30
31

"Right-leaning" opinions you hold? (self.GamerGhazi)

CielleVentrue, Social Justice Camarilla が 投稿

It's no secret that, if you're in this sub, you probably aren't going to be voting Republican next election (or the one after that, or the one after that...) But like Lana Kane or Rupert Giles, many of us probably have that one little issue where we privately think the left is off-base. National security, executive privilege, foreign intervention, trade regulation...what's your point of disagreement?

It should go without saying, but: please do not attempt to downvote or argue people out of the private thoughts they may express in this thread. I'd also prefer that you refrain from posting non-answers like "none of them" - there's no need to prove your progressive credentials, we're all aware that the general alignment here is left of center.

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 249
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]nuclearneo577The sword the smites MRAs 65ポイント66ポイント  (18子コメント)

I hate the anti-GMO movement with a burning passion, but that's really only considered a right-wing opinion because many environmentalist groups are very prone to the naturalistic fallacy.

[–]lifestyledFun King Spineless 28ポイント29ポイント  (4子コメント)

mm, that's really my main problem with the left is how prone we are to groups like anti-GMO, homeopathy-is-the-only-medicine, nature>science beliefs. it's amazing to run into to young people who have the same superstitions as my grandfather, who thinks any medicine a doctor gives is poison and that taking some miracle vitamin pill out of a catalogue from a shady place in florida will do more for his heart and arthritis than anything else. at one point, he wanted me to "fix" my mental problems by seeing some lady in a small town an hour away who had some supposed machine where you gripped two metal rods and it told you what was wrong with you and oh by the way she just miraculously would have some herbal pill to fix it.

like, ok, he's old, and he just wants to feel better and logic kinda goes out the window when you're in pain. but then there were kids in college i knew who thought wearing a crystal necklace could replace deodorant or that smoking pot would prevent the cancer from their two-pack-a-day cigarette habit.

anti-GMO stuff gets to me because it's just like GG, where you see the same debunked claims being presented over and over again from sketchy sources like NATURALNEWS and nothing you can present will deter them because obviously all your sources are part of the conspiracy to poison the public.

and hell, my grandpa has been a farmer for his entire life but even he believes some of that anti-GMO crap, like thinking he's going to get sued by monsanto if the neighbor's seeds blow into his field or that cattle don't like to eat GMO grains, when they seem to enjoy eating pretty much anything in the field.

[–]Officer_MilkyStrawman 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

every time there's a school shooting, my mom blames it on antidepressants.

[–]rawtatoSOCIAL JUSTICE FISH OUT OF WATER 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is the main thing for me, too. So much nonsense surrounding the fearmongering of GMOs. I mean, technically we've been genetically modifying stuff for YEARS! Just look at bananas! It's just that it took much much longer before and now we can speed up the process and people flip their shit.

[–]APictureofSting 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

mm, that's really my main problem with the left is how prone we are to groups like anti-GMO, homeopathy-is-the-only-medicine, nature>science beliefs

It's one of the reasons I've never voted for the Green Party, I don't really trust anything that grew out of that 70s wishy wishy new age environmentalism instead of modern, science driven environmentalism.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]mst3kluvMilo has a journalism degree from Chuck E Cheese 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I hate the homopathy movement and the SUPER SPOOPY CHEMICALS movement as well. Anti-Vaxxers probably fall into one of those categories. Balancing your Ph levels will not cure your cancer. (My friend had leukemia and his Grandma told him that he just needed to balance his Ph levels. Thankfully, my friend went to an actual hospital instead.)

    [–]-Guardsman-Not Technically Illegal 16ポイント17ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Not sure it's on topic, but I'm in favor of nuclear power. It's cleaner than most types of power, more cost-effective than solar and wind power, and less and less risky as the technology improves. Coal, oil and gas may not cause meltdowns, but in the aggregate, they may end up killing far more people than a hundred Chernobyls due to climate change.

    [–]VoteRonaldRayGunStop at nothing less than FULL SOCIAL JUSTICE 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I'm often labelled anti-GMO by Reddit for having a dislike of Monsanto and other companies which lobby US officials to pass poor regulations in their favor. Another major problem I have is with their patents.

    I've never had a problem with the research or development, I just want it to be done properly in a manner which wont cause shit later down the road.

    [–]haeshdem0n 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Agreed. For me the problem with GMOs is how they fit into an already broken intellectual property system.

    [–]SandflapjackWHY WONT YOU JUST LET ME DO THIS FOR YOU ROSE 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

    gmos 4 lyf <3

    [–]Edworking 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

    I have a little fear of GMO because of all the propraganda and a little "herd mentality from my friends" , but as someone that live on Brazil, in a state where there is a city that almost lost it's economy because of a disease on bananas , i find that GMO is a good thing , some changes should be made around regulation and royaltys rules but, generaly a good thing.

    [–]ellenokLiterally Pearl 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

    And GMOs are cool, because they will get you better stuff faster, farmers are probably already buying their non GMO seeds/plants, and you can sue the shit out of the company if the plant fucks up.

    [–]Edworking 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

    one thing that i am against GMO's here in Brazil is about for exemple, you have 2 farms...one use a GMO kind of plant and the other use the normal plant, they are side by side.

    if the plant make it's reproduction by air and the GMO one goes to the farm that chooses to go for non GMO, the fact is that the guy will have some troubles if 20%+ of his plantation turns in to GMO.

    as here on Brasil they need to pay royaltys, but it's not his option, and this can kind of destroy his business both in the sense of bigger expenses ,and worse, in the current GMO/ non GMO thing, most non GMO plantations make contracts to supply non GMO products, this mean that part of his plantation got "destroyed" and he will suffer loses.

    but i might by biased as my grandfather used to own a father and used to have this kind of problem.

    [–]ellenokLiterally Pearl 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Well in that case the responsible parties will pay for damages, and in the case of Monsanto specifically they have been out in the past to clean up and compensate farmers for plants that've migrated where they shouldn't.

    Now, if someone deliberately uses plants/seeds a company owns the rights to without permission, and it can be proven, then they can get sued, and the company does pretty much always lose money in that process.

    I get the thing about not wanting to get GMO in your non-GMO, and that being a potential profit loss.
    In that thing i think care should be taken to ensure that, if that happens, compensation is provided.
    A good look at patent laws and how the rights of farmers are protected legally is definitely a good idea, but that's not specifically a GMO issue.

    [–]Edworking 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I like the study of patent law, i did some research and just like you said, monsanto rly changed the way of acting here on Brazil.

    anyway, they still have quite a few legal actions running against or in favor of, i find patent law very interesting.

    [–]DashCat9Sensitive Joss Whedon 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I don't really see this as a right/left issue, but I butt heads with friends about it....and yeah, all liberals.

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–]ud106cESS JAY DOUBLE-YOU 38ポイント39ポイント  (29子コメント)

      I don't think Bernie Sanders is all that special, and I think some of his supporters are starting to act like Ron Paul fans circa 2012... and not in a good way.

      [–]IrbyTremor☣sᴏᴄɪᴀʟ ᴊᴜsᴛɪᴄᴇ ᴊᴀʙʙᴇʀᴡᴏᴄᴋʏ☣ 23ポイント24ポイント  (6子コメント)

      This isn't even right-wing. This is just legit. He IS nega-Ron Paul and its annoying

      [–]nuclearneo577The sword the smites MRAs 17ポイント18ポイント  (5子コメント)

      Totally. I like Bernie Sanders a lot, but it scares me whenever I see Sanders supporters say that they'd rather vote for Rand Paul (or whichever Republican wins their primary) then Hillary Clinton if she wins the Democratic primary. Sometimes it seems like most of his online following is made up of people who really don't want a woman to be president.

      [–]bradamantium92feminist gazpacho 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Sometimes it seems like most of his online following is made up of people who really don't want a woman to be president.

      There's a long, long list of problems with Clinton well ahead of "She's a woman." Not so long that I'd vote Republican all a sudden if she ended up with the nomination, though I haven't seen anyone say they'd do that, just that they wouldn't vote at all.

      [–]chiphappy 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

      Eh, Clintons for McCain was a pretty big thing back in 2008.

      A lot of "I will not vote for Barack HUSSEIN Obama" rhetoric was floating around.

      [–]Kennen_Rudd 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Yep. The split between Clinton and Obama supporters back then was vicious.

      [–]chiphappy 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Viciousness that often descended in to really poorly concealed racism.

      [–]Thomas_K_Brannigan 11ポイント12ポイント  (6子コメント)

      It's funny to see how many of his supporters don't seem to understand how "socialist" and "social-justice" he is.

      I just like that he's one national politicians who aren't very corporatist. I'm just a little disappointed that, as a proud independent, I'll have to declare myself a democrat on the primaries in my state. Still, come the presidential election, if it's not a close race in my district, I'll likely vote Green.

      [–]-general 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

      Well a good thing to point out is that he really isn't socialist per say, more so a center-left politician

      [–]Thomas_K_Brannigan 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Which is why I used the quotation marks. He's nearing the furthest socialist on the capitalist-socialist spectrum that someone could be in America and still be voted into a state office.

      [–]Edworking 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

      there is even a true left in the US? but honestly, i find the center, focused on rationality and moderations a lot better than the far left or the far right.

      [–]sajberhippienRevolutionary Defeatist 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

      but honestly, i find the center, focused on rationality and moderations a lot better than the far left or the far right.

      Being "center" has nothing to do with rationality or moderation; "center" is whatever is the status quo within the framework discussed. Likewise, "far left" or "far right" just means you're far to the left or right of the status quo.

      What is considered "center" in the US would be considered far-right in current Swedish politics, and what is center in current Swedish politics would be considered far-right in Swedish politics up to the mid 80's.

      コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

        [–]LIATG 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I compared Hillary and him on Face The Nation, and Hillary was very direct in her answers, while Bernie dodged around them more.

        And I'm very worried he's too far to the left for the general. I'm scared about a Republican winning, and Bernie would have a lot of trouble in a general

        [–]GearyDigitMost Charrming Mod 5ポイント6ポイント  (9子コメント)

        I've literally never run into this, though? Like, I see peeps cheering about him on tumblr, but I imagine those same peeps would've been cheering about Obama too if I was on there back in '08

        [–]hackiavelli 3ポイント4ポイント  (6子コメント)

        I used to give Sanders supporters some leeway since things were also crazy with Obama. Thing is Obama came after eights years of a terrible Republican administration and had a political message, "hope and change". Sanders is following a Democrat and has "feel the Bern".

        It's difficult for me to see this campaign as anything other than cult-of-personality driven. I mean, reddit just gave 3200+ votes to and 2x gilded a Bernie Sanders doll in /r/pics. That's just weird.

        [–]GearyDigitMost Charrming Mod 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

        I think it's less a matter of 'cult of personality' and more 'unapologetic socialist is running for president thank you for saving us from having to vote for Hillary'.

        [–]cluelesspersoneve kosofsky SeJWick 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Reddit's politics is really surface level "fuck the establishment", and Hillary is part of that establishment, so you get people supporting both Sanders and Trump, which is fucking ridiculous. I'm guessing loads of Reddit could tell you all about Rage Against The Machine, but wouldn't know who Subcomandante Marcos is for the life of them. They'd probably think Chiapas is a name for a Tapas bar or something.

        [–]hackiavelli 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I'm glad people are excited but from the outside it's off-putting. "Feel the Bern" doesn't mean anything to me. I find it creepy, to be honest. I'd much rather "feel the comprehensive foreign policy" which Sanders has completely avoided.

        [–]Kennen_Rudd 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

        It's difficult for me to see this campaign as anything other than cult-of-personality driven.

        I assume you're American because as an outsider, this is literally all US candidates' campaigns.

        [–]BossDropTheBass 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I personally don't see Bernie as the perfect candidate ever and all, but of the four, I find that he's basically the lesser evil.

        It's not really a case of "Who's going to be the savior of our future" but rather more of a case of "Who's going to fuck us over the least before the next election happens"

        [–]Edworking 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        as a total outside of the us[just a regular turist] , i am like this.

        I would love Bernie or Hilary, or both, but no republicans, 2 GOP debate made me legit scared in some parts.

        but again, my opinion is of almost no value at all[it's probably near the value of a Zimbabwe dollar]

        [–]GargronSpace Jam Wizard 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I'm not American so I only have an outside opinion but for me the things that make me wish he'd win the elections is 1) the fact he doesn't want to continue invading everyone's privacy through mass snooping 2) doesn't deny climate change 3) doesn't deny abortion rights or gay marriage rights etc.

        [–]rootyb 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I disagree with you on Bernie, but some of his supporters leave a lot to be desired. At least, a lot of the ones on Reddit.

        For people supporting one of the most progressive, steadfast supporters of civil rights, I have seen some truly ignorant, racist shit come out of their keyboards. And not even just ignorant, but almost willfully so. Like, even once it's pointed out, arguing "nuh-UH! I don't have to listen to why I'm ignorant! You're ignorant!"

        This kind of thing happens, I think, because he is doing really well on Reddit, across a fair few cross-sections, and a good portion of Reddit is dipshits, so naturally, there's going to be some strong dipshit representation in the Sanders supporters. :)

        [–]Beestonian 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

        I think speech should be rewarded and punished only by speech. Speech punished by violence, doxxing, mob abuse/harassment, calling their employer and asking them to be fired, are all bad form and are an admission that no counter argument you have can stand on it's own terms. I don't think this is really a right wing thing to say, but I've very rarely heard anyone on the left say it.

        [–]Metagolem 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

        You mean that primarily for private figures, right?

        I'd imagine if the US Secretary of Education said "I hate black people", you'd probably feel okay with requesting the President fire him/her.

        [–]Urdnot_VexGG: A fire hose full of failure and wharrgarbl. 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Asking that they be fired is bad but if they're obviously representing their employer while making problematic statements I think the employer should be aware.

        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

          [–]Mursili 11ポイント12ポイント  (12子コメント)

          I tend to think the right is more or less correct about the second amendment. Please note that this does not mean I think it is good policy. I think it is bad policy. But statutes have meanings which can't be interpreted away. Whatever the 2nd meant at the founding has been profoundly changed by the incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states via the 14th Amendment. As such, I tend to think they have the better part of the argument against certain calls for 'bans' and whatnot. Would I be in favor of repealing the Second Amendment? I think I would, but that will remain academic for at least a few lifetimes, I think. So there's my confession.

          [–]myGGthrowawaySea Lion Tamer 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

          But statutes have meanings which can't be interpreted away.

          Most progressives hold to a living tree doctrine of the constitution. Imo the meanings do change

          [–]Mursili 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I completely agree that meanings change! It does not follow, however, that meanings are infinitely variable or that there is no base meaning at any time. I do believe in the "living constitution" (just look at the Fourth Amendment and digitally stored information!), but the solution to a statute with which you disagree is not a sophistical hand-wave, but rather legislative action, as I see it.

          [–]SexyJusticeWhore 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

          The 14th has been with us since the civil war, but it's interesting that an individual right to own guns wasn't recognized by the court until 2008. I certainly understand how you can use the 14th to apply the 1st or the 4th to the states. Clearly those amendments were restraining the power of the federal government. The 2nd, though, that was so clearly NOT an individual right at the time. It was a negotiation of power between the states and the congress to arm the state militias.

          I am in a sort of similar position to you, but maybe the opposite? I'm "libertarian" AF when it comes to the Bill of Rights. But unlike most libertarians, I think the 2nd amendment was a shrewd political negotiation between federalists and anti-federalists (and slave owners), and that it was already obsolete when it was written. I think that NRA and gun-lobby propaganda has moved all of the moderates to the right and convinced the public and, apparently, supreme court justices that the 2nd amendment was something completely different from reality. It should have been repealed in 1865. But it's not too late!

          [–]Mursili 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          The things is, we've hit Hugo Black's 'total incorporation' point where the entire Bill of Rights (even the Third Amendment!) are incorporated against the states. I agree that it was a negotiation, and sort of obsolete immediately, but obsolescence does not vitiate a statute--that's sort of my point. And I also agree that the NRA has taken advantage of this to bring a new reading to the statute since, say, the 70's or so, but I think their 'new reading' is pretty valid in terms of constitutional interpretation. I'm with you--I'd like to see it repealed and replaced with a more sensible and outlined right to firearm ownership.

          [–]GearyDigitMost Charrming Mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

          To be fair, one could argue 'for the purposes of keeping a well-regulated militia' refers explicitly to institutions like the national guard and law enforcement. Goodness knows there's nothing about most states firearm laws that could be considered 'regulated', let alone 'well'.

          [–]Mursili 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

          I completely agree with that, but as I mentioned, this gets complex with incorporation. Originally, the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, so a states v. feds regime made sense. But through the 14th Amendment and the movement toward incorporation, the Bill of Rights came to be applied against the states as well -- and this is where I think the 'better part' of the argument lies.

          [–]GearyDigitMost Charrming Mod 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

          I suppose. Though, re-reading it, it sorta seems like the whole 'keep and bear arms' aspect is written as being dependent on the first part being true... which it no longer really is? At this point, firearms being in private possession don't ensure security of the 'free state'.

          [–]SexyJusticeWhore 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

          "Bear arms" also had a very particular meaning at the time. It didn't mean "own a gun." One part of the 2nd amendment that ended up getting cut from the Bill of Rights was "no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." It's a shame that it was cut, but it also demonstrates that "bearing arms" means to serve a military function with your gun. One does not bear arms against a rabbit.

          Of course, you'd have to be an originalist like Justice Scalia in order to hold us to the meanings the founders intended.... oh, wait...

          The 2nd amendment wasn't interpreted as an individual right to own guns by the supreme court until 2008. Thanks Obama.

          [–]Mursili 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

          I agree, that's an issue and why it's a weird statute. I see the introductory clause as legislative throat clearing--essentially Congress stating its view. This means that it's basically dicta and has nothing to do with anything. Were Congress to pass a law in 1812 saying "Because we are at war with Great Britain, we will tax all books $1.00 at sale," the tax would not go away just because the war did (though a law could be explicitly written this way).

          [–]IrbyTremor☣sᴏᴄɪᴀʟ ᴊᴜsᴛɪᴄᴇ ᴊᴀʙʙᴇʀᴡᴏᴄᴋʏ☣ 19ポイント20ポイント  (8子コメント)

          None. I like guns and that's as close as I get. But I'm a garbage ass gear nerd.

          I'm still for gun control.

          [–]GottaLoveIgnoranceAnecdotally Circumstantial 11ポイント12ポイント  (2子コメント)

          Same. Guns and fighter jets are my shit, but I can't get behind loose gun laws.

          [–]nuclearneo577The sword the smites MRAs 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

          I always feel in a weird position since I like guns and a lot of other military stuff, but don't like a lot of other people who do. For example, the STG 44 has been my favorite assault rifle aesthetically since it was added to Killing Floor, but I would likely never buy an actual one or a replica since people would probably mistake me for a wehraboo.

          [–]spambot5546 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Shitty people ruin good shit for everyone. Thanks to neckbeards you can't own a sword, wear a trillby, or dislike religion. On top of that, thanks to the most extreme gun control opponents you can't be like "yeah, but how fucking sexy is a Sig-Sauer?"

          [–]GearyDigitMost Charrming Mod 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Same. There's a big place in my heart for black powder and early cartridge firearms. <3

          [–]TreezusSaves#GamerGate is White Noise 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

          This is also my stance: I love guns, and I also want some kind of gun control that makes it so at least some unhinged jackass can't get their hands on them easily.

          [–]SamkaiserSocial Justice Dragoon 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Yeah I feel you there, I like guns, I like weapons, I just don't... Like loose gun control and using them for hurting people. I like a bunch of stuff about weaponry, the aesthetics of all of them.

          [–]VoteRonaldRayGunStop at nothing less than FULL SOCIAL JUSTICE 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I've used firearms and have friends who own them. Most responsible gun owners support regulations because they know they won't be effected by them and helps prevent someone idiot giving them a bad reputation.

          [–]james4765Social Justice Boogeyman 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Ditto. Got a closet of guns and ammo, including a military surplus M-16 kit I'm rebuilding. Love shooting, love hunting.

          But that's actually not a big deal in Virginia - gun-toting liberal is kind of a thing here. Senator Warner is an avid hunter, and is one of the most popular politicians in the state...

          [–]The_Savior_Satoshi 33ポイント34ポイント  (2子コメント)

          I believe that the word "crazy" can be used in the general sense of "absurd", "ridiculous" or "shocking" without it being an ableist slur. (Speaking as someone who has GAD, ADHD, and occasional bouts of major depression.)

          [–]StrappinYoungZiltoidSir White of House Knight 20ポイント21ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Yeah, I think it's one of those words where context actually DOES change whether or not it's a slur. Like, just saying 'that was crazy' implies that something was ridiculous or absurd, and my first thought is never 'this person might hate mentally ill people' (whereas with someone using homophobic/sexist slurs, it does go that way), but when I hear someone saying something like 'don't stick your dick in crazy' or just 'he/she is crazy' I feel like those people probably have shitty views on/understandings of mental illness.

          [–]rawtatoSOCIAL JUSTICE FISH OUT OF WATER 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Crazy straws. <3

          [–]StrappinYoungZiltoidSir White of House Knight 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Not much at all. I have a few positions that could be construed as right-wing or could be found in right-wing lines of thoughts, but I don't think any of them clash so horribly with left-wing thought that people would call me a conservative for thinking them.

          For example, I know cultural relativism is a big issue, and I think social context is massively important in understanding a given society, BUT(!) I really think some values and morals (and by extension some cultures) are superior. That does not mean that I think that people from a given culture are superior, or that I think that we can just call a culture bad and use it as justification for mistreatment, but I think it's important to recognize that a lot of things are really worth valuing (like women's rights, freedom from religious persecution, etc.) and that the tendency that some people (granted, not many that I've encountered) have to just say 'that's their culture' whenever they hear about something horrible happening elsewhere. A lot of countries aren't there yet on these issues (developed countries aren't really either, granted), and I think it's still important to recognize that these are things worth valuing. However, on the other side of the issue, there are people who are quick to just say 'our culture is superior to these Muslims, keep them out' (which ironically contradicts several of the supposedly superior culture's values, but regardless) whilst neglecting all of the horrible things the West has done and continues to do, such as abusing third-world countries for the sake of its own development, eating away at the environment, using developing countries as the playground for their conflicts, colonialism, etc.

          Another one that comes to mind isn't really something I think should be implemented in society, but, while I'm not in favour of the death penalty, I don't think I'd really have a problem with a person who was horribly scarred by rape and couldn't get any justice killing their rapist. Like, it wouldn't work well in society if that was a rule (they already didn't find the rapist guilty, so the person would be going to jail for doing it), but if I heard about the situation where someone I knew was victimized did that, I can't imagine being too upset about it. With murderers it's different because the person wasn't a direct victim and might just be acting on suspicion.

          I also sometimes wonder if foreign intervention with things like ISIS would be a good idea, but I tend to think that western involvement in those conflicts causes even more problems, so I'm not passionately opinionated on that.

          [–]dayum-sonSkrillex Justice Wudeboy 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

          I don't get why everyone decided to act like "Brokeback Mountain" is the like the "Birth of a Nation" and is a horrible, horrible exploitative movie?

          I dunno I've just been wondering why it's getting so much backlash from people now a days. Yeah, it had two gay dudes played by straight guys, but in 2005 even the idea of doing a "gay cowboy movie" was something no studio would ever touch. Now everyone seems to hate it for being a "queer tears for straight crirtics Oscar Bait" movie.

          I'm think it's due to the fact that most prominent people in the "anti-GG" community (I know we shouldn't think of it as a real community but you know what I mean) reject the "gay people are just like heterosexuals except they're in love with the same sex" viewpoint in favor of the "gay people are thier own separate community that rejects heterosexual white capitalism and cis heterosexuals need to fuck off and stop trying to assimilate us" viewpoint, which is something that I'm seeing more and more often now a days.

          Edit: Here's another one that's probably gonna rile some feathers up: OK so "Blurred Lines" was a shitty rapey ass song, but for gods sake it isn't even the shittiest nor the rapeyst song to ever become a big hit, yet everyone JUMPED the song (I mean shit, when you consider Eminem rapped about raping lesbians, Motorhead coined the term "jailbait" or fucking any Slayer song, Blurred Lines seems tame in comparison.) I'm so pissed off about it because of the bullshit ass Marvin Gaye lawsuit that held no legal ground, yet nobody wanted to defend the song because it became this big ass controversy. Basically, now if you make a song that's even vaguely similar to another song in the past you're gonna get your ass sued, and it all stems from this suit.

          Edit 2 might as well go again: I'm sorta critical of the "trigger warning" thing not because of what it's obstinately supposed to be (a content warning for those who might be distressed or disturbed by certain subjects) but because of how some try to use it ("x contains it, therefore it's a horrible work, anybody who likes it is a shitlord and the people who made it are horrible people too"). I know in the grand scheme of things the people using it in the former way outnumber the people who use it the latter way, but it still irks me that some try to use it in that way.

          Edit 3 cause I've got nothing better to do: I dunno, it honestly really does seems way easier to piss people off now a days. It's not that their anger isn't justified, but it's that you do or say one sexist/homophobic/racist/problematic/whatver thing and suddenly everyone shanks you like your a devout member of the KKK. I feel like there's a lot of people who don't understand that genuinely good people can and will do shitty things, but suddenly you do one shitty thing and now they've got to destroy you in the name of "internet justice". Ovbiously there's the other end of the "easy to piss people off" spectrum with the InteractiveFencers but that's a whole different issue altogether. I can't help but feel part of this fear comes from me having autism and being kinda shitty at talking to people in the first place, cause I'm I'll do something shitty without thinking or really knowing any better and suddenly the whole damn worlds trying to "get me" assuming that I must be some wholy terrible person based on one shitty thing I've done.

          [–]amelaine_ 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I completely agree with you on the first two points. Obviously it would have been best to have two gay actors, but Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal are two of the best actors in Hollywood, ever, and damn, they had some chemistry. Laverne Cox said a similar thing in an interview: you want to give gender and sexual minorities jobs and visibility, but it can still be a good movie if the role is played with sensitivity.

          And I've realized when listening to popular music that how angry I am at offensive content is mediated by who introduced it to me, my mood, and whether I just really want to like it and can justify to myself ignoring its content. Like the song "Evil Ways" by Santana is about how she's awful because she doesn't cook for him and has the gall to talk to her friends, but it's catchy as hell.

          [–]PhyrexianDildo 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Anyone who thinks "Blurred Lines" is the most problematic thing in music has never seen a XXX Maniak album cover.

          [–]BossDropTheBass 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

          The only thing I could think of is that, while they're ultra-rare and not as big as Anti-SJWs want them to appear, I feel there are legit examples of the so-called "SJW" out there that are doing nothing but ruin the movements they pretend to be supporting for everyone, even if most of them could easily be Anti-SJ sockpuppets.

          [–]baaliscoming 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

          i mean even spike lee agrees with you there. "where the black pictures at"

          コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

            [–]optimusjamieSpreader of Juffo-Wup 6ポイント7ポイント  (5子コメント)

            I dunno if this is really 'right-leaning', but I think nuclear power is the best option we have. It's killed far less people than coal or natural gas (in fact, it may have been a net reducer of radiation-related deaths by taking uranium out of the ground). The reactor at Chernobyl was being made to do things no reactor should, and as for Fukushima, there were warnings for a long time about Japanese reactors not having adequate earthquake & tsunami protection.

            [–]facefault 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

            It's killed far less people than coal or natural gas

            Not only that. More people have died falling off roofs while installing solar panels than have died in all nuclear power accidents in history.

            [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

            There is not enough uranium in the world to go full nuclear unless we make thorium reactors work.

            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

              [–]sugarazor 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

              It may seem strange given where I'm posting this, but I do think many liberals overreach on social justice issues and do more harm to the cause than good. It's often rooted in good intentions, but call-out culture and public shaming are more often than not, used to make ourselves feel superior, not actually change anything.

              [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

              It's often rooted in good intentions, but call-out culture and public shaming are more often than not, used to make ourselves feel superior, not actually change anything.

              Amen

              [–]squirrelrampageSquirrel Justice Warrior 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Public Service Announcement from the Ministry of Political Thinking (Minithink):

              All opinions expressed in this thread will be forwarded to the commissariat and will be considered during the bi-monthly re-evaluation of your SJW card. Reeducation measures will be applied if necessary.

              /s

              [–]Urdnot_VexGG: A fire hose full of failure and wharrgarbl. 27ポイント28ポイント  (12子コメント)

              Fine, I don't think that Edward Snowden is a hero.

              [–]APictureofSting 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I think Assange is a scumbag, but I'm pretty sure that's the majority position on both sides of the aisle now, if for different reasons.

              [–]hackiavelli 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

              No one bats an eye that he just mass dumped top secret documents regardless of relevance to domestic spying. Forget political agendas or the simple technical ability of reporters to analyze them. How could they possibly keep the data from being stolen by other states?

              [–]6112014 4ポイント5ポイント  (9子コメント)

              Of course he's not. He ran off to one of the most authoritarian states on the globe in order to preach free speech and liberty. He's a fucking coward and hypocrite.

              [–]CaelrieNew Mod, Same Great Oppression! 21ポイント22ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Russia's better than solitary confinement.

              [–]Thomas_K_Brannigan 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I mean, in his defense, Russia one of the few nations with the power and will to protect him from the US.

              [–]Ryanimf 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Why the hell does that matter? It's either that or prison.

              [–]no_real_usernameLiterally Shoe 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

              That is just incorrect. The US invalidated his passport while he was passing through Moscow airport.

              So he was stuck there. That wasn't his choice.

              [–]Olpainless 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Yeah he should have stayed out like Chelsea Manning because that worked out so well for her!

              You take asylum wherever the fuck you can when the fucking US is out to lock you in a hole for eternity.

              [–]sajberhippienRevolutionary Defeatist 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

              Of course he's not. He ran off to one of the most authoritarian states on the globe in order to preach free speech and liberty. He's a fucking coward and hypocrite.

              While I'm not in any way defending Russia, I think on many places on the earth, the US would be considered at least equally authoritarian if not more. I mean, Russia's a shithole, but at least it tends to keep it's shittiness to itself; unlike the US, it only occasionally invade other countries.

              Also, calling either of them "one of the most authoritarian states on the globe" seems weird without any actual metric for it. Even the EIU considers Russia on the "lightest" scale of authoritarian, as compared to a multitude of states that are seen as far worse. Though granted, I have plenty of reservations against any "democracy scale" run a private company and declaring the US and France and fucking Spain "full democracies".

              [–]GargronSpace Jam Wizard 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

              Disagree. Russia is more authoritarian than the US. You're comparing a democratic state that has its issues with an actual dictatorship. And Russia invaded Georgia in 2008 and just recently chopped a piece off of Ukraine, so no they're not contained either.

              [–]Guerilla-MaskWhere is Zoe's birth cert 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

              I'd support the death penalty if it wasn't a complete shitshow. I think it should be used for repeat offenders of major crimes that show no signs of improvement, Instead you could get the penalty for aggravated assault and a bad defence case. That should barely count for life without parole.

              Even worse the injection given is poorly regulated resulting in the prisoner dying slowly in agony for hours, I can't believe the fucking guillotine is a better solution right now.

              [–]baaliscoming 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Instead you could get the penalty for aggravated assault and a bad defence case

              not really. the death penalty in the US really goes to especially heinus crimes/ways of committing murder. it doesn't mean the person actually did it but we do a good job separating out really horrible crimes from less horrible murders. there's a paper on this somewhere i'll try to find

              [–]RacecarlockSocial Justice Sharknado 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I like nascar, steaks, processed food, unhealthy soda, large portion sizes, monster trucks, demolition derbies, drag racing, big fireworks, freedom of speech on some levels, and I think that hard work can contribute to success, even if it's not the only thing.

              [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I am for a strong army and nuclear weapons to protect our values of human rights etc, which despite our flaws and problems with racism/sexism etc is still miles ahead of the rest of the non-western world minus japan.

              I am also a bit critical of judaism, Islam and christianity in that it is used as a shield against criticism of people being misogynistic/homophobic.

              [–]mst3kluvMilo has a journalism degree from Chuck E Cheese 16ポイント17ポイント  (14子コメント)

              I think that Communism is terrible ( e.g. Mao, Soviet Russia) and while I can see the many,many problems with it, I think that there's no better alternative for Capitalism. TBH, all the Communism talk kind of scares me. I think some of you are looking through rose-tinted glasses on this issue. Ask some folks who lived in China or Russia how they really felt about Communism.

              [–]VoteRonaldRayGunStop at nothing less than FULL SOCIAL JUSTICE 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

              Mao and Stalin (or Khrushchev) are also hated by lots of communists, Khrushchev and Stalin especially.

              You get stuff like Marxis-Leninism (Stalinism) which Leninist and Trotskyists see as a hijacking of the revolution.

              Maoists are pretty weird, but there are other Chinese communist beliefs which reject Mao.

              Stalin and Mao historically had a great dislike for each other, Ho Chi Min and Mao were similar.

              Communism is a really broad area split into various groups and it's fairly poor to label every communist as a Stalinist. It's like labeling every feminist a TERF.

              [–]baaliscoming 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

              Mao and Stalin (or Khrushchev) are also hated by lots of communists, Khrushchev and Stalin especially.

              retrospective hate only though. western socialists had a despicable record on the soviet union under stalinand other states like mao's china

              [–]VoteRonaldRayGunStop at nothing less than FULL SOCIAL JUSTICE 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Totally false.

              Khrushchev came under fire by everyone from day one, he made the Stalinists unhappy be supporting 'de-Stalinization' policy and all the Trotskyists unhappy by continuing to partake in hegemony and failure to reinstate soviets.

              Stalin was heavily criticised by Western communists, the Australian Communist party cut ties with the USSR, Trotsky was murdered by Stalin, UK communists learned of his atrocities when fighting with Russian troops during the Spanish Civil War, Bolsheviks were murdered en mass during the Stalinist Purge in the USSR following his taking of power. The book 1984 is a criticism of Stalinism from a socialist perspective.

              Mao was not the only leader of the Chinese Revolution, there were other communists alongside him who were killed under his reign due to their continued criticism. Many Western communists maintained their support for these revolutionaries who were betrayed.

              [–]Jasmyne_NovaCultural Bolshevik 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Agree mostly, but personally, Khrushchev was the dictator we needed. You couldn't of had Gorbachev without Khrushchev's work.

              I have issues with Gorby as well, but he tried to progressively transition to Democracy rather than Capitalism. He did dodgy stuff, but he was a compromise candidate of the old guard & more progressives supporting Glasnost & Perestroika.

              Yeltsin? seriously fuck that guy. Putin just continued Yeltsin's corruption & thats why Russia is so bad right now.

              [–]ellenokLiterally Pearl 9ポイント10ポイント  (4子コメント)

              Are people actually for communism, or is it just getting confused with socialism?

              [–]OEQuoteThrawanAwegþæt wæs god feminist! 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I live in a post-communist country. In recent years, the Communists have become one of the strongest parties in the parliament (after being completely shoved to the wayside in '89).

              The general word on the street is that the older generation has started voting for them because they feel nostalgic for their childhoods/early-twenties, which were, coincidentally, marked by the Communist regime.

              The saddest thing to me is that for a person like me, there really isn't a strong party I can wholeheartedly support, not even the left-wing ones. There's a whole lot of racism and xenophobia (as well as other general bigotry) in this country, but none of the parliamentary parties are willing to openly address it.

              [–]Edworking 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

              there are people that are for North Korea.

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yuwy9kuaIXE&ab_channel=JoaoPaulo this happened in Brazil, she is defending North Korea regime , like it's the single most wonderfull place in the world.

              honestly, i feel kind of dumb to linking a video in a language that probably no one here understand, i mean, she could be talking about some real good thing like the necessity of equality and civil rights for everyone, no matter the gender, race, sexual option or something, and then evil me want everyone to believe that she defends north korea.

              but rly, i am not that kind of person.

              [–]LordofDork54 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

              You'd be surprised, there are still plenty of hardcore supporters who still think it's workable.

              [–]no_real_usernameLiterally Shoe 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Ask some workers who's lived in pure, unregulated capitalism how they felt about that.

              Pure capitalism is scary as fuck.

              Neither extreme is particularly appealing. That's why literally every society in existence today is somewhere in between the two.

              But somehow a lot of people look at this middle-of-the-road thing we've ended up with today and use that as proof that "Capitalism is awesome and communism is terrible".

              [–]Edworking 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

              let capitalism flow it's course but make ways to combat poverty, unemployement , homelessness and social inequality

              コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                [–]-Guardsman-Not Technically Illegal 12ポイント13ポイント  (12子コメント)

                I have little love for the animal rights movement. While many of its members are no doubt moderate, the movement's actions and words seem heavily dominated by a radical (and irritatingly self-righteous) fringe.

                That being said, I respect vegetarians and believe humankind as a whole should cut down on meat consumption... but more for environmental reasons than animal rights-related reasons. Cattle, in particular, is an enormous resource drain and greenhouse gas producer per pound of meat.

                [–]PhyrexianDildo 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Vegan here. PETA needs to shut the fuck up and stick to exposing abusive practices in the agricultural sector and promoting conscious consumption instead of comparing KFC to the Holocaust.

                [–]mst3kluvMilo has a journalism degree from Chuck E Cheese 3ポイント4ポイント  (9子コメント)

                I think vegetarians and vegans need to learn to respect other people's opinions. I was a vegan for two years and now I'm a vegetarian. It bugs me when I see other vegan/vegetarian get all up in people faces about not eating meat. Who cares? Let people eat what they want.

                [–]wikired 13ポイント14ポイント  (8子コメント)

                I don't know the vegetarians/vegans you know, but in my experience people who eat meat antagonize vegetarians/vegans waaaaaaay more than the other way around.

                [–]ameboidthe whiter the knight, the brighter the stars 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

                Yeah, whenever I mention I'm vegetarian people instantly get defensive and compulsively emphasise their love of pork or whatever. I guess it stems from a mild case of moral panic.

                [–]wikired 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

                "You can't get enough protein!" I prefer when people at least admit that they like meat instead of acting like they examined all the pros and cons and decided vegetarianism wasn't healthy enough.

                [–]proGGthrowaway👽 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Carnists are pretty easy to upset.

                [–]PhyrexianDildo 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                insert dumbass how do you if someone is vegan joke here

                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                  [–]APictureofSting 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  I fully support animal testing for scientific means.

                  [–]asking-dumb-things☭☭Feminist Killjoy☭☭ 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

                  I don't think Israel is an innocent victim (which is opposed to right wing thought) but I have very little regard for Palestine either. I like Chelsea Manning but think Snowden is cowardly for running. I don't like what happens with nonviolent offenders in our justice system and hate that we lock them up but I could care less what happens to rapists and murders in prison.

                  [–]PhyrexianDildo 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  I always assumed most leftists were critical of Israel for their treatment of Palestinians and operating what amounts to the world's largest open-air prison.

                  Then I found out that opinion makes you a radical or even antisemitic in some circles.

                  [–]StumbleOn#notallgates 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  I agree with Israel. I wish we would stop interfering in that region.

                  I disagree about Snowden though!

                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                    [–]haeshdem0n 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I think state's rights should trump the federal government in all but the most extreme cases. But I also think city/municipal governments should have relative autonomy from the state, which afaik most right winger don't.

                    [–]Badluck1313Beta Mangina White Knight 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Personally, I don't have a problem with the NSA/CIA/etc. spying on every person in the observable universe's communications.

                    I mean, sure, it's a brutally inefficient way to stop terrorism, due to the absurd amount of data they need to comb through every minute, but that just as well means that there's no way a single intelligence agent has time to notice or care about whatever little thing you don't want the government to know.

                    That said, I still think the American people should try to have those surveillance programs axed, but that's more because the USA spends like, half a trillion dollars on its various intelligence agencies, and most of that goes to running this horribly bloated infrastructure.

                    [–]cdts 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I support free trade - but as ironic as it sounds, I also say institutions should be in place to ensure free trade exists (i.e. so corporations don't become too powerful).

                    Moreover I don't think capitalism is inherently flawed - but I do think that (once again, ironically) capitalism can only work with socialist reforms.

                    [–]HokesOne⚒Social Justice Banhammer⚒ 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    I'm generally in favour of resource extraction.

                    I'm obviously not indiscriminate about it though. I think it should be done in the public interest, in partnership with First Nations and other stakeholders, with a strong pro-labour framework, and only if it passes reasonable environmental regulatory hurdles.

                    Many in the Canadian left are pretty knee jerk against any and all resource extraction, which seems foolish considering a well regulated resource industry that works in the public interest could really help finance a lot of good programs.

                    [–]-Guardsman-Not Technically Illegal 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Fellow Canadian here, and I fully agree, just as long as we keep tight control of our resources and don't hand them over to corporations at ridiculously low prices.

                    Some complain that we sell our fresh water too cheap, but I've heard a counter-argument: we should not sell it, but give it. Why? Because it allows us to keep control of it. By selling it, you must sign contracts that allow companies to draw a set amount of water; if the situation changes (e.g., drought), you are not allowed to go back on the terms of the contract. But by giving water, you keep full control on how much you give, and who you give it to.

                    [–]SexyJusticeWhore 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I'm pretty into the whole pushback against cops violating 1st and 4th amendment rights (and bullying us out of our 5th). I pay attention to copblock and PINAC. Of course, I'm not gonna repeat the shitty rhetoric that being "for the constitution" is a right-wing position. I just notice that it's mostly right-wingers and pro-gun people who hang out in those forums and have the same opinions I do on the matter.

                    [–]APictureofSting 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    I'm pro-copyright, and I don't understand the arguments of those who want it abolished entirely at all. I just imagine that would lead to a future where large corporations abandon innovation in favour of just cloning the work of poorer creatives and undercutting them.

                    I'm also perfectly fine with large chain stores and to be honest generally prefer to shop at them because I know what I'm going to get. Communities rejecting them often feels like NIMBYism to me.

                    [–]CulturalMarxistDevil 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

                    I don't know much about the modern transgender rights movement or the scientific information about transgenderism as a whole, so I remain completely silent on the issue.

                    [–]SexyJusticeWhore 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I don't know if you're left or right on that, but you're definitely a unicorn. Opinions on trans issues are like flies on shit. You are a hero.

                    [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Yeah me too, I am too uninformed to really have an opinion on this.

                    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                      [–]AsteroidSparkSterling Jim Worshiper 8ポイント9ポイント  (14子コメント)

                      Pro-gun, heavily. I absolutely hate the militia mentality around gun ownership in the US but I love owning guns and shooting them and if anything actually needs to have its ownership more tightly restricted for the sake of public safety it's automobiles.

                      [–]facefault 11ポイント12ポイント  (6子コメント)

                      Worth noting that last year cars killed 33,804, while guns killed 33,636 people. The gap is smaller than generally thought, and guns are expected to overtake cars this year.

                      With that said, I agree that most gun control proposals are totally pointless. They tend to focus on what's scary rather than on what's actually effective for crime. And about two thirds of gun deaths are suicides; "make it illegal to sell guns to people who might one day become depressed" is not implementable.

                      [–]AsteroidSparkSterling Jim Worshiper 7ポイント8ポイント  (4子コメント)

                      In my state we actually have some clever gun laws, because the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns (despite the majority of proposed gun laws eg the infamous "spooky assault weapon bans" ignoring handguns completely) we have universal registration of them and you need to get a permit to buy them without a carry license (both require criminal history check, approval from local sheriffs, and a safety exam, but purchase permits are one time use while carry licenses are lifetime), and pawn shops can't deal in handguns. The way I see it long guns are sporting equipment more than anything else, handguns are weapons that people buy to use as weapons.

                      Ironically my state also has ridiculously lenient driving laws.

                      [–]thecrazingSome Clever Shit 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

                      ridiculously lenient driving laws.

                      In terms of age?

                      [–]AsteroidSparkSterling Jim Worshiper 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      In a lot of ways, up here you can get a license at age 14 with training certification, and once you're 18 it's even easier to get. Also we have no vehicle inspections whatsoever so it's not uncommon to see cardoors completely made out of duct tape.

                      [–]lifestyledFun King Spineless 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      that's how it was when I was in school. you could get a school permit at 14 if you lived at least a mile away from school, allowing you to drive to and from school without anyone in the car. then 16 you'd get a license that allowed you to drive but you weren't supposed to drive after like 11 pm. 18, you'd get your full license. and the only test I had to take was at 14, while 16 and 18 just required me to go in, do the eye test, and get my new license.

                      same with the vehicle inspections. that's actually why people around here knock out the catalytic converter in their vehicle, because they're not going to get in trouble for it and it they feel the pollution is an ok trade off for a few extra miles per gallon.

                      [–]Edworking 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      I find that Gun control should take a similar way of driving law in some places, similar on how you descrived.

                      you have a carry license, that need to be renovated[where they check if you are still,well a sensate person who might own a gun w/o any sort of danger] every year/few years, you license have the registry of every gun you own.

                      The permit to buy is a clever way to control circulation and registry of gun.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                        [–]VoteRonaldRayGunStop at nothing less than FULL SOCIAL JUSTICE 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        You can be a gun owner and enjoy firearms whilst supporting smart regulation.

                        [–]AsteroidSparkSterling Jim Worshiper 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        We definitely need smart gun laws. The problem I find is most people trying to make them don't understand what they're doing. Instead of safety exams we just got blanket bans on anything that scares a senator's kids.

                        [–]Thomas_K_Brannigan 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        I'm a bit similar. I wouldn't say I'm "pro-gun", but rather "gun-neutral". I don't think gun ownership should be a right, but, like automobiles, it should be a privilege that all adults should be able to partake in, as long as they pay for adequate documentation and pass testing showing they are competent in their operation. I also think in America we really need to find a way to up driving test standards in many areas.

                        [–]no_real_usernameLiterally Shoe 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Unlike guns, cars are already heavily regulated though. Because people realize they're dangerous.

                        Do the words driver’s licenses, seatbelts, airbags, padded dashboards, safety glass and collapsible steering columns mean anything to you?

                        We've done all this to cars, and we've reduced car fatalities by around 95%.

                        But when it comes to guns, regulation isn't the answer. And the evidence you use to back up this claim is pointing to cars, where regulation is already in place, and has been hugely effective.

                        [–]tocloseforcomfort 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        Whenever somebody says "We need more gun control", I hear "We don't want to deal with the sexism/racism/classism/oppression that leads to murder, it is too much effort".

                        [–]no_real_usernameLiterally Shoe 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Whenever I hear people say "it's not the guns that's the problem, it's sexism/racism/classism/oppression/human nature", I hear "American Exceptionalism. You can't expect common solutions to common problems, which have worked in other countries to solve those exact same problems, to also work in America."

                        Are you saying that sexism, racism, classism and oppression are all solved problems in every other country?

                        Because other countries don't have the gun murder rate of the US. If the problem was those things, then you would see daily mass shootings in other countries too.

                        I don't believe that the laws of nature is different in the US. I don't believe gravity is inverted, or that good is evil or that left-handed people are the majority in the US. I don't believe that human nature is intrinsically more broken in the US than in Europe.

                        I believe that when a problem occurs only in the US, then the cause for it must be in something that the US does differently than other countries.

                        And having racism, sexism, classism and oppression is no different from other countries.

                        Having built up a cult and religion around guns is different. Having a large portion of the population literally consider gun ownership to be more important than human lives is different. Having people say "so, a bunch of children just got murdered? That sucks, but it's better than people trying to take my guns away"

                        [–]SexyJusticeWhore 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        So we should bypass the easy, tangible solutions and go straight for the difficult, unlegislatable ones?

                        [–]facefault 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

                        1. I am pretty okay with drone strikes. Are we managing them so badly that the number of civilian casualties is inspiring more terrorists than we kill? Possibly. I don't know. But I have zero problem in principle with robotic assassination. This is partly because I greatly hate Fazlullah and blame him for the continued existence of polio.

                        2. I support the death penalty in principle. Some people are so unlikely to end up doing net good for society that it is more cost-effective to kill them than to give them a chance. But execution is more expensive than life imprisonment, and the way we administer it is incompetent. So in practice I'm against it. Also, get me drunk and I'll argue that public flogging would be more humane, more effective, and more cost-effective than the prison system.

                        3. Free markets are great. Market failures absolutely exist, and Pareto efficiency is NOT as important as helping the worst-off. But I hear a lot of "capitalism is bad" stuff that just isn't true.

                        [–]no_real_usernameLiterally Shoe 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Some people are so unlikely to end up doing net good for society that it is more cost-effective to kill them than to give them a chance

                        See, that's precisely my fundamental problem with the death penalty. You're reducing people to a cost-benefit analysis. "Is it more cost-effective to kill them?"

                        That is scary as fuck. If that is how we see people, the next step is to apply the same to sick or disabled people. Or old people. And then perhaps poor people. To me, it's not about what the criminal in question deserves, and it's not about what it costs. It's about living in a society where killing people is wrong, where human life is valued.

                        I don't want there to be exceptions to that. I don't want to live in a society where human life is valued except when it isn't. Where killing people is sometimes ok.

                        [–]Kennen_Rudd 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        get me drunk and I'll argue that public flogging would be more humane, more effective, and more cost-effective than the prison system.

                        This is probably true but less of an argument in favour of flogging than a serious indictment of the prison system.

                        [–]-Guardsman-Not Technically Illegal 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        I agree with points 1 and 3.

                        While some may find it contradictory to be okay with drone strikes while opposing the death penalty, I think there is an important distinction between the two: the death penalty serves to punish past crimes (which is pointless), while drone strikes serve to prevent future crimes (which is useful). And data doesn't support the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent.

                        (Sorry if I'm getting a bit off-topic. I realize this thread is not for debunking others' positions.)

                        [–]Maxkin 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        I'm British so the political centre of gravity is slightly different here, but I'm an avowed capitalist and constitutional monarchist, as I believe both systems bring more prosperity and stability than any other tried so far. I believe that Western culture is superior to any other culture overall, though there are certainly things we could improve on and learn from others. I also stand behind a strong military and nuclear weapons, on a macro scale the world is pretty much still "might makes right" and I think liberal democracies need to stick together and stand up for themselves, or else we'll be pushed around by more malevolent powers such as Russia and China.

                        [–]StumbleOn#notallgates 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Unlike literally anyone in the GOP, I am a fiscal conservative. Were all other things equal, this is why I would vote left leaning every time. Liberals run the economy better.

                        [–]-Guardsman-Not Technically Illegal 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

                        I believe that nuclear weapons, and the threat of mutually assured destruction, have effectively ended direct wars between great powers.

                        [–]Edworking 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        but that at least to my eyes of uneducated to this matter, look at least plausible if not true.

                        now, here is one point that i am itching to discuss... do you think that the world avoid confront with North Korea because of a pacifist stance, fear of nuclear weapons or because the after effect of a war would be a humanitarian disaster[North koreans for exemple, what would hapen with it's people? the economy[that don't exist] etc...]

                        [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        The answer to all your questions about North Korea is yes.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                          [–]optimusjamieSpreader of Juffo-Wup 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          The problem with this is that MAD might not survive if someone like Kim Jong-Un gets his hands on nukes (North Korean incompetence notwithstanding)

                          [–]GargronSpace Jam Wizard 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I don't quite follow how having direct wars be replaced with proxy wars is actually any better. Perhaps not worse? But not any better.

                          [–]LesterPearsonsProjct 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          The John Birchers are right about the UN.

                          Marijuana use is immoral - not because it's (supposedly) a gateway drug or because it (allegedly) makes white women want to sleep with black men, but because it makes people banal and unimaginative.

                          [–]shahryarrakeenJustify that costume, Immediately! 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          • as much as Zionism is a racist ideology, and British and U.N. sharing agreements have been broken, The state of Israel has done well enough for thier populace that they deserve sovereignty and domain over Holy Sites (they're doing a better job maintaining al-Aqsa than Saudis are Mecca and Medina)and settlers (at least those who swear loyalty to the state and abide by the state's agreements)

                          • Firearms are a potential means by which people can express power when other means are denied(not simply women won't talk to you, or any other collection of petty grievances)

                          • Hilary was by and large right when she "polsplained" BLM organizers about having an actual policy and agenda.

                          • I've never jelled with anarchism. Without a state institution to check ambitions, the more charismatic would hold power over others, tyranny of the majority, etc

                          • I prefer Obama's drone and black op approach to counter-terrorism over Bush's disastrous nation-building approach.

                          • A lot of folks in my community gave moral support to the LTTE for thier guerrilla wars in Sri Lanka. I believe the war went on two decades too long because thier generalissimo wanted to keep his fiefdom in the name of ethnic separatism, and was willing to throw away lives until his was the only one left.

                          • The Dalai Lama it's not a legitimate representative of the Tibetans.

                          [–]Jasmyne_NovaCultural Bolshevik 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I have some fucking horrible ideas, but I can't see alternatives to some of it. I'm somewhat "Hawkish" & bitter.

                          National Security, but make it proportional to the actual threat, not freak out over statistically insignificant deaths to terrorism. There is an opportunity cost in civilian lives in forgoing bombing terrorists & that needs to be weighed against the civilians likely killed from a strike, I don't care what country they are from. I'm open the question of metadata collection, but I'm skeptical that it is particularly helpful. I also don't think its remotely legal in the USA & Snowden was right.

                          While I can appreciate why the ACLU has defended NAZIs & Westbro Baptist Church, I don't share their restraint regarding criminalization of internal threats. If an organisation is an anti-democratic hate group, I want them banned, assets seized & forcibly disarmed. & if they all get killed resisting, thats cool. The real issue is these laws get turned on political opponents with no shame at all. See "Prevention of Terrorism Act" UK, miners strike 1984-85 & Aus Govt targetting envioromentalists as "extremists". Popehat keeps me in line generally.

                          While I'm generally convinced of the merits of Anti-Death penalty, I got 0 patience for hate preachers like the opportunist core of the MRAs & the NRA. It isn't enough to shoot or capture a mass murderer. You got to hunt down & fucking exterminate the ones egging them on. Treat them like Islamic State & Al-Queda is treated. Have some fucking integrity & Drone Strike small arms factories. Again, Popehat would have something sane to say about all this.

                          I'm Pro GMO, evidence based medicine & anti Organic Food Industry.

                          I find progressives too protective of Islam (protecting your average Muslim from bigotry as best you can is fine & I try to help with that). Some of us Liberals, are not nearly Liberal enough when it comes to other cultures. Culture fucks you over & Human Rights should be universal.

                          If we had the trained personnel & funding - This is where it gets nightmarish folks. hey I kind of AM a Social Justice Warrior, well a Hawk. "Social Justice Hawk":

                          I want to forcibly remake Pashtun culture due to the treatment of both boys & girls. https://info.publicintelligence.net/HTT-PashtunSexuality.pdf Embed soldiers with the Kurds & transplant that militarised culture into a new generation of Afghani kids confiscated from their families that want the staus quo.

                          Same for parts of India & Pakistan where rape, acid attacks & burning wives is rife. And some of Africa.

                          [–]Casey234Figuratively Who 6ポイント7ポイント  (18子コメント)

                          I'm staunchly in support of free speech as an ideal, a government should not restrict someone's right to speak, or their right to protest, (with the obvious caveat of yelling fire in a crowded theatre).

                          [–]peterthefourth☭☭Cultural Marxist☭☭ 8ポイント9ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          The implication that free speech is a conservative idea is troubling.

                          [–]-Guardsman-Not Technically Illegal 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          Yes, but the right/left, liberal/conservative scales are highly reductive and often shift over time. For example, the "classical liberals" of the 18th century (those who pushed democracy, secularism, republicanism, etc.) were often in favor of laissez-faire capitalism, which, in the 19th century, came to be associated with conservatives.

                          [–]StrappinYoungZiltoidSir White of House Knight 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          I think the point they're making is that it's worrisome that people think left-leaning individuals tend to favour censorship or getting rid of freedom of speech.

                          [–]Gruzman 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Any time you have a movement cough gamergate/ghazi cough that wants to codify their beliefs, substantiated or no, into an enforced set of norms concerning language, eventually backed up by government decree, then you're favoring censorship and you're against freedom of speech. All sides of the spectrum have different concerns about the speech of others, for different reasons. The left and the right have, in the past, favored all kinds of famous anti-freedom-of-speech laws/regulations; the left seems to be embracing that tendency again, these days. So it makes a bit of a stir.

                          [–]Prosthemadera 6ポイント7ポイント  (10子コメント)

                          Is that considered right-leaning, though?

                          [–]MilitaryBees⚔Social Justice Paladin⚔ 0ポイント1ポイント  (9子コメント)

                          I'd say a little yes and no. Free speech above all else always seems to be touted the hardest by staunch libertarians.

                          [–]StumbleOn#notallgates 4ポイント5ポイント  (8子コメント)

                          "touted" but not actually followed. Part of the trick of the right wing is saying one thing but doing the opposite. Free speech is better off in all circumstances under Liberal governments.

                          [–]Mursili 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          "Fire in a crowded theatre" is a troublesome metaphor. "Imminent lawless action" might be a better caveat here. Just a suggestion!

                          [–]StrappinYoungZiltoidSir White of House Knight 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          Do many people here or in the left actually hold the view that it should be restricted, though? Most censorship or attempts at censorship have come from really conservative crowds (i.e. fundamentalist Christians trying to get tons of music/books banned, the PMRC, etc.). At most I've heard of petitions from leftist groups wanting to ban certain artists from performing.

                          I don't think it's a leftist position to believe in free speech. I believe in freedom of speech, but I also believe in using that, which means that, yes, people can express shitty views and the government can't penalize them, but (despite the understanding that a lot of MRAs seem to have of the issue) I and others can criticize a person for their shitty views, because we have freedom of speech as well.

                          Honestly, this isn't related to what you're saying, but every single time I've seen someone complain about how liberals want to 'censor' free speech recently, it's been in response to someone saying that someone else said something that wasn't okay. It seems to me that crying censorship whenever someone you don't agree with uses their free speech to call you out is much closer to an abuse of freedom of speech (since they have a fundamental misconception of freedom of speech as being some thing where people can say awful things and not be criticized).

                          [–]sugarazor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Tipper Gore was the face of the PMRC though and Joe Lieberman was a Democrat when he wanted the government to regulate video games. Although this was the late 80s/early 90s when being a Democrat did not necessarily equate with being a "leftist."

                          But this is the problem with the GG debate, they're so loud that they've given the perception that any sort of critique or opposition to certain content in games is the equivalent of wanting to censor it.

                          [–]SandflapjackWHY WONT YOU JUST LET ME DO THIS FOR YOU ROSE 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          I literally want to fuck over everyone

                          [–]myGGthrowawaySea Lion Tamer 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          Not exactly right wing , but I have "STEMbro" inclinations. (Not that social science is completely useless , but it should be taken with a heap of salt because of all the methodolical problems and bias problems guys like Haidt have uncovered.) I think evopsych is unfairly maligned. (It has its problems but they're generally the same ones as psychology/evo-sci in general.) I think Stephen Pinker refuted the blank slate.

                          [–]amelaine_ 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I have kind of the same inclinations but within the social sciences. Not that I think quantitative is necessarily better than qualitative (descriptive, narrative power should never be underestimated) but it makes me angry when I run into a Freudian analysis in 2015 or when I read philosophers dabbling in anthropology who never go into the field.

                          [–]BZenMojo 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I believe amnesty encourages undocumented immigrants and undocumented workers depress wages and undermine worker protections. That said, I don't think it's their fault and economic concerns are really an employer-centric issue.

                          [–]amelaine_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I think (not sure yet) that the federal government should back off education and give block grants if anything.

                          [–]DakkaMuhammedJihad 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          Two things that directly relate to one another:

                          1) Chelsea Manning is neither a hero nor patriot. She was angry, and though her anger might be justified, had no fucking clue what she was doing, what she was leaking, or what the affects of it might be. It was an incredibly dangerous and stupid thing to do.

                          2) Edward Snowden is a fucking liar, and a criminal. The problem is that I know what he's talking about first hand, and I know exactly what he's lying about. Furthermore, I know that he knows he's lying.

                          [–]TheRealSJKSocial Justice Kangaroo 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          Four things:

                          • I laugh at all the little birdies I see chirping in here, calling for the downfall of capitalism. You dream big... but it's a dream nonetheless.
                          • I'm voting for Hilary. I mean, in the election, if she wins, you're gonna vote for her, and so will many others. Those others might not vote for Sanders. Keep in mind that "socialist" meant "the guys with nukes that we were in a cold war with" for a lot of people over, say, 35. And if we get a GOP in the Oval Office...
                          • I feel like calling someone an "intersectional feminist" is essentially going "well, she's not a TRUE Scots-I mean feminist!" Sure, they might not be for trans rights. Sure, they might not care about black people as much as you like. But it feels like most of you guys don't think baby steps are a thing.
                          • I don't really care about any of the black rights movements. This white guy probably can live his life and die content even if those movements make no progress, and those movements will live and die the same way no matter if I get involved or not.

                          [–]AliceBonesBeta Mangina White Knight 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          I hear Sanders won't be running as an independent against Hilary if he doesn't get the nomination.

                          [–]baaliscoming 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          but ideologically more extreme candidates have a harder time winning elections. ideologically Mitt Romney and Hillary are more likely to win than Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders ceterus paribus

                          [–]Terran117Stalin Did Nothing Wrong 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          I support gun rights, but that is not right wing really since Marx advocated arming the workers. I don't like postmodernism, I believe in strong armies ONLY as a defense force and NEVER for imperialism (compare Cuban army to American) and I believe you should be forced to make a contribution to society in some way or form unless you are impaired from doing so. I am no ableist.

                          [–]TheRealSJKSocial Justice Kangaroo 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          I believe in strong armies ONLY as a defense force and NEVER for imperialism (compare Cuban army to American)

                          How is THAT not left-wing?

                          [–]Wizzer10Ex-MRA (no, seriously) 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I think that Julian Assange is evil beyond contempt.

                          I think that nuclear disarmament, even if it were unilateral, would be unfeasible.

                          [–]EthicsInSTFUbespeckled malcontent 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

                          I'm in favor of reinvading the Falkland Islands.

                          [–]GottaLoveIgnoranceAnecdotally Circumstantial 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          I honestly can't tell if that is a joke or not . . .

                          [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          I hope it is

                          [–]EthicsInSTFUbespeckled malcontent 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          You sound just like the Argentinians :(

                          [–]piwikiwi⚔Mary⚔ 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Or I just think that the people living there have the right to choose which country they want to live in and they overwhelmingly voted to be a part of the UK. Unless you desperately want the Argentinians to lose another war.

                          [–]FishAndBone 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

                          I'm opposed to public sector unions provided that public sector pay is tied to predicted hours worked and they automatically get cost-of-living adjustments.

                          [–]GearyDigitMost Charrming Mod 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          I think that caveat took you out of 'right-leaning' territory, in that 'I would oppose unions if there were no need for them' is a centrist or left-leaning stance.

                          [–]FishAndBone 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          in that 'I would oppose unions if there were no need for them' is a centrist or left-leaning stance

                          There is more to unions that just pay, like working conditions, resources, hours requested, ability to organizes strikes more easily, petition for overall higher wages.

                          [–]james4765Social Justice Boogeyman 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          And, especially for public sector workers, protection from being thrown to the wolves by some political appointee who made a bad decision.

                          [–]FishAndBone 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I work in the public sector. If some political appointee decides that X shouldn't exist any more, sucks to suck. I shouldn't have a union protecting me from that.

                          [–]mujahid69 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I think much of the left is off base on gun control and the attachment to democracy, but I don't see my positions on those issues as right-wing in the slightest. If we ever want to change anything I think we need to rid ourselves of the idea that voting is going to do it, and start thinking about methods that will.

                          [–]patch173 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I still feel very uneasy about granting abortions, while they should be legal, they should come with heavy restrictions and I don't think should be done in every situation.

                          [–]JennyDoombringerSocial Justice Helix Red Priestess 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          In theory, I support the death penalty for both murder and rape, which is even farther than most Republicans are willing to go. However, I think which sorts of crimes get the death penalty and which don't need to be explicitly defined (even if it takes hundreds of pages to do so), as leaving it up to judge or jury discretion lets in all sorts of biases, like how a black criminal is way more likely to get the death penalty than a white criminal guilty of a nearly identical crime.

                          Also, even though I'm a vegetarian, vegans annoy the fuck out of me. And living in the Cleveland area has caused me to sympathize with deer hunters, as well (though I still would never want to do the hunting myself).

                          And, like several other people in here, I do support nuclear power, and think the fear of GMOs is ridiculous. I don't see either of those as right-wing opinions, though.

                          [–]PhyrexianDildo 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I track far left almost to the border of Anarchy ville but I fucking despise intellectualism and academia in politics. Not that either of them are inherently toxic. Perish the thought.

                          But when it comes to articulating political theory and praxis, I agree with the right that a lot of leftists are pointy-headed position paper writers deeply out of touch with the people they want to reach/help organize. The right wing are disingenuous clowns and sacks of bastard ass but you cant deny they know how to talk proles into going against their best interests.

                          I wish American populism wasn't mired in so much homespun bigotry, sexism, and "Old Tyme Religion" sentimentality. We could learn something from keeping shit simple and speaking more to daily existence instead of utopic visions or beating people over the head with poststructuralist essays about reifying contemporary autonomous movements.

                          [–]GreyWardenThorgaSocialJusticeZordon 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          I just literally got done with a rewatch of Buffy, like my skin is still tingling from Buffy's smile at the end of 'Chosen' so I'm trying to think of when Giles said something Republican-ish.

                          As for me, I don't oppose the death penalty in all circumstances. To me it seems less humane to lock vicious murderers up with drug dealers and tax dodgers than it does to end them.

                          ...end the murderers I mean, not the tax dodgers.

                          [–]CielleVentrue, Social Justice Camarilla[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          I just literally got done with a rewatch of Buffy, like my skin is still tingling from Buffy's smile at the end of 'Chosen' so I'm trying to think of when Giles said something Republican-ish.

                          I was thinking of "Pangs". He wasn't as hard-line as Spike about the whole thing, but unlike Buffy/Willow he wasn't especially conflicted. It's a soft example.

                          [–]fuzzy_cthulhusocial_justice_sommelier 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          Spike and Giles weren't really uttering apologia for killing the aboriginal peoples of America- they were just tired of Willow's white-guilt-based pacifism, which they pointed out was inappropriate considering everyone responsible was dead and the ghost of a Chumash tribe was killing genuinely innocent people in the current day in revenge for crimes they had no hand in. In this instance, I think Chumash warrior is probably more right-leaning.

                          [–]CielleVentrue, Social Justice Camarilla[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Spike and Giles weren't really uttering apologia for killing the aboriginal peoples of America- they were just tired of Willow's white-guilt-based pacifism, which they pointed out was inappropriate considering everyone responsible was dead and the ghost of a Chumash tribe was killing genuinely innocent people in the current day in revenge for crimes they had no hand in.

                          See, I saw that as a reflection on the real-world position that, since currently-living people had no hand in historical crimes, demanding atonement/reparation from them in the present day is unwarranted. But I may be reading too much into it.

                          コメントをもっと表示する (11 返事)