stuff with a bit of skepticism anyway. It’s like personality tests and stuff. Fun but I wouldn’t use it for public policy.
=====
  Minarchism has my heart although it’s impractical to me. Then again, so is a lot of this stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state
====
  I think I could build a collectivist anarchist substate within a minarchist framework.
=====
 Think about it: The freedoms allotted by taking care of the courts, police and military for you, frees you up to create substates that are collectives and whose public face is law-abiding but anarchist within.
=====
  You don’t think capitalists and collective communities can live side by side in a minarchist state?
=====
 Nah fam. Minarchy ensures valid contracts and law-abiding by the capitalists.
=====
 That’s assuming you’d be allowed to have armed security in a minarchist govt.
====
  If they do ALL the policing why would you have your own?
=====
  “a night-watchman state is a model of a state whose only functions are to provide its citizens with the military, the police and courts, thus protecting them from aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud and enforcing property laws.”
—–
 US police *basically* do this but it’s uneven-handed. If it were balanced properly, all citizens would get protection.
=====
  Police operate in a local level, then county level, then state level. There is no federal police, nor is there consistency between police forces.
====
  Not really. They can do police-like things but they’re for specific cases only.
=====
  there’s a lot of overlapping jurisdiction and in-fighting is common. They try to cooperate but since Sheriffs and Judges are _usually_ political positions (Usually appointed but sometimes elected), there’s a lot of political games that take place.
=====
  I’m neither ACAB (all cops are bad) nor am I a bootlicker (thin blue line yo). I want a properly managed police that does only what it needs and no more.
======
  All laws can’t be enforced. That’s impossible, even if you cut down all the laws by 90%. That would be a police state.I’d say priorities are pretty simple. Minarchists say a minarchist state is a logical consequence of the NAP (non aggression principal).So, that would be whatever supports NAP.
=====
  But again, that’s why I think it’s impractical. My heart would love it but I doubt it’s possible.
======
  That’s the law being enforced. It is actual policing and it’s to protect property.
=====
It’s not to save lives.
====
Easy Income source.
====
The state is great at capitalism.
====
Taxation is state level capitalism.

=====

  If that business printed the money, owned the security and wrote the laws, it could.
=====
Then it’s no longer a business, it’s a government
 Yes – and that’s why businesses need to be regulated.
=====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


six × = 42

Leave a Reply