Fud or looming disaster:

[Moonbeam]

The link below expresses the opinion that the left is in danger of going to a very bad place. Do you thing this is typical right wing hysteria intended to generate or maintain right wing paranoia and keep them in the fold, or is it a warning to Democrats by a sympathizer that the party really is in danger, or do you think in either case it's bull shit and the party is not in any such danger?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...rid_collaborative_2_na&utm_term=.446f1d498ec2

 

[IronWing]

Ed Rogers is a contributor to the PostPartisan blog, a political consultant and a veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses and several national campaigns. He is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group, which he founded with former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour in 1991.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/huntsman-bachmann-in-2012/2011/05/26/AGIs3HCH_story.html

I'm going with, "He's a Republican Party hack." His writing suggests that he views a single payer system is a bad idea which is an extreme right position to hold.

 

[FIVR]

Sanders on steroids, huh? Oh and "those stoners who started the occupy movement" will maybe "have democrats court Antifa"?


The blog is written by a retarded person, probably a retarded conservative trying to pretend to be a retarded democrat.... and of course read and posted by fellow retards.

 

[JSt0rm]

guess you got your answer moonbeam

 

[Victorian Gray]

Yes, the American Democratic Party is "now captive to the party’s left-wing fringe".

ROFLMAO!

 

[Jhhnn]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/huntsman-bachmann-in-2012/2011/05/26/AGIs3HCH_story.html

I'm going with, "He's a Republican Party hack." His writing suggests that he views a single payer system is a bad idea which is an extreme right position to hold.

This.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yes, the American Democratic Party is "now captive to the party’s left-wing fringe".

ROFLMAO!

The problem I see is that the authoritarian left, the left that reacts to programming but doesn't think, gives the progressive left a bad name. They create situations that cause They cause non-radicalized people to question, doubt, and abandon rational liberalism. Gender race and ideological identity politics is not the way to sell liberalism to the masses because most people not only feel, but have been screwed by the system and they want to hear a message that applies universally, rather than to this or that segment who thinks their identity is the only thing that matters. Everybody matters and everybody needs to be told that by the democratic party if it wants to win. Trump has caused liberals to reveal the those who are on the authoritarian side of the party and their ideas are dangerous to it, in my opinion. Were we not seeing that split these kinds of fud pieces couldn't be written. I think the line that separates the authoritarian from the libertarian sides of both parties are more important than the separation on the right and the left. The authoritarian side of both parties are dangerous.

 

[Victorian Gray]

The problem I see is that the authoritarian left, the left that reacts to programming but doesn't think, gives the progressive left a bad name. They create situations that cause They cause non-radicalized people to question, doubt, and abandon rational liberalism. Gender race and ideological identity politics is not the way to sell liberalism to the masses because most people not only feel, but have been screwed by the system and they want to hear a message that applies universally, rather than to this or that segment who thinks their identity is the only thing that matters. Everybody matters and everybody needs to be told that by the democratic party if it wants to win. Trump has caused liberals to reveal the those who are on the authoritarian side of the party and their ideas are dangerous to it, in my opinion. Were we not seeing that split these kinds of fud pieces couldn't be written. I think the line that separates the authoritarian from the libertarian sides of both parties are more important than the separation on the right and the left. The authoritarian side of both parties are dangerous.

Not interested thanks.

 

[Grooveriding]

Their platform laid out in this article might sound radical for the Democrat party, but it's stock issue for the right or left wing party of all the other developed nations. Universal healthcare is something everyone in the room is getting right except for the one ugly stepchild.

 

[JSt0rm]

the looming disaster is all the retarded shit republicans type at each other.

 

[IronWing]

The problem I see is that the authoritarian left, the left that reacts to programming but doesn't think, gives the progressive left a bad name. They create situations that cause They cause non-radicalized people to question, doubt, and abandon rational liberalism. Gender race and ideological identity politics is not the way to sell liberalism to the masses because most people not only feel, but have been screwed by the system and they want to hear a message that applies universally, rather than to this or that segment who thinks their identity is the only thing that matters. Everybody matters and everybody needs to be told that by the democratic party if it wants to win. Trump has caused liberals to reveal the those who are on the authoritarian side of the party and their ideas are dangerous to it, in my opinion. Were we not seeing that split these kinds of fud pieces couldn't be written. I think the line that separates the authoritarian from the libertarian sides of both parties are more important than the separation on the right and the left. The authoritarian side of both parties are dangerous.

This has nothing to do with the article in your OP. Perhaps a new thread is in order.

 

[FIVR]

This thread is a disaster.

 

[OWR88]

Pocahontas 2020

 

[OWR88]

Lying Ted 2020

 

[OWR88]

Little Marco 2020?

 

[dank69]

Giant Fucking Asteroid 2020

 

[JSt0rm]

hail satan

 

[ivwshane]

Surprisingly all better options than what we have in the white house now.

 

[OWR88]

Oh I would give you my left but to have little Marco in the White House right now.

Lying Ted? It pains me but he is actually better looking than Trump.

 

[Moonbeam]

This has nothing to do with the article in your OP. Perhaps a new thread is in order.

What? The questions I asked about the material and the person who wrote the link is what the thread was intended to be about, not the the material in the link directly. I'm giving some of my feelings about those questions. You and a few others gave direct answers but others, seeing that I posted the thread, couldn't keep from acting like children. I was actually interested to see if I could save myself the trouble of getting a eskimospy type answer without doing the work myself (You started down that road) but what the hell:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/i-have-found-americas-worst-columnist.html

 

[Perknose]

The problem I see is that the authoritarian left, the left that reacts to programming but doesn't think, gives the progressive left a bad name.

Dealing in false equivalencies, are we? Ooooo, let me play too:

(Clears throat)

The problem as I see it is the authoritarian mystics, the mystics that react to programming but harp on it so heavily and so often that they come across as smug and, well, authoritarian. They give ages-old wisdom a bad name.

 

[woolfe9998]

The problem I see is that the authoritarian left, the left that reacts to programming but doesn't think, gives the progressive left a bad name. They create situations that cause They cause non-radicalized people to question, doubt, and abandon rational liberalism. Gender race and ideological identity politics is not the way to sell liberalism to the masses because most people not only feel, but have been screwed by the system and they want to hear a message that applies universally, rather than to this or that segment who thinks their identity is the only thing that matters. Everybody matters and everybody needs to be told that by the democratic party if it wants to win. Trump has caused liberals to reveal the those who are on the authoritarian side of the party and their ideas are dangerous to it, in my opinion. Were we not seeing that split these kinds of fud pieces couldn't be written. I think the line that separates the authoritarian from the libertarian sides of both parties are more important than the separation on the right and the left. The authoritarian side of both parties are dangerous.

This is all essentially correct. However, don't expect to convince other liberals of this. There are three essential categories of liberals: those who are the authoritarians you describe, those who are openly against the authoritarians you describe, and the rest of them, who tolerate the authoritarians even if they aren't authoritarian themselves. This last group is the largest IMO. At the moment, it seems difficult to get through to them. Anger over Trump is likely the largest factor. In this climate, few liberals seem intent on curbing the excesses of the authoritarian left.

That said, I don't agree with everything in that article. A lot of it is prediction, grounded in present reality, but only to a point. He's also failing to distinguish between things like single payer healthcare and extreme identity politics. There might be reasons that one is more desirable than the other. But the author's own political viewpoint, which I would divine as center or center right, is causing him to see them as basically the same. While one is divisive and problematic, the other is... mainstream throughout the entire industrialized world save the US. In my view, it's hardly a radical idea.

 

[Moonbeam]

woolfe: This is all essentially correct. However, don't expect to convince other liberals of this.

M: I guess not. I hadn't guide expected such a vicious reaction. Snowflakes, I guess.

w: There are three essential categories of liberals: those who are the authoritarians you describe, those who are openly against the authoritarians you describe, and the rest of them, who tolerate the authoritarians even if they aren't authoritarian themselves. This last group is the largest IMO.

M: Except for this part, which I can see but hadn't thought to formulate, everything else in your post was pretty much exactly what I was trying to say.

W: At the moment, it seems difficult to get through to them. Anger over Trump is likely the largest factor. In this climate, few liberals seem intent on curbing the excesses of the authoritarian left.

Exactly, but not good news. It means their message will be a loser.

w: That said, I don't agree with everything in that article. A lot of it is prediction, grounded in present reality, but only to a point. He's also failing to distinguish between things like single payer healthcare and extreme identity politics. There might be reasons that one is more desirable than the other. But the author's own political viewpoint, which I would divine as center or center right, is causing him to see them as basically the same. While one is divisive and problematic, the other is... mainstream throughout the entire industrialized world save the US. In my view, it's hardly a radical idea.

M: I thought the article was shit. I think we need some form of universal health care and I want minorities, etc, included, but under a more universal appeal.

 

[dank69]

woolfe: This is all essentially correct. However, don't expect to convince other liberals of this.

M: I guess not. I hadn't guide expected such a vicious reaction. Snowflakes, I guess.

w: There are three essential categories of liberals: those who are the authoritarians you describe, those who are openly against the authoritarians you describe, and the rest of them, who tolerate the authoritarians even if they aren't authoritarian themselves. This last group is the largest IMO.

M: Except for this part, which I can see but hadn't thought to formulate, everything else in your post was pretty much exactly what I was trying to say.

W: At the moment, it seems difficult to get through to them. Anger over Trump is likely the largest factor. In this climate, few liberals seem intent on curbing the excesses of the authoritarian left.

Exactly, but not good news. It means their message will be a loser.

w: That said, I don't agree with everything in that article. A lot of it is prediction, grounded in present reality, but only to a point. He's also failing to distinguish between things like single payer healthcare and extreme identity politics. There might be reasons that one is more desirable than the other. But the author's own political viewpoint, which I would divine as center or center right, is causing him to see them as basically the same. While one is divisive and problematic, the other is... mainstream throughout the entire industrialized world save the US. In my view, it's hardly a radical idea.

M: I thought the article was shit. I think we need some form of universal health care and I want minorities, etc, included, but under a more universal appeal.

You got a vicious reaction because that writer is a piece of shit to his very core and it doesn't take research or even any knowledge of his background to divine that information. It is apparent just from reading that one article. It is filled with every shit rationalization tool in the degenerate conservative toolbox to the point that reading it is literally painful.

 

[dank69]

This is all essentially correct. However, don't expect to convince other liberals of this. There are three essential categories of liberals: those who are the authoritarians you describe, those who are openly against the authoritarians you describe, and the rest of them, who tolerate the authoritarians even if they aren't authoritarian themselves. This last group is the largest IMO. At the moment, it seems difficult to get through to them. Anger over Trump is likely the largest factor. In this climate, few liberals seem intent on curbing the excesses of the authoritarian left.

That said, I don't agree with everything in that article. A lot of it is prediction, grounded in present reality, but only to a point. He's also failing to distinguish between things like single payer healthcare and extreme identity politics. There might be reasons that one is more desirable than the other. But the author's own political viewpoint, which I would divine as center or center right, is causing him to see them as basically the same. While one is divisive and problematic, the other is... mainstream throughout the entire industrialized world save the US. In my view, it's hardly a radical idea.

IMO anyone opposing Democrats or liberals on authoritarian grounds is a fucking muppet. It's like worrying about the dogshit on your shoes when the entire fucking world is burning down around you.