-->
@cristo71
Well until this joke of a thread, both.
Well until this joke of a thread, both.
wikipedia.
Created equal is not the same as eternally equal. If men were eternally equal then how come some are in prison and others aren't?Created equal. Nobody should be in prison because of inheritance.
t if they didn't believe it was a superior way of life they wouldn't fit the definitions.You do understand that asserting that one class of humans is inherently supreme is very different than prefering on argument of another.
Ideology is pretty irrelevant to Fascism: the only ideology that counts is the idealogy of the autocrat.Can't both be true.
- False and stupid.
hat is the answer of an insane anarchist who couldn't manage to fit in to a collective farm.
- False. Liberals don't believe in poltiical heirarchies
The liberal answer, as explained is: order and hierarchies assembled by consent are acceptable. Those assembled without consent are not acceptable.
- A temporary government appointment is not social heirarchy
You inject an implication of inheritance where none is required, even by your own choice in definition.
- White supremacy implies an inheritance of white genetics, white "blood"
Anything democratic is Liberal definition. Democracy is the Liberal form of government.
Only white people tend to believe that white supremacy is a right wing thing.
I meant “white people INTRAmarrying…”
Even the FBI recognizes that there's no denying it.
Was the republican party far left in 1860?
-->@<<<oromagi>>>Anything democratic is Liberal definition. Democracy is the Liberal form of government.Every single corrupt nation that happens to have elections already disproves you here.
Post socialism
Created equal is not the same as eternally equal. If men were eternally equal then how come some are in prison and others aren't?Created equal. Nobody should be in prison because of inheritance.Moving the goal post. You injected inheritance where "wikipedia's" definition did not.
t if they didn't believe it was a superior way of life they wouldn't fit the definitions.You do understand that asserting that one class of humans is inherently supreme is very different than prefering on argument of another.
Ideology is pretty irrelevant to Fascism: the only ideology that counts is the idealogy of the autocrat.Can't both be true.
- False and stupid.
Not an argument, ignored.
The liberal answer, as explained is: order and hierarchies assembled by consent are acceptable. Those assembled without consent are not acceptable.
- A temporary government appointment is not social heirarchy
Then republicans have never been in favor of social hierarchy. You attempt equivocation.
You inject an implication of inheritance where none is required, even by your own choice in definition.
- White supremacy implies an inheritance of white genetics, white "blood"
I did not comment on your definition of white supremacy but "right wing politics" which did not contain "inheritance" or "inherent". Moving the goalposts.
Anything democratic is Liberal by definition. Democracy is the Liberal form of government.
I mean, what is "right" and what is "left" is defined by who is associated with it, possibly.
Post socialismLeftism is not a post-socialist word.
- I regret that you lack the perception to apprectiate how the word inheritance is an apt shorthand for social orders and hierarchies as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable, typically supporting this position based on natural law, economics, authority, property or tradition.
he liberal answer, as explained is: order and hierarchies assembled by consent are acceptable. Those assembled without consent are not acceptable.
- A temporary government appointment is not social heirarchy
Then republicans have never been in favor of social hierarchy. You attempt equivocation.
- The topic is why are all White Supremacists Right WIngers.
The question is not whether government is necessary for human happiness or whether every form of government is imperfect, corrupt, tryannical. Any government contrary to one's values will feel like tyrranny. The question is whether the mob or one man is more likely to represent the interests of the majority and act to that majority's benefit. That is not perfect freedom for everybody always, it is only more free than any other system of government.
Your claim that democratic is liberal by definition or that liberal is democratic by definition remains false.
Democracy { democrats } is broad base of support ergo liiberally applied government just as paint is liberally applied with a broad brush.
yet the definition you gave is, which was the point.
You regret that I can't be cowed into reading bizarre extra meaning into words as that would allow the framework you advanced to make a tiny bit of sense.
The tattered remains of your definition of "right winger" is the subtopic at hand.
Arguments as to whether democracy brings more liberty are irrelevant to your error.Democracy and liberty are not the same thing. Democrat and liberal are not synonyms.Your claim that democratic is liberal by definition or that liberal is democratic by definition remains false.
There is no doubt democracy allows for more freedom than any other form of government.
American ideology is Liberal by definition: "we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal"
There is no doubt democracy allows for more freedom than any other form of government.
The basic tenet of a pure leftist is that any individual worker is not allowed to own what they produce.
Conservatism is about conserving the status quo.
The status quo in America is that white people own nearly everything and maintain the power.
Status anxiety.
Many people in: Russia, Turkey, Egypt, Philippines, Venezuela, Belarus, Cambodia, Azerbaijan, Thailand, and Ethiopia would disagree.
People there have objectively had more freedom and civil rights under other forms of rule.
Milton Friedman, the renowned economist and Nobel laureate, argued that a free market is necessary for liberty, not Democracy.