What is a headline that has appeared in France at least 250 other times?
“SNCF on strike”
“The president’s approval rate at an all-time low”
“French tennis player eliminated from Rolland Garros tournament”
ITT: leftists arguing with each other even if they probably agree on 90% of things. If you don’t pass the purity test then you’re just a shitlib and no better than a MAGAt according to a huge chunk of this place.
The right doesn’t give a shit about purity, as long as they’re on the same team they’ll work together.
For the record, I’m an NDP voter which is the left most party in Canada.
Our left biggest enemy is the other leftist party with which they agree on 90% of subjects. It’s so fucking infuriating, in the meantime, the centrists, the right and the far right are all working together (not very surprising obviously).
Right wing - You don’t hate gays? Ah well close enough, you’ll get there with time.
Left wing - You think women should be entitled to their own spaces? YOU FUCKING BIGOT!!! REEEEEEEEE???
A better argument would be the down votes prove you’re clueless and oversimplifiying things. Or just a troll.
I’m aware that I’m oversimplifying things, it’s an extremely nuanced and sensitive subject and to write about it in whole on Lemmy would be a mile long wall of text. I don’t think I’m clueless, but I understand that insulting my intelligence makes you feel better about your predetermined side of the argument rather than actually trying to engage with the substance of my comment.
I think it’s pretty obvious that there are many people that think along the same lines as me but you can bury your head in the sand and pretend I’m a troll if you want.
Regardless of my personal opinions, my comment was written as a proof of how the left, despite broad similarities and agreements, eats itself over minor differences whilst the right aren’t as bothered. You’ve done nothing but prove that point.
Regardless of my personal opinions, my comment was written as a proof of how the left, despite broad similarities and agreements, eats itself over minor differences whilst the right aren’t as bothered. You’ve done nothing but prove that point.
It’s because on the left we actually have principles. The right are populist, they just demonise the minority of the day, they don’t actually care about what they scream. Of course they get on very well because they have nothing they care about except power.
I’m a big left winger and I’m broadly in support of trans rights except for two or three minor sticking points which I think are very much worthy of debate, like women’s sports and women’s changing rooms, but if I actually express that, I’m a massive cunt 🤷🏼♂️🤣
It’s probably because it hits very close to the extreme-right talking point that trans women are only trans because they want to sneak into the women’s toilet or win at sports. People are like “not this shit again 🤦”.
Though I think banning trans women from changing rooms is like misgendering them which is mean.
Support for Israel genociding Gaza is a big, divisive 10%. Always was going to be.
In France, and in the rest of the world “left” and “right” are two buzz words used for propaganda
Not really, at least not in France. The left is advocating for higher taxes on the rich, for a Gaza ceasefire and some other things, the right is all for destroying our social system, ending with private education and healthcare. They’re also, sometimes violently, anti immigration.
As usual… :-/
One oft-leveled criticism was the heavy concentration of its electorate in certain social categories — present in large urban areas but far less so among other parts of the working class in towns and rural France. This issue is especially important given that Marine Le Pen’s far-right Rassemblement National has enjoyed real momentum in these areas
Damn, it’s like there’s a common theme here with America’s failing to reach the working class in towns and rural America leaving the right strong and the left divided.
inb4 the “divided left” this article is referring to is actually a bunch of united socialists being told to suck it up and vote for a deeply unpopular ex-banker who barely scraped ahead of le pen the last time he and his paedophile wife were declared the “last hope” against fascism
This is what certain “leftist” accelerationists are pushing for in the US, too.
IMHO, ur wrong. Liberalism is a curse everywhere. You can’t water down a good solution in politics. Give fascists a inch and you’ll give 'em a mile
You MUST make solutions that appeal to enough people to have a coalition. Refusal to negotiate on anything, and taking an all-or-nothing approach is what will fuck us all.
Republicans have been strategic; it’s taken them nearly 40 years of work, but they’ve managed to throw out Roe v. Wade. They took a lot of small nibbles over time, fought the battle on a lot of fronts, and by dog, they eventually won. They’re also fighting this on public education, religion, and a hundred other fronts, and because they’re able to largely form working coalitions, they’re winning. (This latest House, with the Freedom Caucus, has been an exception rather than the rule.) The left needs to fucking learn this lesson, instead of each faction not giving a goddamned inch and fighting to the bitter end over everything. Fracturing and circular firing squads aren’t helping the left, they only help the right.
Lol ur so wrong and mad. Good solutions appeal to people when implemented- If the rich lived in fear, or better yet were eliminated -life WOULD be better for the rest of us. You sound like a steamroller pacifist.
History is replete with examples of individuals who believed they could create a utopia by killing enough people. Of them, you’re not the most enlightened, just the latest.
Billionaires shouldn’t exist. They profit off death. Are you getting paid to argue for their lives?
I think your primary motivation is violence, not progress. I don’t need to be a shill to recognize that.
No, thats the billionaires you’re thinking of again. And the conditions which uphold your likely quite cozy, insulated life and opinions.
You thinking a solution is good doesn’t mean everyone thinks the solution is good. Additionally, “rich” isn’t a single point, but a continuum, so the idea that you can eliminate the “rich” and make life good for the “non-rich” is ridiculous. Is someone that makes $75,000 a year “rich”? They certainly are to someone that makes $15,080 (full time, federal minimum wage), despite $75,000 being the median household income in the US.
Point went over your head. Good solutions will amaze when implemented and win over people who previously had doubts. By the rich I mean billionaires, not middle class folks who get taxed to shit bc the former won’t pay to make this country any better. Anybody who makes 75k a year is equally right around the corner to poverty by comparison, especially with the consumerist trappings of a american lifestyle factored in.
No, I understood what you were trying to say. But you’re not understanding me.
You’re operating under the–likely false–assumption that there’s a single solution that will make all people (or, all the people that don’t fit your arbitrary definition of “rich”) happy once it’s implemented. Of course, how you get to implementation prior to everyone buying in to the idea is just skipped over, since that’s inconvenient. (If you only count billionaires as the rich, that’s a total of about 3200 globally out of 8.1B people, or .000039% of the global population. If you widen that definition to people that own $30M+ in assets and liquid wealth, you can widen that out to about .01% (note that this was as of 2017, so that number is quite out of date).
This is where politics and building consensus comes in. Even on the left there’s not broad agreement on every policy point, or how to get to a particular place, and you’re going to need more than just “the left” to get any kind of proposals passed, unless you prefer an authoritarian-style of gov’t that uses force and violence rather than building consensus.
I prefer no government but maybe that’s just me. People have simple NEEDS and they’ve been made to believe satisfying those is a lot more complicated than it is. Food, shelter and healthcare can all be distributed and managed, perhaps even more effiecently WITHOUT a strongly centralized power structure. which IMHO, are inherently anti-democratic and self-serving.
Lol, what a perfect fucking example. This post is about left unity and not being able to get together despite agreeing 90% of the time. You start out calling everyone who doesn’t agree with you a lib and in the next fucking sentence you’re calling them fascists.
