Why as a Man with Leftist Values, I Hate the Modern Left

[Giacomanzo]

A little background. I grew up in a largely fascist town. And I don't mean "fascist" in a mocking sense, but were literally 7 families out of 10 have various pictures of Mussolini all over their houses and stores, who are not afraid to declare themselves as nostalgic of the Fascist Totalitarianism and to declare themselves as intolerant and other things of this kind.

I have personally being part of this culture, even as a child, I remember thinking that their thoughts were insanely inhuman, so naturally, when I was very young I was dragged towards Extreme Left (meaning Marxism, not modern day definition of Communism). I remember debating in 5th grade about the assassination of Matteotti, while I was saying that the Senator was an hero, everyone else claimed his murder to be an act of justice, as his speech could have had put a premature end to "Italian best historical period".

With the year passing, I started abandoning those extreme points of view, starting to think of them as overly optimistic and impossible to apply in an individualistic society. Especially after reading "I Malavoglia" I started to think that people of low or mid-low classes never had and never will have a role in society. I still think so.

Now, why this whole introduction? Well. Let's take a look to all what the one that I call "Internet Left" has to speak of, as the following two points are the major cause of my hate.

1 - Lack of actual interesting point of view

I honestly do not recollect any of the speeches in favor of the masses through their words, all I can read are...personal issues?

Seriously, aside for MAYBE public instruction and public Healthcare those things they claim have nothing to do with economy, nor with societies's problems. I'm quite sure many of those "liberals" have not any actually interest in Economy in general, actually.

Why doesn't the Left members speak of the "Class Struggle" any longer? Because workers situation is not half as bad as it was in the 1800s? Well, guess what? Sexism, racism and homophobia or any kind of discrimination are not as bad as they used to be as well! Why are those things, which were just satellite problems to the major points of Hegelian Left, became predominant with the time? I'm not saying they shouldn't be discussed at all, but not every fucking things should be about them. You cannot use "discrimination" for excusing every single of your problems, because guess what? Overusing something makes it worthless :)

2 - Elitist attitude

Thankfully this does not apply to everyone, but I would say with no problem to at least 40% of "liberals" I know in person. They just feel superior. And they also need to show to be superior to you. WHICH IS THE FUCKING OPPOSITE OF BEING IN FAVOR OF THE MASSES.

There is this one guy I'm thinking of which has made of this attitude his living cause. Whatever you are speaking of, you will start mock the argument or people who are particularly able to speak about it, he will start quoting some Philosopher or some Author, etc. Also, and this class is the worst one, he is a "radical chic" or, as I call it, a "radical shit", people who just take clothes at random to show how much they don't care what your inferior mind think of them.

I could list many, many other reasons for my hate towards Left, but now let's get to the point and the end of myTake

I criticize the Left because I'm part of it and I wish it to become more similar to what it is in my vision.

[madhatters4]

examining point two and obviously what you consider left and right as an italian tends to vary to degrees with what we consider left and right in the US.

in america strangely Liberals have been labeled by many of the opposition as elitist while Conservatives labeled as for the people. this seems to fly in the face of liberals trying to increase minimum wage, provide healthcare to those who can't afford it, increase social welfare programs, lower taxes on middle and lower class... countering that with conversative (in america) who seek to (not all of course) get rid of social welfare programs, keep minimum wage below $10 an hour, and not have a socialized healthcare system. continuing that (liberal elitism vs conservative whatever) our last three democratic parents were born to single mothers who lower socioeconomic status. our last three democratic presidents have all been (by demographic measurement) born poor whereas the last 4 republican presidents have been born into wealthy families, are celebrities, and/or from families of the political elite

it just strikes me as a strange disconnect between perception and reality

[Giacomanzo]

Clearly I cannot speak for the U. S., not living there, but I wouldn't have put on the table the politicians, which are of course another pair of hands :) I was just referring to people in general.

[madhatters4]

well the politicians were just part of it. but speaking to what you said about caring abotu the working class and what not being values of the right which many in america would agree it just seems like a disconnect from the actions we see in politics. for example the simplest instances to look at is taxes. conservatives/righties tend to believe in giving taxes breaks to the rich while the lefties/liberals tend to believe in taxing the wealthiest more and giving a break or maintaining the same tax code to the middle and lower classes.

[Giacomanzo]

Well, those would be the things I would agree on discussing actually [Even though I think they are more applicable in Italy than U. S., having an Economy built by a shitload of small companies instead of huge corporations like you do) :) Those are the Left values I care about, because they actually have a point in economy, and in people status in general, they are not just whines that a person should learn to laugh about in High School.

[Nice_Guy_Last]

I call it the Hillary Conundrum. Given her status, her class, and her history, by all means, she should be a Republican. It was this perception of her being a political elitist that drove even staunchest union members into the bosom of Republicanism. That Donald Trump, a man who has made billions off of the suffering of middle class workers and entrepreneurs, could be the leader chosen by a populist movement stands testament to this view of Clinton.

Course, had Bernie been given a fair chance by the DNC, he probably would have won. By a landslide.

[madhatters4]

@Nice_Guy_Last i agree about trump. the idea of him as a champion of the working class is absurd. he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. was given 20million dollars by his father to start business. and throughout his business career has repeatedly shown little concern for the blue collar workers who helped make him a extremely wealthy

as for hillary. she was actually born pretty poor. an abusive father who disappeared. she got into college on a scholarship and her and bill clinton were essentially poor all the way up to the early 2000s when they started raking in money with book deals and doing the speaking circuit. so i can absolutely understand why she would be an advocate for the working class because she truly came from relative poverty

[genuinlysensitive]

The reason there is a disconnect is that "Liberals" just use those as rhetoric. Take 2008 they had 60 vote super majority in the Senate and control of the whole government. Did they "Stand up to Wall St."? No, they continued the bailouts. Did they increase the minimum wage? No, they didn't lift a finger to do so! Did they end the Bush tax cuts and lower taxes on lower and middle classes? No they kept the Bush tax cuts in place! Did they pass meaningful healthcare reform? No they passed Obamacare, also known as the Romney plan which has become a complete disaster.

The problem with the modern left, including the Democratic party is that its run by "Third Way" believers who only use economics as "rhetoric" but follow the conservative fiscal policies of the right. Including Obama and Clinton, who admitted to Loyd Blankenfien, (of the '08 crash) she thinks "Only you guys"(read Wall St.) can police yourselves. @Nice_Guy_Last just FYI she was a Republican and a proud "Goldwater Girl".

[madhatters4]

@genuinlysensitive i don't necessarily disagree. although i may disagree to an extent with elements (no meainingful healthcare reform... whether you life it or not ACA is meaningful and a major change)... but it still doesn't account for the idea that the right or conservatives are the party of the people. you are right to an extent about obama not lowering taxes on the middle and lower class but he did increase taxes on the wealthy and if he had it his way would have done so further. while conservatives and trumps plan continues the old policy of lowering taxes on the wealthy and increasing taxes on the middle and lower class

so i agree to an extent with your point but it still doesn't go to explain why the right (in america) could claim to concern themselves with the working class when all the evidence in the past (nearly) 100 years shows that the middle and lower classes suffer greater under conservative political leadership than left or "liberal" leadership

[genuinlysensitive]

Well my point is right now fiscally the left and the right are virtually identical. Infact Obamacare, was originally the Romney Plan, cut and pasted. As for "meaningful" it has caused increasing premiums, skyrocketing detuctibles, loss of choice/competition, as well as being far from "deficit neutral" as was promised. That is a disaster, not meaningful.

Going back to broken promises:

It was supposed to decrease premiums for the average family by $2,500: FAIL
It was supposed to increase competition: FAIL
It was supposed to decrease deductibles: FAIL
It was supposed to increase enrollment by 24 million: FAIL

My point is fiscally there is no "left". Just one party that lies about being left, in order to get people to vote for them, and too often it works.

[madhatters4]

@genuinlysensitive i agree about the two parties being fiscally conservative more so than in the past.

meaningful means simply "having meaning." obviously the ACA has meaning and thus it is meaningful. the details positive or negative are irrelevant if the question is, is it meaningful.

20 million people do have insurance who didn't otherwise, it has helped to slow the annual inflation of prices and in fact medicare rates (the largest payer and thus biggest determiner of pricing) dropped slightly in 2016 from 2015. it hasn't been a huge success but i also don't call it a total disaster. premiums rose because insurances companies dictated as such. deductibles have stayed largely the same but if they rose again that is insurance companies doing... so we have to lay some of the blame in the negative effects of ACA at the feet of insurers who sought to increase their revenues

but i'm not blind to the fact that the ACA needs big fixes.

[madhatters4]

an interesting thing will be to see, if the is a repeal or modification of the ACA, if insurance companies in good faith reduce premiums... i doubt they will

[madhatters4]

@genuinlysensitive where'd you get those numbers about reduction in premiums by $2500, and other stuff?

[Giacomanzo]

I'm sorry @genuinlysensitivi and @madhatters4 , for obvious reasons I can't be part of the conversation, but you can keep doing it, no problems :)

[RasmusAiken]

Consider this. The government does not "give" tax breaks or anything else. It "takes" from middle class Americans and from the proceeds, "buys" votes through redistribution schemes from less wealthy Americans.

[madhatters4]

@RasmusAiken well trumps plan is to reduce taxes (give a tax break) to the wealthiest americans

[genuinlysensitive]

Hillary was going to do that anyway. Loyd Blankenfien gave her so much money he probably kept her in his pocket next to his wallet.

As for the ACA It was "supposed to" decrease the average family premium by $2500, which it didn't, It was supposed to improve competition, which it didn't and many insurance companies went out of business or opted out forcing many to go on to Obamacare, so much for "If you like your insurance you can keep it"

And as someone who knew someone on Obamacare when it first cam out I can tell you it sucked back then and premiums, and detuctibles have only increased since then. For a healthy woman in her late 20s no pre-existing conditions the cheapest or bronze plan option (singular, so much for choice) had a $300 a month premium, with $75 copays and $600 deductible. These are people who barely have enough for food and rent, where do you think they will get all this money?

[madhatters4]

@genuinlysensitive well a woman with a pre-existing condition was going to find it very hard to get insurance previously

again i ask for your numbers about projected premiums.

i work in public health and as a result had to read the ACA front to back multiple times. nowhere does it discuss decreasing of premiums so i'm interested where you got numbers like that

obviously the ACA isn't perfect but it has saved lived, it has allowed for 20million previously uninsured people to have insurance. trust me i know about increased premiums, as mine have gone up, but it doesn't mean there isn't some good in the ACA that should be kept. it also doesn't mean that repealing is the only way to fix the situation

the previous system was inherently flawed and was going to lead to an invitable crash without remedy. the premiums are a problem absolutely. i never said there aren't issues but full repeal seems like a really poor decision

[genuinlysensitive]

And yes if they are dirt poor they get some help, but if you are middle class, working two jobs and just barely have enough for rent food, and tuition, you are screwed. And on top of that, hey we will "penalize" you for not choosing to go hungry, or be homeless, or drop out.

As for your numbers I don't know where you are getting them, but the government says only 11 million had enrolled as of March 31 2016:

www.cms.gov/.../2016-06-30.html

As for Obama's "promise" it would reduce the premium of the average family by $2500 I heard him say it numerous times. If you can't take my word for it here it is as well:

www.politifact.com/.../

Not to mention the administration itself announced 2017 hikes:

www.pbs.org/.../

The administration also says that you can save premiums by switching to cheaper plans. What they don't tell you is cheaper premiums mean higher co pays and deductibles, and less covered services altogeather, so they are right about premiums, wrong about saving money.

[madhatters4]

@genuinlysensitive well the number is nearly a year old so i'd be interested to know the numbers currently

[madhatters4]

as for the premiums that hasn't come to fruition and again as i said i'm not happy with the premiums rising. it is a consequence of insurance carriers hiking up rates and should have been accounted for when developing the policy. still close to 20 million people have enrolled. people with pre-existing conditions can no longer be turned away

so reiterating. it isn't perfect. it has had unintended consequences. but the system was drastically flawed. now it has flaws but fewer than before... so the goal should be to fix the flaws not blow up the entire system

[genuinlysensitive]

@madhatters4 Now I ask you where you got those numbers. Those numbers are a year old because they are officially compiled by the government at the end of March when the enrollment period ends. To get official 2017 numbers we need to wait until after March when the open enrollment ends, to my knowledge anything else is just a "guess" or projection, and I find it implausible that enrollment nearly doubled Since November 1, when the enrollment period began.

The woman I knew had NO pre-existing conditions I said...

As for the system, I believe it's clear the flaws are systematic, not to mention no one in the administration, Congress, or Clinton campaign, to my knowledge has suggested any way to "fix" the flaws. I am curious how would you suggest fixing it?

[madhatters4]

@genuinlysensitive i should clarify it's 20million who enrolled specifically with an ACA sponsored plan and those who signed up with a plan in the marketplace created as a result of the ACA

[madhatters4]

how do you fix it? you have to find a way to appease insurance companies or make a mandate to insurance companies not to inflate premiums. that is the issue. insurance companies have been forced to pay for services they previously could deny, so as insurance companies are want to do they pass the costs on to consumers by increasing premiums

the belief of people in my field is that the ACA was a precursor to a single payer system as is the model in other countries. in that case premiums would be mandated by the government.

so i guess regulation of the health insurance industry is the best way to limit gauging of consumers

[madhatters4]

interesting thing i just saw though. a report from the congressional budgetary committe, a comittee Paul Ryan oversees says repealing the ACA will result in 18 million people losing insurance and 20-25% spike in premiums in the short term if the path they've suggested (repeal and delay) takes course in the first year of the repeal.
and 32 million would lose insurance and premiums would double long term

[madhatters4]

sorry. forgot the source
www.cbo.gov/.../52371-coverageandpremiums.pdf

[Anonymous]

what "leftist values"? the exiles in siberia. the gulags and the concentration camps of the read plague? the paidomazoma of young boys and girls? the slaughters. the church persecutions. the genocides? divide and conquer. another preaching of hatred. thats all leftism is in its marxism form.

[Giacomanzo]

Sure, please tell me, how much of those things have spoken of can you find on any Hegelian Left philosopher book, aside for the exile of religion? You are speaking about Dictatorship, which has nothing to do with theoretical Communism nor Socialism.
As I said, I am no longer a communist since I was 12, but those things are just called communism for no reason at all, since they have nothing to do with it.

[BlueCoyote]

I think I can see where you're coming from. I agree with your first point but not really with your second.
One of the problems (if you will) about the "internet left" is that it's highly influenced by US-American ideas of what liberalism contains, just like most of the internet is strongly influenced by US-American culture and mentality. This means that people on the internet tend to argue about things that aren't necessarily a big issue elsewhere on the planet. Great examples for this are abortion or gun laws. Both are extremely controversial topics on the internet because they are extremely controversial in the US. However, most non-Americans (not only Europeans) would probably agree that these things aren't a serious issue in their country. The last time abortion was seriously controversial in my country, I wasn't even alive.
The same is - though to a less degree - also true for other topics. For example Europe does struggle with xenophobic people too but we're nowhere close to the racial tensions that America experiences.
However, what you should also understand is that the left isn't just one monolithic ideology. Even outside of America, the left has always been split into different "streams" (the same is also true for the right). For example urban left people tend to be part of the socio-liberal wing, while rural left people tend to belong to the more traditional left that mainly cares about economics and workers' rights. None of these two directions is wrong or stupid, they simply take different approaches and deal with different social problems. So for example I would count myself as a relatively typical socio-liberal leftie. I care about gay rights, drug politics, internet privacy, educational policies and all these kind of things. I am a member of a left party and this is what I fight for. However, that does NOT mean that I'm indifferent about economic issues. My party has very close ties to all the major workers' unions in my country. It's simply not the topic that I'm outspoken about - and that should be okay. There are lots of other people for this.

As for your second point: if you're talking about economic elitism, I wholeheartedly agree with you. Luckily, I come from a country where we don't have super-wealthy pseudo-left people like in America. When it comes to education however, I completely disagree with you. PLEASE don't let yourself be fooled by the hateful anti-intellectualism of the extreme right. Education is something for (cont.)

[BlueCoyote]

everyone and it is something to be proud of. Every person (including normal workers and poor people) should have the chance to get a great education. And if they don't, they should still try their best to acquire it in on their own. Today we live in a sad time where working class people are proud to be ignorant because intellectuals are seen as "the enemy". This is tragic and horrible in my opinion. They're letting themselves be used as pawns on the chess board of the extreme right. This is why the left has traditionally always cared to educate people (including the poor), be it during the Russian revolution or in Cuba. In the early days of the Soviet Union, it used to be popular for normal steel workers or coal miners to come together 1-2 a week and discuss works of philosophy or Russian literature. Some of these people had no formal education but they were extremely well-read. That's something to be proud of. There's nothing admirable about being deliberately ignorant.

[Giacomanzo]

Oh no, I wasn't implying "Do no have an education." What I meant is they act like they are the only ones who are cultured in this World. Being an intellectual and brag about it are two completely different things. Is just as stupid as if you are a body builder showing off your body just to let others feel miserable.
What are you talking about, bragging about being ignorant, has nothing to do with the Left or the Right, is just a populist bias that politicians of both sides do to get the votes of the masses.

[Giacomanzo]

Marx, just to take use the name I've already used, was clearly an intellectual man, but I don't think I've ever read about him saying something that sounded like "I'm way better than you people".

[Anonymous]

You make two good points. I think both come from what is known as "the Third Way" (also known as Gideon's Third Way, Google it!) which was a leftist strategy adopted in the US/Britain in the 90s and spread throughout much of the world with regards to left politics. Basically it adopts the elitist, power hungry financial, policies of the political right, and only focuses on "Social Issues". However the people have long since spoken on these social issues so now the left has nothing to differentiate itself from the right, since it refuses to go back to fiscal policy that benefits everyone.

The result is what you have observed, lack of a different or "interesting" point of view combined with superiority/calling anyone who does not identify with name names, such as "stupid/sexist/racist, etc."

What you have noticed appears to be a global problem, it has happened here in the US and Canada as well as UK, and many other parts of the world.

[chigurl33]

I think I'm more right leaning in some of the more popular issues and left leaning in some of the deeper issues but I can't identify with the left simply because it's most publicised views don't represent mine... I so much wish I could be part of the left but I can't.

[Giacomanzo]

It's not like it is a bad thing to not be on one side...

[chigurl33]

The stigma that goes with being more right leaning in discussions is something I wish I could avoid... I already done have a lot of friends, why would I want to lose some more?

So I really do wish I could be on their side in some certain issues but I can't and I'm not the kind of person to fake it... ain't nobody got time for that.

[Giacomanzo]

You have lost friends because of different opinions? That sounds ridiculous, I know in teenage years talking about politics gets you on the nerves, but still..

[chigurl33]

Trust me... it's madness here, the whole feminism and pro choice thing. I think I have only 2 or 3 female friends now, the rest are all like 'If she wants to be a boy let her be, shell understand she gets fucked up by the system of patriarchy' or 'she's just doing it to gain favour with guys since she can't get a date with her blah blah blah' then they use the fact that I'm a virgin against me.

Teenage girls can be petty sometimes.

[RasmusAiken]

Fascinating viewpoint. The US Democrat Party now in shambles would do well to take note as they try to rise out of the ashes of the November 8 election. Republican leadership will have to make good on its promises of reduced taxes, smaller government and more jobs.

[Giacomanzo]

As long as it doesn't destroy the economy of the nation, good thing if they manage to. Italian centrist party "Democrazia Cristiana" did those things between the 60s and the 70s, but it was done without any control, and by indebtment towards basically anyone, especially U. S. and Germany. As a results, now there are no new jobs at all, because they tried to increase the national product too fast and with no control over the other problems.

[RasmusAiken]

The challenge to the new Republicans will be to pay off National Debt by growing the Economy (jobs). If they can't achieve that they are no better than the charlatans who created the debt to begin with.

[PT1911]

The Facists of the future will call themselves anti-facists.

After living with a roommate who was liberal, and me a conservative, I brought him more to the right, he brought me more to the left. Still on opposite sides, but we're closer to the center now

[Giacomanzo]

Cool!

[Jamesol1]

The left are cancer these days. I listen to the right more and agree with some of the stuff they are saying. Funnily enough i did a test and I'm a socialist... unless im mistaken that is left wing... but i bloody hate the sheer arrogance and white male hating.

[Anonymous]

I know what you mean, original leftists never supported perversions like "same-sex marriages". As a leftist myself, I also can't stand modern day leftist parties.

[Giacomanzo]

No, I'm okay with same-sex marriages. I just think it shouldn't be the main focus.

[Opinion Owner]

Ok, that's understandable.

[KnightCross]

Left in western world is pretty fucked up and you have a point... Left could be a better position it didn't try to push an anti-christian agenda

[Centurion20000]

Modern liberalism has basically told the working man (white, brown or black) to basically fuck off.

[John_Doesnt]

You're bashing extreme leftists. Just like I'm sure conservatives hate KKK leaders.

[SlightlyCrazy]

This post is brilliant but st the same time I can't agree

[Giacomanzo]

May I ask you what do you disagree on, more precisely?

[SlightlyCrazy]

Well it seems you offer a lot of criticism on current issues but you don't offer a solution. It seems like you've become content with change and that is not in the leftist spirit

[Giacomanzo]

Oh, I do have many solutions, I just do not wanted to speak about 'em on this thread. If you want , you can pm me, and I'll give you my points of view.

[SlightlyCrazy]

Why not express them here under the eyes of unforgiving scrutiny. Any theory which cannot hold up to argument is hardly worth my time

[Giacomanzo]

Okay, so here they are, even though your tone makes me think you would disagree whatever I say.

1 - Productivity Tax on a bimonthly period: The rate percentage I have to pay on my product vary based on how much I have producted instead of being a fixed tax, and it is calculate by some Earning Before Taxes ranges.
For example: EBT 0~9,999.99 -> 5% of my EBT goes on taxes.
EBT 10.000,00~ 24.999,99 -> 10% of my EBT goes on taxes.
EBT [...] you get it.

2 - Patrimonial tax on a year long period: Same as before, but it applies on the families instead of the enterprises and it depends on what I own instead of what I produce.

3 - Public Incentives on Younger Enterpreneurs: A certain amount of money to young adults (20-30 y. o.) who want to start an activity, but instead of giving away all the money on one session, it has to be given within five years. To get the money you should get on the second year, you must demonstrate you have producted a certain quantity in the first one.

[Giacomanzo]

Those are my 3 major ones, if you have some of your own, you can share them.

[Anonymous]

cdn.meme.am/.../11397159.jpg

[Anonymous]

s2.quickmeme.com/.../...52a1068f1cdeb531b16e43.jpg

[SuccessfulHornDog]

I am a conservative who doesn't like things about the modern right, so yeah, it happens