Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
02-27-2011, 03:14 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 03:26 PM by Infinite.)
#1
The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
Is that it isn't exactly true. The political beliefs of self-proclaimed patriot types generally fall into the categories of right-libertarianism and paleoconservatism. These are right wing politics, even though they aren't in line with the current Republican party. They're more traditional 'Old Right' conservative politics. It's kind of intellectually dishonest in my opinion how people like Alex Jones will always promote stances such as supporting tight restrictions on immigration from the perspective of opposing an elitist conspiracy when more likely they're just things that he personally believes in.

Probably some sort of a 'centrist' viewpoint, probably not the traditional establishment one, would be the most fitting of the description of 'neither left or right'. I think not subscribing to either extreme is a good thing, but I personally think that Ron Paul style conservatism is still a bit skewed to the right side of politics. For example Paul can't talk about the 9/11 official story being suspicious for political reasons, but left wing candidates like Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel and Cynthia McKinney can. However all 3 of those candidates support tight regulation of gun ownership, basically the elimination of it altogether for regular citizens. So despite the fact that they at least suspect that the government might be capable of murdering thousands of it's own citizens, they still wish to disarm every citizen, which would enable the state to carry out whatever aims it wanted to against us without possibility of physical defense or retaliation.

Holistically both leftism and rightism are biased and flawed in my opinion. Political figures like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are not 'neither left or right'. One is an old school conservative/right-libertarian and the other is an extreme leftist/collectivist. Conservatism is a form of collectivism too in my opinion. Conservatives aren't libertarian in the sense that they believe in live and let live. They have generalized notions of what 'society', and thus the people in it, should be like.

"conservatism, Political attitude or ideology denoting a preference for institutions and practices that have evolved historically and are thus manifestations of continuity and stability." - source

But what if those institutions and practices aren't working to the benefit of people in their lives? According to conservatives they can't be changed, individuals are just a means to an end of this supposedly great vision. In this way conservativism is similar to socialism. In fact even Noam Chomsky claims that values wise he's a conservative.
By the way, I feel like the conspiracy movement figures have kind of trained us to not examine actual political philosophies and just to view everything from the viewpoint of this conspiracy reductionism. As in how they say 'this is what The New World Order is pushing, so you need to support such and such in order to fight it'. But if you really examine it what I've found is that everything is not as straight forward as they claim. For example again with the immigration debate, Alex Jones claims that the fact that Bill Gates supports La Raza is evidence that open immigration is in line with 'The New World Order' and it's eugenics agenda. But if you look into the anti-immigration groups that Jones promotes, it's a fact that these groups are openly pro-eugenics and admit as such. And historically eugenics has always been intertwined with the anti-immigrant movement. The notion that foreign colored immigrants were going to fuck up the gene pool and dilute the superior white race. I did a thread about this a while ago. I've come to the conclusion that Alex Jones doesn't really care about eugenics, at least when it comes to immigration. He just uses it as an excuse with the link to the Gates foundation and La Raza which is more weaker than the open proclamations in support of racial eugenics by the groups like FAIR that he supports.
Reply
02-27-2011, 03:49 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 05:23 PM by yeti.)
#2
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
Please explain your reasoning that being against illegal immigration is the same thing as being a eugenicist.

Can you also provide your evidence demonstrating that Kucinich is an extreme leftist/collectivist?
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
02-27-2011, 04:42 PM,
#3
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-27-2011, 03:49 PM)yeti Wrote: Please explain your reasoning that being against illegal immighration is the same thing as being a eugenicist.

Can you also provide your evidence demonstrating that Kucinich is an extreme leftist/collectivist?

1. I didn't say that being against illegal immigration is necessarily the same thing as being a eugenicist. I said that there were close historical links between anti-immigration organizations and eugenics. Here is an article that extensively documents this.

2. Dennis Kucinich is probably the most far left member of the entire Congress & supports strict gun control, the UN, government public healthcare, etc.
Reply
02-27-2011, 05:27 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 05:38 PM by yeti.)
#4
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-27-2011, 03:14 PM)Infinite Wrote: if you look into the anti-immigration groups that Jones promotes, it's a fact that these groups are openly pro-eugenics and admit as such.

OK, then can you affirm for me that you understand that there is a HUGE difference between being anti immigration and anti illegal immigration? Also, in your opinion, how many groups does Jones promote that are in any way anti immigration? I listen to him every day, and I have never heard him promote or interview guests who are against immigration. Groups who are openly anti immigration are few and far between, and justifiably fringe. They reek of racism and/or CoIntelPro.

There is way too much use out there of weasel words to promote agendas and smear people who don't deserve it. Calling someone who is anti illegal immigration anti immigration and equating them with eugenicists is one such example.
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
02-27-2011, 05:41 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 05:47 PM by yeti.)
#5
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-27-2011, 04:42 PM)Infinite Wrote:
(02-27-2011, 03:49 PM)yeti Wrote: Can you also provide your evidence demonstrating that Kucinich is an extreme leftist/collectivist?
2. Dennis Kucinich is probably the most far left member of the entire Congress & supports strict gun control, the UN, government public healthcare, etc.

OK, thanks for that. Now could you answer my question?

Hitler was pro gun control. Was he an extreme leftist/collectivist? Almost every government on the planet supports the U.N. Are they all extremely leftist/collectivist? Do you actually believe that government health care is an extremely leftist/collectivist policy? If so, then why does every 1st world government in the world (including yours until the early 1970s) have government health care? Are you saying that every 1st world government on the planet is extreme leftist/collectivist except the U.S. government? Because if you are, that is quite typical of the ignorance and arrogance that the rest of us on this planet are quite used to hearing from Americans.
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
02-27-2011, 11:48 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2011, 11:48 PM by Hans Olo.)
#6
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
How is government mandated health care not collectivist politics? It may not be 'extreme', but as I understand the terms collectivism and individualism I don't see how it can be seen as anything else than a collectivist measure. Please explain, maybe I'm missing something.
Reply
02-28-2011, 12:25 AM,
#7
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-27-2011, 11:48 PM)Hans Olo Wrote: How is government mandated health care not collectivist politics? It may not be 'extreme', but as I understand the terms collectivism and individualism I don't see how it can be seen as anything else than a collectivist measure. Please explain, maybe I'm missing something.

OK, you just admitted it's not extreme. Therefore you agree with me on this.

Anyway, who said it was mandated? Do you honestly think that governments force people to accept treatment (fluoride aside), and penalize you if you go elsewhere? This is another example of weasel words in action. You're free to seek treatment outside the government system at any time.

OK, universal health care might be "collectivist", but so what? So are roads, highways, police, fire, libraries, education, water and sewer systems, etc. Even the bloody bank bailouts were "collectivist" because everyone is paying for them - even into future generations!

You see where I'm going here? Using the word "collectivist" as though it's some kind of slur that only pinkos and anti Americans believe in is an attempt to get people to ignore reality to further an agenda that only hurts them, to the benefit of the elite scum parasites that profit from the workers' ignorance.

Do you agree?
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
02-28-2011, 02:13 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-28-2011, 02:14 AM by Dunamis.)
#8
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
And doesn't it make sense that things that serve the whole (the collective) should be governed by the whole (the collective)? Sure there's the problem of government not looking out for peoples best interests all the time, just as is always the case...

...but do people in the USA really think big business such as insurance companies have ever looked out for the best interests of people? The government when not looking out for the people are only doing the bidding of big business anyway, so one cannot be worse than the other (imo) when it comes to infrastructure management, healthcare or otherwise.

At least this way the guy who ends on the streets because his parents were drug addicts can now be treated as well as a teacher if knocked down by a car. I think that such aims should not be overlooked nor underrated. Compassion should be the first thing on ones mind when addressing such plans.
"He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked." -- 1 John 2:6
"Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly... This is the interrelated structure of reality." -- Martin Luther King Jr.
"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." -- Proverbs 18:13
"Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." -- Leo Tolstoy
"To love is to be vulnerable" -- C.S Lewis

The Kingdom of God is within you! -- Luke 17:20-21

https://duckduckgo.com/
Reply
02-28-2011, 11:53 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-28-2011, 12:14 PM by Hans Olo.)
#9
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-28-2011, 12:25 AM)yeti Wrote:
(02-27-2011, 11:48 PM)Hans Olo Wrote: How is government mandated health care not collectivist politics? It may not be 'extreme', but as I understand the terms collectivism and individualism I don't see how it can be seen as anything else than a collectivist measure. Please explain, maybe I'm missing something.

OK, you just admitted it's not extreme. Therefore you agree with me on this.

No, I said "it may not be 'extreme'", because we have not defined what 'extreme' collectivism is, hence the quotations, so until we do it's just a weasel word. And I said it may not be extreme, I didn't say it wasn't. It's just not necessary to differentiate between collectivism and extreme collectivism. At least that's not the point I wanted to make, so I leave it out. I don't admit and I don't agree Smile

Quote:Anyway, who said it was mandated? Do you honestly think that governments force people to accept treatment (fluoride aside), and penalize you if you go elsewhere? This is another example of weasel words in action. You're free to seek treatment outside the government system at any time.

Now it looks like you're confusing mandated health care with a mandatory treatment. Two very different animals. Government mandated health care is a scheme that makes everyone buy health care, that means, pay for it, not take a pill. We are discussing very different topics here.

Are you saying, government mandated health care is not mandatory?!

Quote:OK, universal health care might be "collectivist", but so what?

Thank you for admitting you were wrong when you said, it was not collectivist. That's the point I was making.

Quote:So are roads, highways, police, fire, libraries, education, water and sewer systems, etc. Even the bloody bank bailouts were "collectivist" because everyone is paying for them - even into future generations!

Yes, but only if we are talking government made roads, highways, ... Then those are all collectivist measures. That's what collectivism means - take away some tights of the individual to the benefit of the 'collective'.

Quote:You see where I'm going here? Using the word "collectivist" as though it's some kind of slur that only pinkos and anti Americans believe in is an attempt to get people to ignore reality to further an agenda that only hurts them, to the benefit of the elite scum parasites that profit from the workers' ignorance.

Collectivist means what it means. There are two different questions here, one is "what is collectivism?" and the other one is "is it good?" For now, I just want to clarify what the word means. Thanks for clearing that up.

Edit: It's moments like this that make me realize that this is by no means a libertarian forum. People of all kinds of schools come here and discuss conspiracy related topics - so called "liberals", socialists, communists, social democrats, libertarians, ... I suppose, everything except neocons and fascists?
Reply
02-28-2011, 06:12 PM,
#10
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-28-2011, 11:53 AM)Hans Olo Wrote: No, I said "it may not be 'extreme'", because we have not defined what 'extreme' collectivism is, hence the quotations, so until we do it's just a weasel word. And I said it may not be extreme, I didn't say it wasn't. It's just not necessary to differentiate between collectivism and extreme collectivism. At least that's not the point I wanted to make, so I leave it out. I don't admit and I don't agree Smile
...
Now it looks like you're confusing mandated health care with a mandatory treatment. Two very different animals. Government mandated health care is a scheme that makes everyone buy health care, that means, pay for it, not take a pill. We are discussing very different topics here.
...
Are you saying, government mandated health care is not mandatory?!
...
Thank you for admitting you were wrong when you said, it was not collectivist. That's the point I was making.
...
Yes, but only if we are talking government made roads, highways, ... Then those are all collectivist measures. That's what collectivism means - take away some tights of the individual to the benefit of the 'collective'.
...
Collectivist means what it means. There are two different questions here, one is "what is collectivism?" and the other one is "is it good?" For now, I just want to clarify what the word means. Thanks for clearing that up.

OK Hans, it's obvious you want to play word games in an attempt at oneupmanship. How sad. This is a very serious topic.

I really don't appreciate it when you put words in my mouth, or try to portray me as ignorant and confused. Do you think I'm stupid, Hans? Do you think I'm ignorant of how government health care works?

So let's cut to the chase here: Do you believe that government health care is a bad idea? Should the U.S. use the same model the rest of the advanced world uses, or not?
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
02-28-2011, 06:13 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-28-2011, 07:21 PM by rsol.)
#11
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
id like to say there is no true way that people in the truth movement have. some are from the left and will continue to be. the right has its fans too. the truth movement is really about TRUTH.

The problem the truth has to most world leaders and governors is on of consistency. If you lie all the time you can at least be consistent. with the truth you HAVE to tell it all the time of once you let one slip you will never be trusted again. lies are easy, they can change and bend with the times. truth is stagnant, solid. It doesn't move for anyone......

In many cases a white lie or two can be beneficial. however its when the lies get BIG that's when they get dangerous.

Although we would like politicians to be honest, to be honest, you dont. the sad fact is. if you cant lie for someone now and again, no one will "trust" you.

Its a fact, not a pleasant one. facts rarely are. a bit like the truth, so often its never good, no wonder so many shy away from it.
Reply
02-28-2011, 09:08 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-28-2011, 09:13 PM by Hans Olo.)
#12
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-28-2011, 06:12 PM)yeti Wrote: OK Hans, it's obvious you want to play word games in an attempt at oneupmanship.

This is and was about your argument about collectivism. You started the oneupmanship and word games by saying I "just admitted it was not extreme", which I didn't, and "who said it was mandated?" while it's clear that it is, if that is not the very definition of oneupmanship, I don't know.

Quote:How sad. This is a very serious topic.

Don't you cry tonight, baby Wink

Quote:I really don't appreciate it when you put words in my mouth, or try to portray me as ignorant and confused.

I didn't do any of what you're accusing me of, and I don't appreciate you making such accusation. What's the matter with you? What do you even mean? I said you were confusing two things in your sentence, and you did. Read it. That doesn't mean I think you're 'confused' as a person. Geez. Now you're confusing me.

Quote:Do you think I'm stupid, Hans? Do you think I'm ignorant of how government health care works?

No, but if you really want to know what I think, I always thought you were obviously a very smart guy, but easily offended which is socially a bit awkward. However I do believe you made an honest mistake there and it was correct of me to ask for clarification and to correct you there.

And why are we suddenly talking about you and me? Can we move on?

Quote:So let's cut to the chase here: Do you believe that government health care is a bad idea? Should the U.S. use the same model the rest of the advanced world uses, or not?

You mean, let's change the subject here. But, fine, after having established that government mandated health care is collectivist in nature, let's look at the other question: is it good? I think, no it is not good. You think it is.

Your reasoning so far is that most if not all comparable countries have it and so the US should have it, too. Do you have anything to add, before I respond?

I don't believe in collectivism. I'm not a supporter of communist, socialist, social democrat, so-called-democrats™, so-called-liberal beliefs, not a Christian, not supporter of any of the big US or Canadian parties and I don't do well with groups and cults in general. I support libertarian ideas. I think Ron Paul is right about a whole lot, and I believe in free markets and capitalism, and individual liberties.

So you tell me what's so good about government regulated healthcare, if you are so passionate about it. I'm not here to change anyone's mind about anything. I will answer your questions, if you want. But I don't have the time and energy to convince you of something you've already made your mind up against. Sorry.

This is not a small detail we are talking about here, this is about collectivism vs. individualism. And here we are, back on topic, because this is where the dividing line is, it's NOT left and right, whatever that's supposed to mean.

That means, on the one extreme side you have Hitler AND Stalin (who were authoritarian collectivists in the flesh), all the socialists, communists, the 'Democrats', most Republicans, and on the other side Galileo Galilei, Murray Rothbard, Thomas Jefferson, Ron Paul, ... people who support individual liberty in general. On the extreme of this side there are anarchists, people who oppose all government per se. I don't, btw.
Reply
03-01-2011, 04:26 AM,
#13
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
(02-28-2011, 09:08 PM)Hans Olo Wrote: This is and was about your argument about collectivism. You started the oneupmanship and word games by saying I "just admitted it was not extreme", which I didn't, and "who said it was mandated?" while it's clear that it is, if that is not the very definition of oneupmanship, I don't know.

Don't you cry tonight, baby Wink

I didn't do any of what you're accusing me of, and I don't appreciate you making such accusation. What's the matter with you? What do you even mean? I said you were confusing two things in your sentence, and you did. Read it. That doesn't mean I think you're 'confused' as a person. Geez. Now you're confusing me.

No, but if you really want to know what I think, I always thought you were obviously a very smart guy, but easily offended which is socially a bit awkward. However I do believe you made an honest mistake there and it was correct of me to ask for clarification and to correct you there.

And why are we suddenly talking about you and me? Can we move on?

You mean, let's change the subject here. But, fine, after having established that government mandated health care is collectivist in nature, let's look at the other question: is it good? I think, no it is not good. You think it is.

Your reasoning so far is that most if not all comparable countries have it and so the US should have it, too. Do you have anything to add, before I respond?

Since you like insulting me and playing your little games, there is no point in discussing anything with you. I'll just say this: enjoy your ripoff health care system.
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
03-01-2011, 08:11 AM,
#14
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
Another baseless accusation. I'm not insulting you, you asked me for my opinion and I gave it to you. My 'games': I only mirrored what you did. Don't play with fire if you can't handle the smoke. Have a good day.
Reply
03-01-2011, 08:23 AM,
#15
RE: The Problem With The Truth Movement's Supposedly Not Being Left or Right
Infinite makes some good points, IMO. First, Alex Jones is obviously a paleo-conservative as is most of "patriot" radio. At the same time there are many classical liberals on the fringes and in some cases in the midst of the "truth" subculture. Therefore, when people say there is no left-right paradigm, he's kind of being disingenuous or at least not as precise with the language as he should be.

So what are we really talking about with regards to left-right? That's a difficult question since things have been repackaged frequently and the original designation was based on political considerations and not specific ideologies. Some people like to start a continuum from anarchism to totalitarian (although that's not consistent with the original use.)

Such a continuum (also described by Hans) sounds neat and clean but glosses over a major point. There are really two separate considerations. The first consideration is based on the inherent conflict between highly individualistic human beings living in large collectives. The collective has to give some to the individual and vice versa. The first question is therefore where to draw that line. How much autonomy is sacrificed for the "common good" and how much inefficiency is sacrificed so people retain their individuality.

The second question and far more important question is who decides where along the spectrum a society ends up. This second question is the populist/centralist question and is an entirely different dimension from the individual/collective one. Think of the political affinity charts that people put up on concen and other similar boards.

The problem is that when taken to the extremes (anarchy or dissolution of society on the one hand and a hive mind society on the other) the two questions merge. Consequently, when people shorthand totalitarianism or anarchism they don't really consistently put them the same place. Why? The conflict between the individual and society (ie: left-right) no longer exists.

Pulling my late night ramblings together, left-right exists even if we can't articulate it specifically. But left-right is not the issue that we should be concerned with. People are going to constantly have disagreements over how to balance individual and collective. But who makes the decisions and how is immensely important.

If one took a cross section of the "truth" subculture I think we would find the common thread is populists. That's why so many libertarians left and right are prominent. So in closing it isn't that there is no left-right paradigm; it's just far less important than the populist-centralist paradigm.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Who Are These 2,000 Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth? bristopen 3 551 09-12-2013, 07:56 PM
Last Post: datars
  Kristin Tate Covers The Truth In Media Launch Event datars 1 439 08-01-2013, 05:05 AM
Last Post: April
Thumbs Up Daniel Ellsberg and the Establishment Left CharliePrime 1 265 07-19-2013, 11:06 PM
Last Post: mexika
Music How Elites Created the Hippie Movement to Kill America CharliePrime 12 2,455 05-16-2013, 08:43 PM
Last Post: Easy Skanking
Wink The Top 50 Truth Researchers Today CharliePrime 12 1,212 01-26-2013, 02:20 AM
Last Post: R.R
  The complete and undeniable truth - Larken Rose ezekiel73 2 413 01-20-2013, 07:47 PM
Last Post: fujiinn
Bug The Hippie Movement was one of the largest mind control operations in history CharliePrime 4 928 12-13-2012, 05:03 PM
Last Post: CharliePrime
  Just realizes that yesterday was my 10 year anniversary. Waking up to the truth datars 3 643 04-26-2012, 09:50 AM
Last Post: yeti
  Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War Solve et Coagula 0 278 02-26-2012, 06:41 PM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula
  Ron Paul to Congress: If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It? Solve et Coagula 0 274 12-25-2011, 12:04 AM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)