you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 42 points 2 years ago (34 children)

Everyone hates Rand Paul but he voted no on this, as did others on the left and the right. Fuck fascism and fuck left authoritarianism.

  • source
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    Rand Paul votes no on anything that allows the government to do anything. I doubt he even reads the bills.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    A principled stance is a principled stance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    All the people who wanted to maintain segregation (i.e. Rand's father) had principled stances. Should we admire them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (5 children)

    What principle would lead someone to support segregation?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    In Rand's father's case? Libertarian nonsense about not being forced by the big bad government to stop with the 'whites only' bullshit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    Ah. Free association is what it'd be called by libertarians. I see what you mean now.

    Was he against government-forced segregation?

    I'm kind of bad in these situations (from a libertarian perspective) because I tend to refuse to worry about things I like the outcome of.

    If you and I had incredibly similar views on how people should behave, and we both put time and money into achieving those outcomes, but I didn't support using violence (libertarian reductionist view of government), does that mean I support things I'm ostensibly fighting personally?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    He would have opposed the Civil Rights Act "because of the property rights element." See? Principled stand.

    https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/91287-paul-says-he-would-have-opposed-1964-civil-rights-act/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago

    Neoliberals are conservatives. Always have been. By all international standards, the Democrat party is a conservative party and the Republicans are a more conservative party. We don't currently have a viable left/progressive party.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago*

    The entirety of the left-of-center in the US is a handfull of progressives, at most.

    By international standards Biden is hard-right, Trump is far-right.

    This shit is full-on rightwing authoritarianism.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    there are no left authoritarians in office.

    liberals are not leftists. haven't been since 1848.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    Dunno why 1848, but those students on the streets of Vienna whom "dear father field marshal" Radetzky hanged on many lanterns were not leftist. They were pretty republican-nationalist, right liberal that is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    are you... are you defending the original incident that lead to the term 'tankie'? impressive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don't get your thought process. The original incidents were Soviet interventions in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    sorry when I hear about a name from that language family I I st assume. I ignore most soviet history and as much american history as I can because its stupid and can be summarized 'and then they figured out how to make even worse decisions! hooray!'

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -11 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Any liberal who supports disarming civilians is a left authoritarian.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Only the fringe lunatics think it's even possible to disarm a population. Far lefties like myself realize the power that small arms represent in the fight against fascism. Marx said to arm up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    Marx also assumed that revolution eventually leads to a communist utopia.

    Thus far they have only led to authoritarian regimes. Even Cuba is little more than a benevolent dictatorship.

    Weapons are a good way to combat other weapons, not ideology.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    If it's authoritarianism, it ain't left.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Tankies sadly exist in our side, but I don’t think there’s a single one in US politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can call yourself a leftist without actually espousing ideals reflecting it.

    Tankies aren't leftist, they're leftist cosplayers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I actually watched recently a few videos on YT by Klim Zhukov (in Russian, naturally ; he's a Tankie and a historian by education), and I'm not so certain.

    I may even agree than in some things they are more orthodox-Marxist than most western left movements.

    Now, by Tankies I mean Stalinists here.

  • source
  • parent