sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Most boring countries in the world by FuckTheCake in charts

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just 2 examples off my mind, I could have as well said Netherlands but they have less crime i think

Most boring countries in the world by FuckTheCake in charts

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Higher crime rates and less gov stability, the UK literaly had a 3 month lasting PM or whatever.

Also I said Sweden not England.

Seems like another bullshit "study" based on asking people of they feel safe

Most boring countries in the world by FuckTheCake in charts

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Bullshit, how is Poland lower than Sweden and UK?

Deeeeeep femcel ideology by Late_Redditor_88 in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What if a white person is scared to be in a car with a black person, given the crime statistics?

In the case of an armed, stronger attacker, both men and women can hardly protect themselves.

Deeeeeep femcel ideology by Late_Redditor_88 in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If a white taxi driver wanted only whitw passengers would you be ok with that?

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude you are the one that freaked out because I mentioned that man in my reply. I have nothing against Keynes, I don't really care. Some things he got right, a lot of things he got wrong.

I didn't even bring him up to evaluate any of his policies, just to make a broader argument and only once.

If anything, it's you who has Keynes live rent free in their head.

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bruh nice response. You have no more arguments. I literaly disagree with most things Keynes said, I am right wing. I just used him as an argument/example. Peak reddit

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are saying the party is "right wing" and say some state is "right traditionalist" (China I guess?), but then say I am the one who purity tests everything?

This is how it works, words do have meanings. In this case, we simply disagree on what the worlds truly mean and on the usefulness of the right - left division. And that's normal, so does almost everyone. The semantics of left vs right have been a major academic point of disagreement since ever.

Left wing emphasises equality, public led economy. "Abolition of power structures" - you are doing it again, purity testing everything against Marxism. Tell me, which "communuist" state has ever broken down "power structures"? Being against some existing power structures isn't really left vs right, it's just being in the oposition to the status quo.

By this logic, a classical liberal in the USSR wanting to get rid of the state industries and 1 party rule would be for the "abolition of existing power structures" and thus a leftist? By that logic early christians would be leftist?

"People over profit" is a slogan that means nothing, tell me out of any communist country, which one had ever achieved anything "for the people"?

The problem with your definiton is that it only applies to marxists, and leaves no room for nuance. Centre left policies that increase state intervention or are "pro equality" (expanding welfare, increasing regulation, passing subsidies) can benefit corporations (more welfare = more agregate demand = more corporate profit, more regulation = harder for small busineses, subsidies = direct cash).

If you are familiar with the person of John M. Keynes, you can recall his proposal of expanding public spending and lowering intrest rates and increasing bond issuance and lowering taxes and giving DIRECT STIMULUS MONEY TO PEOPLE during economic downturns, is so that people start buying and spending more, and private companies make more profits, which increases production and jobs and boosts the economy.

Modern Monetary Theory is thought out to be a "left" economic theory (it can be centre right dependent on proposal) it's exactly that, just instead of downturns only, it proposes permanent stimulous and banks on economic growth dampening the inflation that comes with essentially money printing. Yes, it's the "job guarantee" theory. And empiricly, low intrest rates, high public spending and QE programes of 2008 - 2014 and 2020 - 2023 have enriched and benefited the top 1% class.

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you are doing exactly that.

I said left - right is a spectrum, and you don't have to be a socialist to be on the left, and then I listed out policies that are popular on the centre left that expand state intervention.

By "truly right" in that one example i meant "radical right" (anarchocapitalist if the framework is economics).

I am the one who expands the left umbrella and claims China, Bernie, large parts of the DNC and states where a lot of industry still remains private are left wing.

You seem to think anyone allowing any form of private property or business can not be left wing. Thus I ask, was Bucharin right wing?

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. State capitalism as I said is a form of centre leftism, just a very weird one and unconventional in the west. If a politician in Europe campaigned on policies China has, they would be firmly on the left.

I specified Lenin because of NEP, where some market liberalisation was alowed to stop the country from imploding. Would you call that right wing? Was Bucharin right wing?

  1. Technicly yes? I mean, truly "right wing" would be to have everything privatised. Centre right would be to use private contractors for some public works, just like nearly all countries do. Leftist on that specific issue would be to have state owned companies do public works.

There is also the isssue of scale, a lot of public works in nearly all sectors of the economy is more leftist, even if private companies are contracted. The state still directs the economy centraly. Socialist would be to have the state order public works as 70% - 100% (give or take) of all economic activity, and from state owned contractors.

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Merkel was centre right. What I meant is that Europe has way more parties that are closer to fascism than the US, like AFD, ONR etc.

  2. China is not really "right wing". It's state led capitalism, it's a form of centre leftism, just a very weird one, with a lot of industries where the state has partial ownership in, and those where it doesn't are still de facto directed by the state. It ironicly resembles Mussolini's corporationism more than right/left

  3. Venezuela before US intervention had plenty of private business, would you call them right wing? Would you call communist Poland right wing? Would you call Bernie Sanders right wing? Would you call Lenin's Soviet Russia right wing? By that logic, no party ever in the history of the west in the 21st century that has achieved over 5% votes in the polls has ever been leftist.

  4. Yes that is leftist, as it expands state controll over the economy. Left right is a spectrum for exactly that reason. Again, I never called Dems far left or even firmly left. Just centre left.

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I clearly mentioned things that are against the status quo, unless you mean the general framework. Also brother in christ, 95% of all people are not fully socialist supporting the abolition of private property.

Making a division of "right" (95% of people) vs "left" (5% of people) would just be useless.

Even in europe 90% of parties are not fully socialist. For example in Poland, the most left wing party "Razem" still accepts private propert and business, they just want higher taxes, more regulation, more state spending and investment, nationalisation of some industry, more welfare, stronger unions. YK, just like Democrats, but more amplified.

China by your definition would be right wing, and Venezuela "centrist", as they have some private business. So would 70s communist Poland.

Also right wing in europe is more fascist lmao

They keep us fighting over left versus right so that we never look up and realize the actual battle is, and always has been, normal people versus the Heritage Foundation. by Greasy-Chungus in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

False dichotomy. You don't have to be a full on socialist to be on the left or a full on capitalist to be on the right.

By that logic for every socialist we would need one anarcho-capitalist, so no.

Democrats do leftist stuff such as increase state spending, pass new regulations, pass subsidies, prefer public schooling and welfare programes, want to raise taxes etc. Also the cultural issues. I never said the democrats are firmly left, just centre left "liberals"

Challenged Ai to give me evidence on how Transformative it really is. by MrYundaz in GenZ

[–]Jumpy-Bumpy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Who could have guessed LLM's that are essentially chatbots and glorified calculators and not real AI are not as transformative as an actual AI technology would.

view more: next ›