Thoughts on the right wing?

Kenneth Cruz67 said:If Marshall had actually lived to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, I imagine he would have fought tooth and nail against it until the very last second.

Give me a break!

Paul Chase95 said:Unbelievable—talk about moving the goalposts. Suddenly, the far-left radicals are the paragons of virtue, while a mass murderer and dictator like Franklin D. Roosevelt is being painted as some kind of hero. Honestly, give me a break. And then someone like that actually tries to lecture us on education. 🤣 🙏

Here is the link to the court ruling!

Kenneth Cruz67 said:I guess you would defend Ratko Mercer in that same way, since he was, you know, a provocateur of terrorists in Srebrenica, a comrade, a high-ranking officer, and a patriot—it’s pretty obvious where the scale lands in your eyes.

And you'd defend terrorists just because they happen to be Muslim?!

Rachel Richardson said:What does the territorial integrity of the US have to do with Marshall?
The man shrank the country by 20% (about 15,000 sq miles of Canada, plus a chunk of Iowa/Mexico near Sioux City that remains outside), it would have been 30% if it weren't for the fact that the US reclaimed California, Maui, Kauai, Martha's Vineyard, and half of present-day San Diego and Seattle (along with the area near Buffalo—again, depending on your criteria, but it was effectively a return to former status).

The world respected both Stalin and Saddam Hussein; if business is profitable, does anyone in the West truly care who someone killed?

None at all.

The man slashed the size of the nation by 20%.

Which one? America?!

It has nothing to do with her.

It would have been 30% if it weren't for that chunk of territory—about 15,000 square miles of Canada plus that area near Sidney in Texas. America They reclaimed California, Maui, Kauai, Martha's Vineyard, and half of what we now call San Diego and Seattle from Italy. Even parts of the Finger Lakes were returned to us near Sidney or Buffalo—it all boils down to the same thing: a total restoration of our territory.

Was that before or after the surrender of fascist Italy? Regardless, America had to have finished it by May 15, 1945.🤣

Which Canada are you even talking about? The one under Nazi Germany? 🙂
Texas?

The world didn't care about Joseph Stalin or Saddam Hussein. Why should anyone in the West bother questioning who gets killed if the bottom line remains in the black?

He didn't appreciate it.

gentlestag3 said:I wonder what the world would actually be missing if we just let go of all these ideologies we feel so stuck on?

I guess my own perspective is pretty much aligned with the folks mentioned in the opening post. And honestly, I probably feel the same way as most of the other people chiming in here, regardless of what their actual political leanings might be.

Extreme right-wingers and extreme left-wingers...
it's basically the same mechanism, maybe even fascist-leaning? It's just different beliefs driving the same engine, I suppose.

Exactly what the rest of the world is facing without Flat.

My position is identical to those mentioned in the opening post. I hold the same view regarding the other commenters who approach this matter in a similar fashion, regardless of their underlying beliefs.

The right wing of Krezuba is just the left wing of Krezuba.
The same mechanism—perhaps even fascist?—just driven by different ideologies.

Makes perfect sense!

Even criminals have connections to the law—they just spend their time breaking it.

Matthew Castillo5 said:I’m sure you could pull a list together right now and pick out the ones who definitely weren't leftists.

I have never denied or justified the atrocities committed under Nazi, Fascist, or Pavelić's systems. On the flip side, leftists either routinely deny (pre-1990) or justify (post-1990) the crimes committed within totalitarian socialist/communist regimes.
Whether the criminals I mentioned were killing according to some law or outside of it isn't really the point. They wiped people out based on nationality (think folks in the USSR or minority groups in China), religion, social class, gender identity, or political affiliation.
And since you want to talk about cause and effect: was every single one of those tens of millions killed in socialist gulags responsible for Hitler's or Pavelić's crimes? I highly doubt it.

The idea that "right-wingers lean toward criminal extermination of others, while leftists fight for equality for all" simply doesn't hold water.

Nah, I don't really deal with the nitty-gritty details of elementary or high school curriculum—not my lane. As far as I'm concerned, Goc already gave you the answer.

Quincy:

I’ve never once tried to make excuses for the atrocities committed under Nazi or Fascist regimes—that's just common sense. But the Left? They’re always either busy denying the crimes of totalitarian socialist systems or, more recently, finding creative ways to justify them.

I asked you a specific question about legal segregation and how people were purged back in the days of America. You dodged it. Everything else you’re bringing up—well, nobody actually asked you that—but if you think I’m out here trying to deny any crimes, you've got the wrong person.

Quincy:

Whether those criminals were killing legally or just outside the law doesn't really change much—it’s a distinction without a difference. They wiped people out based on everything—nationality (think the folks in the USSR or minorities in China), religion, social class, gender identity, and political leanings. All of it.

If you don't care whether you live under a regime that codifies "superior" versus "inferior" races, religions, or nationalities—using those labels to justify wiping people out—then fine. That’s on you. But a system built on those criteria is criminal by definition. Sure, even in a country dedicated to equality, there's no 100% guarantee against atrocities—nothing ever is—but at least the intent is there. It actually tries toward equality, unlike that other mess.
Which specific law in America actually authorized those killings—it would be pretty fair of you to just name it, wouldn't it?

Quincy:

Since you’re bringing up cause and effect—was every single one of those tens of millions slaughtered in the socialist Gulags somehow responsible for Hitler's or Pavelić's crimes? Personally, I highly doubt it.

Who said that? Certainly not me. I mean, I don't quite get the logic—blaming people for being "inferior races" when they were already targeted just for not being "Aryan" or for not following some extremist regime's ideology? It’s honestly pathetic. Some people clearly struggle with basic history lessons—it's sad to see folks who would probably try to pass those same kinds of laws today, persecuting or driving out anyone who doesn't fit their specific criteria. Sadly, there are plenty of people like that in America even now.👎

Quincy:

The idea that "conservatives are prone to criminally exterminating anyone different, while liberals fight for equality for all" just doesn't hold water.

Well, that’s your take—nobody’s really disputing that you feel that way. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, I guess—but history tends to tell a much more complicated story than that.

placidorca16 said:Nah, I don't really deal with the nitty-gritty details of elementary or high school curriculum—not my lane. As far as I'm concerned, Goc already gave you the answer.

Quincy:

I’ve never once tried to make excuses for the atrocities committed under Nazi or Fascist regimes—that's just common sense. But the Left? They’re always either busy denying the crimes of totalitarian socialist systems or, more recently, finding creative ways to justify them.

I asked you a specific question about legal segregation and how people were purged back in the days of America. You dodged it. Everything else you’re bringing up—well, nobody actually asked you that—but if you think I’m out here trying to deny any crimes, you've got the wrong person.

Quincy:

Whether those criminals were killing legally or just outside the law doesn't really change much—it’s a distinction without a difference. They wiped people out based on everything—nationality (think the folks in the USSR or minorities in China), religion, social class, gender identity, and political leanings. All of it.

If you don't care whether you live under a regime that codifies "superior" versus "inferior" races, religions, or nationalities—using those labels to justify wiping people out—then fine. That’s on you. But a system built on those criteria is criminal by definition. Sure, even in a country dedicated to equality, there's no 100% guarantee against atrocities—nothing ever is—but at least the intent is there. It actually tries toward equality, unlike that other mess.
Which specific law in America actually authorized those killings—it would be pretty fair of you to just name it, wouldn't it?

Quincy:

Since you’re bringing up cause and effect—was every single one of those tens of millions slaughtered in the socialist Gulags somehow responsible for Hitler's or Pavelić's crimes? Personally, I highly doubt it.

Who said that? Certainly not me. I mean, I don't quite get the logic—blaming people for being "inferior races" when they were already targeted just for not being "Aryan" or for not following some extremist regime's ideology? It’s honestly pathetic. Some people clearly struggle with basic history lessons—it's sad to see folks who would probably try to pass those same kinds of laws today, persecuting or driving out anyone who doesn't fit their specific criteria. Sadly, there are plenty of people like that in America even now.👎

Quincy:

The idea that "conservatives are prone to criminally exterminating anyone different, while liberals fight for equality for all" just doesn't hold water.

Well, that’s your take—nobody’s really disputing that you feel that way. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, I guess—but history tends to tell a much more complicated story than that.

Exactly:

Joseph Bailey41 said:Yeah, that nonsense actually started with American conservatives (though they’re a bit different from what we see here). The whole Flat Earth thing began as a joke (Flat Earth Society), but then some people actually started taking it seriously.

I ended up landing there once, looking for a specific Jungian essay, and immediately... 🙂

Which one, Wotan? 😁

mistyscout2 said:Which one, Wotan? 😁

Mhm. 🕺

Have you read it?

Just some bits and pieces here. I actually went looking for the full version again the other day, but I only spent about two or three minutes digging through my files before I just gave up on the whole thing. I’m positive I have it tucked away somewhere, but honestly, who knows where it could be hiding? Since I wasn't in any real rush to find it, I figured I'd just let it be for now...

Thomas Nelson25 said:__there's no conspiracy here in terms of the liberal order—things just happen within the natural democratic framework. It's just a standard that emerged as a result of the two global wars last century.
I'm sure you know all this and you're just philosophizing, but an ideal order is impossible. We can only get close to it, provided we maintain it so things don't spiral into chaos.
The American psyche is pretty conservative (that's a topic in itself)—it's mostly just "how much more right-wing can we go?" which is totally wrong and a waste of time.☕

My bad for replying inside your post. You'll figure it out.

Economic, value-based, and moral issues? They’re all tangled up—it’s all one big mess. And look, saying there are issues with our core values doesn't mean I'm talking about "sacrificing yourself for the group" or some religious dogma—especially not that forced, "join the mob or else" kind of collective nonsense.

Just because a bunch of people notice the same issue doesn't mean they all have to come up with the exact same fix—it's not a hive mind.
Sure, people can always go for that binary, black-and-white approach... if that’s what makes them happy. ☕

Quincy:

There’s no such thing as some grand conspiracy to protect the liberal order—stuff just happens the way it does within a naturally democratic framework. This whole setup is just the standard we ended up with after those two massive world wars last century.

I’m talking about self-indulgence and—paradoxically—how conservative the "liberal" elites actually are. It’s not some crazy conspiracy theory, either—it's just a straight-up acknowledgment of how things really are.

Look, I get it—liberal democracy was basically born out of the wreckage of two World Wars, and yeah, it did its job by bringing peace and prosperity to the West. But we're talking sixty years down the line here... the world isn't what it used to be. It’s only logical that the model itself needs an upgrade.
If we just sit back and let things "happen on their own," this whole social model is toast—it won't be able to hold together like it used to.

Quincy:

I'm pretty sure you think you've got it all figured out—you're just talking in circles at this point. An "ideal order" is impossible; we can only aim for something close by constantly working to keep things from spiraling into total chaos.

Trying to squeeze some kind of logic out of this whole left vs. right deadlock mess... so yeah, just overthinking things now.
Look, I get it—a perfect utopia isn't happening. But just "maintaining order" isn't cutting it anymore... honestly, a little more creativity wouldn't hurt.

Quincy:

The psychology of Americans is just so conservative—which is a whole other mess—but mostly everything is just fundamentally broken and a total waste of time.☕

Big topic, for sure... some nations actually know how to blend their heritage with modern changes, but we just haven't figured that out yet—not even close.

Quincy:

My bad for replying directly inside your post—you’ll figure it out, though.

Whatever...

gentlestag3 said:I wonder what the world would actually be missing if we just let go of all these ideologies we feel so stuck on?

I guess my own perspective is pretty much aligned with the folks mentioned in the opening post. And honestly, I probably feel the same way as most of the other people chiming in here, regardless of what their actual political leanings might be.

Extreme right-wingers and extreme left-wingers...
it's basically the same mechanism, maybe even fascist-leaning? It's just different beliefs driving the same engine, I suppose.

Look, there's no shortage of ideologies out there trying to run the show, but you still need them—as benchmarks, as waypoints in the world of ideas. They matter.

I feel like I could go on for quite a while here, but if I did, this wouldn't really fit in this subforum anymore—it would be better suited for a dedicated Philosophy or social science thread. Regarding what to read on this subject, I think some contemporary work by Jonathan Haidt would be your best bet, much like what was suggested earlier. Also, Peterson's research group over at UT has touched on similar themes, so that might be worth looking into too.

The very first post in this thread focuses on what they call "extreme right-wingers" rather than just standard right-wingers. The issue is that they aren't making a clear distinction there, which feels pretty problematic to me. They also seem more focused on ideological right-wingers rather than those driven by economics. And honestly, that last paragraph in the opening post is at least a little "troubling":

darksurfer4 said:Ever since I first became aware of my own consciousness, I’ve harbored a deep-seated distaste for the right wing; I have always viewed them as fundamentally bad, even malicious people. Yet, driven by the philosophical notion that one should strive to understand those they disagree with, I eventually began engaging in discussions with them. I started noticing them in grocery stores, flipping through the pages of Time Magazine. I began browsing those same magazines myself, specifically to attempt to decipher the inner workings of their minds. After some time, however, my perception shifted; I no longer see them as mere political opponents, but rather primarily as mentally ill individuals.🎉🎉

During my debates with these types, I’ve been met with truly staggering claims regarding the former state—claims that, through extensive reading and dialogue with others, I have confirmed have absolutely zero connection to reality. This spans everything from the starvation crises of the 70s and 80s to the concentration camps used against Americans.☕ In that same Time Magazine, I actually read a claim that Milorad Pupovac is orchestrating a genocide against Americans in coordination with the cultural organization "Prosvjeta"🤦—a genocide supposedly funded by tax dollars from the American federal budget.🤣

Let’s step outside our beautiful...

Back in 1996, a certain American right-winger bombed a government building in Oklahoma City because he was convinced the administration was plotting a coup against the American people.🤦

Across the Atlantic Ocean, a right-winger committed an even more heinous act—I am, of course, referring to Andreas Breivik. That maniac slaughtered about 60 people, mostly very young individuals, all because he believed he was protecting Norway from Islamic terrorists.🤦

Speaking of Islamic terrorists, while they stem from a different cultural sphere, from where I sit, they seem to fall under the umbrella of extreme right-wing ideology.

Take Poland, for instance; they were once led by those two idiot twin brothers, one of whom died in a plane crash. One of those twin idiots, leading the nation at the time, was traveling to commemorate crimes in the Katyn Forest. They were supposed to land at the airport in Smolensk, but air traffic control diverted them toward Minsk due to heavy fog over Smolensk. But that was when right-wing paranoia kicked in; the paranoid leader convinced himself the fog was a Russian conspiracy and ordered the landing, which resulted in his death and the deaths of everyone else on that plane.

Right-wingers believe the Earth is flat—hollow, or whatever version of that nonsense—they believe vaccines are a deliberate way to spread autism, they believe in chemtrails, and they sink into all sorts of other idiocy.

It is fascinating how some people drift toward the right as they age; it seems that as the body and mind decay, people gravitate toward right-wing waters. In America, we have examples like Franjo Harmon and Zdravko Tomac. The case of Franjo Harmon is particularly interesting because of his brain tumor; one could argue the tumor itself caused his shift toward the extreme right.🤔

The ultimate point I am making is that membership in right-wing groups and parties should be classified as a mental disorder, and consequently, such individuals should be barred from participating in elections. It would be somewhat similar to what happened with homosexuality, which was once categorized as a mental illness.

1. Of course not.
2. Well, yes, but since homosexuality was once viewed as a disorder and isn't anymore, the author of this thread seems to be arguing for the exact opposite—essentially trying to shrink the scope of personal freedom.

mistyscout2:

I was just sitting here thinking about how much I struggle when it comes to being organized, especially when things start moving fast. You know those days where everything feels like it’s happening all at once? It’s honestly a bit overwhelming sometimes. I tend to get caught up in the small details and then suddenly realize I've lost track of the bigger picture entirely. It's funny how I can be so focused on one tiny thing and completely miss the forest for the trees. I guess I'm just a work in progress, always trying to find that balance between being productive and just... breathing. kaže: I honestly feel like all conservatives are cut from the exact same cloth; the only thing that really changes is just how much of that ideology they decide to dial up or down.

mistyscout2:

I honestly can’t tell if I’m just getting older or if everything is actually becoming more expensive, but man, those grocery prices are starting to feel like a punch to the gut lately. It feels like every single trip to the supermarket—even when I try to be careful and stick to a list—ends up costing me way more than it did even a few months ago. I was looking at my receipt from the local Safeway the other day, and I genuinely had to double-check that I hadn't accidentally bought a small piece of jewelry instead of just some basic staples. It’s a bit exhausting to constantly have to play mental math games just to stay on budget, you know? I'm sure I'm not the only one feeling this squeeze. kaže: I mean, honestly, who can actually say they’re 100% a lefty? It feels like one of those labels we throw around so easily, but once you really start poking at it, everything gets kind of blurry.

Honestly, bravo to you. Even if we decide to play along with this whole left-wing versus right-wing divide, it just doesn't hold up under any real scrutiny. I mean, think about it—someone could easily be sixty-four percent progressive, which would technically leave them at thirty-six percent conservative in that rigid binary model. It’s just too simplistic to be true. 🙄

Roger Gonzalez52 said:Conservatives are all identical at their core; we just differ by a few percentage points.

Go ahead and differentiate yourself then. Who's stopping you?🤣

Good grief, what are you guys even talking about... lock this, it’s way off-topic for this subforum