nanana
-
Posts
343 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by nanana
-
I agree with your general point PozBearWI, so to help with that I am not trying to adjudicate who belongs in this camp or to insist that we agree, but merely to have a discussion with those self-identifying as more on the right. Another example of a rightish concept is that people on the right seem to be less confused by how to self-generate value whereas people on the left seem to worry less about moving resources around and taking them by force of law from others
-
Thanks topblkmale for the questions and viking8x6 for encouragement for the inquiry. Topblkmale, I use The term homo because I enjoy It, and also because it’s a word that dropped out of the woke-influenced vocabulary. I think I use It partly because the left’s drive to censor everything offensive as having VERY BAD if unintended consequences. I forget where I read it but really like the insight that the caveman who put down his rocks and arrows and started swearing invented civilization. I think if we are going to live nonviolently on multi-tribal earth, we’re going to have to man up and let the swearing fly. Right-leaning is less clear to me, would not have thought of myself as on the right until very recently. That’s partly why I’m posing the question. To me, being on the right means not feeling guilty about standing up for my interests and trusting that others will do the same and we’ll figure it out RATHER than trying to imagine how offensive everything must be other people and hijacking their voices. It also means not being afraid to be a solitary hero. But I’m just shit-talking until I can Get a crowd of men to talk back. What did I miss?
-
Greetings all: given the way our more left-leaning brothers bring great passion, argumentation, and volume to their commentary, I wonder If they’d let us have a left-free thread to explore what it means to be a non-leftist homo. They’d be very welcome to be voyeurs and even to start a separate passionate vociferous thread about how awful and misguided our perspectives are. I would certainly enjoy reading such a thread and agree not to inflame their sensibilities if they would also be gentlemen about this one. So, I pose the question: if you identify as a non-leftist homo, what issues are most important to you and why? What should be done?
-
Because stupid myopic medical experts thought it would be good for the starving poor of the world if they shut down the economy and put everyone on lockdowns just to let childhood iIQ plummet, drug addiction skyrocket, small businesses go into bankruptcy while the government let Amazon, Walmart etc foist the biggest wealth transfer in history. Government wrecked the economy then invented trillions to create debt and dependency while encouraging everyone to stop working.
-
Given the minuscule percentage of contribution your vote makes to the winner, voting for a winner is also jacking off in the voting booth. You can’t both excoriate Greens for not building a party from the grass roots and then pretend that only Democrats and Republicans don’t jack off in voting booths. It DOES sound like a hot idea though 🙂.
-
So well said
-
This is the typical opening salvo of people who let NPR and The New York Times do their thinking for them. Be careful, this sad minefield has been the excuse liberals use to stop thinking deeply, like a brain off switch.
-
Well said Alphatop32. I frequently find that liberal puppets are completely unaware of how bad their sources are and how easily they are manipulated. They typically don’t do a lot of primary research AND they immediately ask for sources because they only believe in highly curated information without questioning the motives of those who are curating it. It’s as if a complex story is beyond their abilities.
-
Democrats don’t understand economics and thus misinterpret objections to illegal immigration. Whenever I hear Some democrat blah-blahing about racism, I’m immediately aware that 1) they either don’t understand economics well enough to recognize MASSIVE resource reallocation; or 2) maybe they understand and embrace theft. Either way, stupidity or immorality are highly unimpressive.
-
I can Definitely see that most democrats don’t wish to kill people btw. I like most professed democratic values. But it makes me sad that democrats are unable to see beyond the happy words and critique actions. I suppose Most democrats on this site are happy to see the American bully sell American infrastructure, education, and domestic investment down the road to set up Ukraine and Israel up to killing and being killed, let alone the genocide of Palestinians (which at least on the Israeli front RFK Jr and Trump are probably even more blood-excited about). They are so desperate for praise from the killer-Cheneys. Why are they so desperate for Cheney-praise?
-
I cant Believe the fucking Democrat losers revel in Liz and Dick Cheney endorsements nowadays and think that’s evidence of their party’s moderation. Dick killed 10 million souls and now he put the blood mark on Kamala the great moderate. If I got Cheney endorsements I’d volunteer to be in a snuff film maybe paid for by the Soros foundation.
-
I don't mean it the way you take it but like most here I crave enough of a common ground where we could titillate each other by expanding our consciousness. And that’s probably not happening for you as it is equally not happening for me. I never thought I’d see the day that democrats genuflected for Bloody Cheneys approval. It’s all good. Instead of exchanging energy I’m turning to the harder and happier task of coexisting. Peace
-
This cohort is pretty good at the comparison game, name calling (usually a sign of a failure of logic or empathy), critiquing hair color, expertise in domestic processes and quoting and embracing main stream media, tangential focus, and convincing me of the pointlessness of trying to transcend partisanship. Enjoy your self-convincing. Peace
-
So Bootman, you didn’t really address my question about the faults of the Democrats but deflected it back to how bad the Republicans are. Maybe you don’t have it in you to provide a non-partisan critique, which is really what my question was testing. Would any other Democrats like to try to explain why they tolerate corruption in their party and seem to only be capable of deflecting?
-
I am NOT a fan of Trump but don’t understand why partisan Democrats think he’s going to destroy Democracy by himself when their leaders have taken a wrecking ball to free speech, truth (Russiagate, Biden laptop), freedom from big Pharma corruption (Covid vaccines), modeled insider trading (Pelosi) and nepotism (Biden), and warmongering (Israel/Ukraine). I often don’t mind Democratic values but very much dislike the actual record of Democratic leaders. Can some Democrat explain why Democrats use up all of their hatred on an admittedly questionable leader of the Republicans while having such low standards for their own leaders and how vaulting crappy leaders to the top of their party serves them?
-
NEDenver who lied to you and told you you can invent $35T and not reduce the value of the dollar? Po’ thing.
-
What a silly thing to write NEDenver. The power structures I wish to maintain? By starving corporations of their biggest bloodsucking customer in favor of freedom for all? Modern Monetary Theory is the theory of leaches. It’s a values thing.
-
Again BootmanLA all of your examples come from personal choices that saddle the person responsible for the debt, not the person AND all of his NEIGHBORS. This comes across as a very inappropriate analogy unless you want to pay my next car bill ( 🙂 ).
-
You just either made my point BootmanLA: the bigger government gets, the more it tries to legislate morality for others. The smaller it is, the less likely it is to impose conservative views and policies on liberals and vice versa. To riff off of your point about debt, you may want to go in debt to pay for the leveling of the Gaza Strip but I MOST DEFINITELY DO NOT. Who made someone king over me to take my life’s work and divert it to causes that I think are abominations? On the other hand, a conservative might feel the same way about state funded abortions. The more the government tries to do, the more it tries to be king over people who are forced to fund programs that go against their morality. If government were the only source of funds that would be one thing. But there are countless other voluntary sources of funding that don’t require the theft of someone’s earnings by involuntary means to promote policies they don’t agree with. There IS NO CONSENSUS on morality so coercive taxation should cover the smallest possible sphere covering areas that engender the greatest support. on that we disagree. Inflation cooks up because Government and its monopolistic, non-capitalistic, financialistic drug-dealer the Federal Reserve invents money from scratch, which is why most Americans don’t understand anything about value or economics and don’t understand the morality of theft. I find both Pikety and Reich, and though you didn’t mention him, Paul Krugman, to be very flawed in their philosophical understanding and misguided in their premises and quantifications. Give me Mises and Rothbard and Hayek any day.
-
I agree with you BootmanLA that human nature is highly bonding and collectivist and with you NEDenver that taxation ends up benefiting the wealthy the most. To be more precise about my concerns, government typically benefits the loudest and the most conniving the most. I think there are core government functions that most could agree about but the government has strayed massively away from those functions in an unsustainable immoral manner. The farther the government strays from core functions the greater the risk that the conniving and lawyered-up will be subsidized, that large groups of people will be outraged by the programs being supported, etc. The government has long ago stopped being accountable to the people. Every taxpayer would have to pay $175K +/- to pay off the debt. Every citizen has paid terribly via inflation. I agree about collectivist wishes to reduce societal ills but advocate a more voluntarist method of dealing with them rather that an ever-expanding government taxing and inflating away the poor and middle class. Financialism is hollowing us out.
-
BootmanLA as much as you preach and pontificate using many wraps of text I’d like to see you dig deeper into your vast collection of wisdom blah-blah into the vast past of asci text to teach me something other than what some deity told you to think and manifest. Despite the lack of wisdom you have a great fact base. Bring it on.
-
I like the pushback but the reality is that a redistributive government is going to lose credibility especially when it gives to people who didn’t pay into the system. Almost every claim of racism is an admittance that the outraged didn’t pass economics 101. You can’t invent money unless you’re a socialist. As Margaret Thatcher (I hated her when I was an economic child) said, socialism works until you run out of other people’s money. I’d ask all of you: do you know how to sustain yourselves or do you depend upon others to survive? What do the real contributors really owe you? Perhaps they’re willing to pay you off to not be hideous but what are you really doing to be subsidized?
-
Unfortunately at some point 51% of the voters learned they could freeload the shit out of the other 49%. THAT’s freeloading.
-
Great points BootmanLA
-
why is it that the republicans and independents knew this would happen before the democrats did? happy to see the democrats move beyond denial finally.
