Why is the left wing having more trouble overlooking people's political views while they claim to focus on inclusivity?

[Rig_Stroll]

9/10 times you tell a right winger that both wings are bad, they try to reason with you.

9/10 times you tell a left winger that both wings are bad, they feel offended, attack you, and block you.

Why can't we just put our wings aside similar to putting aside our differences in sexuality and skin color?

I believe it's because the left wing wants to copy and paste answers and if they have no political party or "wing" to follow then no one will supply the cookie cutter answers to them.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

I do want people to be their true, authentic selves at all times. If your authentic self votes in the same way as those who think all brown people should be deported, and those who think all LGBTQ+ people are child molesters while also saying “well both sides are problematic!” Just because you want the tax breaks as if that doesn’t actively damage government infrastructure capabilities and simultaneously provide no cheap solutions in privatization, I’m going to call you inept and say you are purposely ignorant and I no longer want to spend time with you, and then leave.

[Rig_Stroll]

First of all I don't vote. But people who:
-think all brown people should be deported
-all LGBTQ are child molesters

I have not seen any person who says anything even close to either of the two. It's like Justin Trudeau accused the entire Canadian conservative party of casual homophobia when front row members like Melissa Lantsman are LGB themselves. Just made up nonsense. What they do all oppose is permanent sex changes for minors, and the adults who want children to get sex changes are molesters, how else would you explain it? How can a surgeon be allowed to touch a child's genitals that have no physical defect calling for surgical intervention?

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

How many trans minors have you actually seen? Teens I can see, but I’ve never seen anyone under the age of 17 undergo sex change surgery. It’s just fearmongering spread by their party to help set that line of what they will and won’t allow, excluding groups to build on what they have because they’re told that’s what their constituents want.

[Rig_Stroll]

Ok so you never saw anyone under the age of consent being trans. Does not seem like you could possibly have anything against the "conservatives" who allow trannifying those who are of legal age of consent.

In other words the label "conservative" was just a needless bogeyman and you have nothing in disagreement with those labeled as such.

Yes there exist controlling assholes who want to dictate what rights adults have over their own bodies. These are such a minority that, you know, they only grow thanks to the publicity they get from those obsessed with the wings.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Yes, and the conservative party has proven they’re that group by taking away an adult woman’s right to decide whether or not she wants to be a mother if she gets pregnant unknowingly or unintentionally.

[Rig_Stroll]

Neither in Canada or USA does the conservative federal election candidate oppose abortions. And both have the majority votes. Therefore. Even if someone in the near future appears as a "conservative" candidate opposing abortions, it will be the issue of this candidate, not necessarily the millions of people who as of today are voting conservative. And if these millions of people want abortion? Who are they now? Automatically liberals?

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Who is the conservative federal election candidate that you’re referring to in the US? Trump is very actively against abortion and specifically picked conservative judges for the Supreme Court that would agree with that and give them a conservative majority. That differs from the congressional branch of government so that’s the only place I think you could be referring to

[Rig_Stroll]

As both wing's stars have demonstrated, you can't take their word for anything, but trump's 2024 announcement was that laws should stay as decided by each state and shit like incest and rape must be exceptions. And only what, 10 states have banned abortions? You could travel a little, or buy yourself some mifepristone if you suspect you or a friend will get graped.

[Syntosi]

It appears that you are somewhat behind the times. Simply put, the left wing knows about the paradox of tolerance and you appear to not be aware of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

What the paradox of tolerance basically says is that a society that is tolerant to everything is unsustainable and vulnerable from those who are intolerant. As such to maintain a society that is truly tolerant you need to maintain the right to be intolerant to certain people and groups or the system will fall apart.

That is why we can't "just put our wings aside similar to putting aside our differences in sexuality and skin color". We have tried that before, but that approach simply does not work in reality.

[Rig_Stroll]

You are a nice dictionary when we need a definition. But inserting it here is retarded because of this:

Are you saying that people who are labeled "right wing" should not be tolerated?

I guess your answer to that is, no, you're not saying that.

So if people who happen to be labeled as either wing deserve to be tolerated, why the fuck do you need the wing label at all?

[Syntosi]

The right wing has been tolerated before, they aren't now. The reason is fairly simple as the right wing has transformed from the classical conservatism to the more modern MAGA party. They are no longer the same thing so it is not strange that they should be treated differently.

And yes, I am saying that MAGA should not be tolerated. Nazi punching and all that.

As for using the wing label? I am doing so for the purposes of conversation. I personally do not see the world in a right wing/left wing spectrum but it is common enough that it simplifies communication and spending literal hours trying to explain to people how I view political views is not practical even assuming they would understand.

[Rig_Stroll]

You see it goes on forever, we accepted that right wing isn't bad per se, but now there is a new enemy, as if deliberately orchestrated to never reach an agreement.

In high school social studies we were made to take tests that determine your wing. Every single time I tried, it fluctuated to the opposite from the last.

What does it tell me? These wing labels are trying to shove you into categories you don't belong in. It's a really idiotic test too, basically "if you had to choose whether every human is better off being a fаggot or is it better if all humans were forced to stay in their closets, which one do you choose?" I choose not to force people at all.

No humans belong to either wing.

Both American parties hate pedophile molesters, and both had unashamed pedophiles for presidents, and still the masses, civilians, end up fighting each other, neither of whom are pedophiles themselves, just because the test results in their high school labeled them as the opposite wing or some equally idiotic reason.

[Syntosi]

I mean, if you want to clean up the language and dispose of the right wing/left wing political labels then that is fine with me. I would still be intolerant to nazis and MAGA though. It does not change my position in the slightest because the labels were never part of my consideration.

[Rig_Stroll]

MAGA up their/your/everyone's ass. It's a label. Not an act of violence.

We all oppose violence. Idgaf if I had Adolf Hitler himself for a neighbor as long as he wasn't harming anyone.

When I see violence idgaf who it comes from, left, right, the anus, I will oppose it.

[Syntosi]

Right wing is a meaningless label. MAGA however is more defined and it stands for something which you can have a stance on. In my case I consider the things that MAGA stands for to be intolerable and worth fighting for.

Your position of neutrality and/or appeasement has never worked historically and since you brought up Hitler, this sort of thinking is what paved the way to his authoritarian takeover of the Germany government. It is an example that proves the paradox of tolerance as I stated at the very beginning.

Your position is untenable.

[Rig_Stroll]

It's called freedom of thought, which never existed in any dictatorship.

[Syntosi]

And many dictatorships has been born from freedom of thought. Again, your position is untenable. It simply can't be maintained in a society for any length of time because it will be overthrown by someone who uses its weakness against it.

Especially now when we have historical examples of exactly how it is done to make destroying your ideology even easier.

[Rig_Stroll]

Name historical examples of dictatorship sprouting out of freedom of thought. There are none because they all required repression of opposition.

[Syntosi]

LITERALLY HITLER! WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HIM LIKE AN HOUR AGO!

Seriously. Do you read any history?

[Rig_Stroll]

I got it. He went for a peaceful protest with signs "Kill jews, give up rights". And people followed.

[Syntosi]

No you dont. Germany at that time was a peaceful democracy where Hitler was allowed to build his support because preventing him would be infringing upon his freedoms. His support is specifically because they made a conscious effort not to stop him and his rise to power was them giving him power so that he could represent his support base as in any democracy.

Hitlers rise to power is a perfect example of how a democracy can fall while playing within the limits set by that democracy. The same limits incidentally that you are proposing right now which will have the same outcome.

[Rig_Stroll]

Historically, he used an emergency act to overcome the constitution. Such emergency acts imply lack of freedom of thought because it was based, historically, on a mentally sick person setting a building on fire.

[Syntosi]

... What part of the current American political environment suggests to you that a mentally sick person can't rise to the top? I mean seriously, Trump has already flirted with the idea of being "dictator for a day" to "fix" all the problems in the world before supposedly giving the powers back and he did it openly on TV.

And also that emergency act was not what sent Germany down that ugly road. It just progressed the time table a bit to what was always going to happen sooner or later. Hitler already had his hands on the levers of power at that point so the game was already over. If you ask me then the only reason Trump has not pulled the same stunt is because unlike Hitler, he is incompetent and struggles to do the most basic of things by himself.

If you had replaced Trump with Hitler then his January 6th coup would have succeeded (if he would not have overthrown democracy before then that is).

Point is that "freedom of thought" has no defense from a situation where the will of the people gives bad people power that they can abuse nor does it prevent them from manipulating the system and people. It is a system that will always ultimately fail.

[Rig_Stroll]

While I agree that the emergency act was nothing like the culprit, it's due to completely different reasoning from yours. What you might call "occult" really, it's no secret that hitler was "involved with occult" and it is of course to a much higher extent than widely known or implied in such clips: https://youtu.be/9y6H1_wiQsg?si=c-lL5Fmy-P4YjOn_

And again with the Trump shit. First of all, it's all a set up, as I suggested before, these wings are deliberately orchestrated to forever divide. By that I mean trump deliberately says shit that scares you so much without him intending to do it. I can guarantee you that, he will not be in power for long actually and it's not his intention.

But if you want to talk about Jan 6th, he specifically tweeted "be peaceful". And what else? The mob wouldn't exist without "wing mentality". Imagine if people said "it's not the party (or wing) that matters but the goodness of their policies and keeping of promises. And neither does good policies or keeps promises." Which would be objectively factual.

[Douglas1179]

If you pay a girl to take her clothes off and suck your cock, then she's never going to do it for free. She's always going to expect payment for that blow job. In fact, she is going to go down on that dick as soon as you show her the money. Similarly, the left wing will continue to divide and conquer because that is how they get money for their government programs, abortions, and medically insured sex changes. Because they are greedy whores.

[Rig_Stroll]

Hmmm I wonder if that can be put under the political label of "pavlov's cock effect" as the Soviet spy @horn_hog suggested earlier today. It goes like this:
Unconciditioned Girl see cock = girl fucks.
Conditioning = girl sees cock + money, then fucks.
Conditioned girl see cock = demand money before fucks.

[Horn_Hog]

@rig_stroll usually the girl is so hot I cum before I even have time to pull out the money.

[Agape93]

Both are just as bad. Most times when I said I was against Trump, I got attacked, not reasoned with.

[Rig_Stroll]

I don't want to ever hear anyone bragging about fucking their own daughter either. That's not politics then. That's reputation management and celebrity culture.

[Agape93]

I agree entirely

[NaultD]

so like a child going no contact with a parent if the parent just shut up I'm sure they could go out and have a meal and even share a house for the holidays. That's a real way for bygones to be bygones.

no one is going to over power us in our own place anymore. Are we supposed to teach older folk good manners today? No they can talk to the dirt for all I care because that's all they have left. Left to give left to connect with.

[exitseven]

The left has policies that have failed and they have no answer to that. Biden/Harris had no success that they could run on. The only thing they they could do us call Trump a Nazi.

[RageBabe]

The left tends to do a lot more “crystal balling.”

[PsychicBoobs]

Right side has zero proof to back up political claims and have zero common sense with issues. This equals zero communication.

[Anonymous]

Collectivism requires everyone agree on everything so collectivized. This makes left wing politics inherently intolerant and exclusive by nature.

[msc545]

Because the right-wing supports a mentally ill criminal.

[Rig_Stroll]

I'm more convinced that they support requiring documents in order for anyone to enter the country, regardless of skin color.

The fact that donald trump, a proud daughter fucker is the candidate, is unfortunate, and you only perpetuate his power by equating anyone wanting a secure border to a supporter of his.

[Anonymous]

left-wingers only have one rule and that is to prioritize their feelings above all else

[FunkyMonkee]

Rules for thee and none for me.