Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 65

Thread: Right vs. Left and MGTOW

  1. #41
    IG72's Avatar
    Senior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    346
    Liked
    1998
    Reputation
    1172471
    Usual false-choice logic trap. Left and Right are handy labels used to frame political dialogue. Both sides believe in the social contract in various forms, especially marriage. A true MGTOW sees labels for what they are, and is not ensnared by them, or ensnared by the proponents pushing their social contracts under the Left/Right disguise.

    Some might say this is an anarchist's position, but honestly, that's just another label that hipsters self-label themselves with to impress their first time uni polsci GFs. Very fucking blue pill in my books, not to mention completely fucking lame. Just more window dressing.

    MGTOW are collectively uncategorizable. Afterall, we're all going our own ways and noone else's.
    Last edited by IG72; 30-01-14 at 02:41 AM.

  2. #42
    ounumen's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    69
    Liked
    239
    Reputation
    35093
    While I am not a fan of Europe or how they have structured their societies (as a Nation we are just too damn big IMO) I do like that every party is labeled exactly what they represent. You want a Fascist representative well they have that, a Communist yup, a Socialist, a Conservative and the list goes on. The big lie these career politicians have perpetrated on the American people is they can’t allow their true platforms to be recognized except by those willing to read their records as the low intellect voter will not vote for them. I firmly believe if you ran on a Nationalist platform in rural Texas you would be elected no matter what or as a hard lined socialist in say San Francisco. Instead they hide behind D or R.

  3. #43
    ThomasCovenant's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    744
    Liked
    2887
    Reputation
    1005242
    I see the political spectrum as being circular - with extreme right and extreme left being at virtually the same point on the circumference.
    The common features of the "extreme right" and the extreme left seem to be;

    Total government control over social and economic policy
    Military belligerence
    Blatant discrimination of groups of people who are undesirable (eg Jews or Cossacks)

    Perhaps the "extreme right" examples you have been thinking of are not right-wing after all?

    I suggest that the extreme right is anarchy, and before you reach that you have the Libertarians. The furthest to the left is totalitarianism as per "1984" or "Brave New World".

    Left = more government control, less freedom and more security. Right is the opposite.

  4. #44
    ounumen's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    69
    Liked
    239
    Reputation
    35093
    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasCovenant View Post
    The common features of the "extreme right" and the extreme left seem to be;

    Total government control over social and economic policy
    Military belligerence
    Blatant discrimination of groups of people who are undesirable (eg Jews or Cossacks)

    Perhaps the "extreme right" examples you have been thinking of are not right-wing after all?

    I suggest that the extreme right is anarchy, and before you reach that you have the Libertarians. The furthest to the left is totalitarianism as per "1984" or "Brave New World".

    Left = more government control, less freedom and more security. Right is the opposite.
    Not according to the leftist hardliners. According to them they "give" freedom and "provide" for us pesants.

  5. #45
    toolate's Avatar
    Banned

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    145
    Liked
    610
    Reputation
    434835
    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Sin View Post
    I am a foreigner but I have lived in Murica for about 4 years and follow the political goings in that place.

    Honestly, it does not matter. Left and the Right are both the same. One will fuck you up straight in the face while the other will do it beneath a mountain of bullshit .

    At the end of the day, IMO, MGTOWs should be apolitical. As in, we should have our stances depending on issues. Some of us might be conservative when it comes to crime but progressive when it comes to porn.

    The sad thing is, politics in Murica is now reduced to either this or that & both are crappy. Sadly, real life is a bit more complex than left or right.
    Many good comments on this thread but this one sums it up best for me.

    I suffer from the burden of seeing things from more than one side. Can't get trapped by party or polarizing politics, but have had a leg snared occasionally. I guess libertarian is where I lean. I just don't want the government or the mob down the street to dictate to me how I and the family should live. That said, I also respect the fact that we need some rules of engagement where my shit doesn't pollute the neighbors well and likewise my well.

    I like our "Bill of Rights" in the States and I support ALL of them.

    Politics and other human power plays are ALL about money. Don't be suckered in by ideology; that's a shield power grabbers hide behind.

  6. #46
    Mr. Andry's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    203
    Liked
    1371
    Reputation
    485658
    The right wants the masses enslaved to capital, corporate serfdom. The left wants the masses enslaved to the state, just plain serfdom. Both require the disposable male to prop up their ideologies and do the real work. Neither offer much freedom to any but their respective elites, a relative few. It's a divide and conquer technique that works brilliantly. Until the inevitable revolution. Too many fat-cats making bank without producing, too many people becoming dependent upon the state, too many working for too little, and in my opinion, without a paradigm shift away from the current exploitation/consumption/crony capitalist system we are living in, doomed to fail, repeatedly. We are on the brink of catastrophic economic collapse with leaders working frantically to keep it up so it won't fail on their watch, pushing the problems off to the future. A definite vacuum of leadership.

    I am no economist but here in Canada, I have to wonder who thinks that selling resources to buy finished goods can ever work out. Since using resources to produce things is the very essence of the consumer system, and in the process of using the resources value is added so finished products must be higher value than the resources for the companies to make a profit. In the long run, we cannot sell enough resources to afford the value added products. It's like selling lemons for 5 cents and buying lemonade from one lemon for a dollar. Worse, if not everyone can exploit the resources, than only a few can buy the lemonade.

    As long as people are mired in the right/left false dichotomy, we cannot move forward.

  7. #47
    ThomasCovenant's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    744
    Liked
    2887
    Reputation
    1005242
    I am no economist but here in Canada, I have to wonder who thinks that selling resources to buy finished goods can ever work out.
    It won't, if that's all you do and all you ever do. I assume Canada has other tricks up her sleeve.

    As long as people are mired in the right/left false dichotomy, we cannot move forward.
    I often hear this claim but I've never really understood it. Are you able to elaborate?

    The greatest debate in society since the First World War has probably been the extent to which government gets involved in social and economic affairs.

    To me, the right/left labels make reasonable sense as if you ask left-wingers and right-wingers to describe their own beliefs, they will generally say that the government is too expansive and restrictive and should be cut back (right) or that the government is not doing enough to moderate the economic cycle/unemployment (left).

    Right-wingers generally believe that restricting capitalism or trying to moderate its effects (using the tools we have like interest rates and fiscal policy) end up being counter-productive as booms are stoked and recessions made deeper with more debt. They are more sympathetic to the Austrian and Classical schools as represented by Von Mises and Hayek (later Friedman). They believe that interference prevents the correct prices being set so we end up with over or under-production.

    Left-wingers believe like Maynard Keynes, that it is not about prices, but about demand. That is to say that the economic cycle is not natural or inevitable but a kind of capitalist malfunction and that the government should borrow and spend to smooth demand.

    As far as I can tell this seems to be a genuine difference of opinion.

  8. #48
    Mr. Andry's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    203
    Liked
    1371
    Reputation
    485658
    It won't, if that's all you do and all you ever do. I assume Canada has other tricks up her sleeve.
    I would not make that assumption. We are the one-stop-shop for just about any resources yet very little is actually produced here. The Governments know we have resources for decades, so their short attention spans (4 year election cycles) does not lend itself to conservation or long-term planning. There are lots of obstacles to starting a small business as well as the fact that for material goods, we individuals must compete with the Walmarts/Targets/Home Depots/Costcos. Can't do it. Before even dealing with the high taxes and miles of red tape.

    When I was a kid, there used to be hardware stores and other independent small businesses. Now, its big boxes everywhere. This may be more efficient for the bottom line but for the social fabric? It has meant less jobs with lower pay and fewer opportunities for the little guy.

    That leaves only service industries. Not everyone is going up north to drill for oil.

    The left/right thing is what people constantly spar about without solving the problems. What is the point of it all now? Right wingers claim they want smaller government but are all about building the police state via the war on drugs or terror. Left wingers claim to be for fairness yet shut down any debate that threatens their dogmas. There are elements of progress on both sides but clinging to either one precludes considering the other point of view. Politically, they are all fixated upon getting elected, getting their own snouts in the trough while making room for their friends. Either side. The people fund it all.

    Consider the minimum wage thing. I hear right wingers claim minimum wage reduces the number of jobs. Well supposing we dispense with it and let the market decide, what happens when you have our current conditions? High demand for employment, low supply of jobs, this would push wages down faster than the offshoring that has occurred which is forcing 1st world workers to compete with 3rd world workers. The demands for housing or power will not abate with that removal of minimum wage. So what do you call a 'job' that takes all your time but does not provide enough to survive(let alone save to go to school or learn a trade)? What if those are the only jobs? A permanent underclass with no upward mobility ripe for exploitation. Peasant, be grateful you can make a dollar today... I have heard this attitude espoused all my life. And the only way I can make that dollar is to make the baron 100.

    The solution? I wish I knew but I believe the libertarian model is impossible and would hand the world to the very sociopaths that are exploiting it now via crony capitalism, because they have most of the wealth already. Even if it was a viable model, how would we get there from here? The coming collapse will more likely usher in global fascism rather than any libertarian system.

    How to preserve the incentive to work (and progress) without making it so onerous that it becomes slavery? Well perhaps people shouldn't automatically assume that we should be working our whole lives away, especially with automation replacing so many jobs. A shift in thinking towards a more holistic and sustainable lifestyle and away from the constant rapine of the planet just to overproduce so we can maintain constant growth. Lose ideas like planned obsolesence and build things to last.

    I'd like to believe there could be a balance between socialism and capitalism so that neither one becomes dominant. The goal being the reduction of human suffering, not making swimming pools full of cash for oligarchs to swim in.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  9. #49
    Stonecold's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    125
    Liked
    509
    Reputation
    60397
    The right/left paradigm is an Hegelian dialectic. Are there different brands of freedom? Can we really choose between left-wing freedom and right-wing freedom? Of course not. The real choice is between freedom and fascism. Either the individual is nothing and the state is everything, or the individual is everything and the state is nothing.

    This video explains it quite well.


  10. #50
    Firecross's Avatar
    Senior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    349
    Liked
    2999
    Reputation
    965391

  11. #51
    NonNegotiable's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    869
    Liked
    5024
    Reputation
    1824336
    Q: What do the Left Wing & the Right Wing have in common?
    A: They're both attached to the same chicken.

  12. #52
    IG72's Avatar
    Senior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    346
    Liked
    1998
    Reputation
    1172471
    Quote Originally Posted by NonNegotiable View Post
    Q: What do the Left Wing & the Right Wing have in common?
    A: They're both attached to the same chicken.
    ... and possibly from the back of the chicken...

    It's the new viral video meme going around: "Two Politicians, One Chicken".

  13. #53
    ThomasCovenant's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    744
    Liked
    2887
    Reputation
    1005242
    Consider the minimum wage thing. I hear right wingers claim minimum wage reduces the number of jobs. Well supposing we dispense with it and let the market decide, what happens when you have our current conditions? High demand for employment, low supply of jobs, this would push wages down faster than the offshoring that has occurred which is forcing 1st world workers to compete with 3rd world workers.
    If you reduce the minimum wage then the supply of jobs would increase. This is because it would be more profitable for companies to hire cheaper labour rather than find other ways to maintain or increase productivity like via automation or offshoring for example.

    I am not saying that lower wages for people is desirable, I am merely pointing out that you cannot support higher wages and lower employment at the same time, the forces oppose one-another.

    So what do you call a 'job' that takes all your time but does not provide enough to survive(let alone save to go to school or learn a trade)? What if those are the only jobs? A permanent underclass with no upward mobility ripe for exploitation
    I would call it a job that no-one applies for. For if they did, they would simply starve to death. The price for this job would be so low that there would be no demand for it. Unable to fill the vacancy, the company would be forced to raise the price to "sell" the job.

    Of course, in reality, taxpayer subsidies paid to employers and employees keep these jobs on life support.

    I wish I knew but I believe the libertarian model is impossible and would hand the world to the very sociopaths that are exploiting it now via crony capitalism, because they have most of the wealth already. Even if it was a viable model, how would we get there from here? The coming collapse will more likely usher in global fascism rather than any libertarian system.
    It looks impossible if you believe that government regulation is holding back the excesses of capitalism, but I think your oligarchs want us to believe that. I believe that government regulation is what enables cartels, stifles competition, allows the proliferation of jobs that don't pay a living wage and allows the propagation of inflation which is the ultimate tax on the poor. We live in the most regulated society in our history with the greatest proportion of production ever, controlled by the state.

    I cede to your point re the practicalities. It seems that greater government control until the point of collapse is the defining feature of all representative societies. Libertarianism is surely going to be confined to theoretical discussion.

    How to preserve the incentive to work (and progress) without making it so onerous that it becomes slavery? Well perhaps people shouldn't automatically assume that we should be working our whole lives away, especially with automation replacing so many jobs. A shift in thinking towards a more holistic and sustainable lifestyle and away from the constant rapine of the planet just to overproduce so we can maintain constant growth. Lose ideas like planned obsolesence and build things to last.
    I agree with this! Structural unemployment looks here to stay, so maybe a move to shorter working spans or more part-time work. However, the gains we would have to make in productivity would have to be massive, and if anything, we are becoming less productive.

  14. #54
    NonNegotiable's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    869
    Liked
    5024
    Reputation
    1824336
    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasCovenant View Post

    I would call it a job that no-one applies for. For if they did, they would simply starve to death. The price for this job would be so low that there would be no demand for it. Unable to fill the vacancy, the company would be forced to raise the price to "sell" the job.

    Of course, in reality, taxpayer subsidies paid to employers and employees keep these jobs on life support.



    It looks impossible if you believe that government regulation is holding back the excesses of capitalism, but I think your oligarchs want us to believe that. I believe that government regulation is what enables cartels, stifles competition, allows the proliferation of jobs that don't pay a living wage and allows the propagation of inflation which is the ultimate tax on the poor. We live in the most regulated society in our history with the greatest proportion of production ever, controlled by the state.
    Not to mention the de facto slavery of having millions of undocumented/"migrant" workers willing to work for pennies, artificially keeping wages low, ("Nobody wants this job because the wage is too low? Well, we could offer more money, or we could pay Juan even less under the table!"). A can't see a truly free market ever existing alongside a slave economy.


    Oh, wait, but that makes me racist, doesn't it?
    Last edited by NonNegotiable; 31-01-14 at 08:09 PM. Reason: Thought of a joke to end on.

  15. #55
    Mr. Andry's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    203
    Liked
    1371
    Reputation
    485658
    If you reduce the minimum wage then the supply of jobs would increase. This is because it would be more profitable for companies to
    hire cheaper labour rather than find other ways to maintain or increase productivity like via automation or offshoring for example.
    That may be yet there can only be a finite amount of consumption. The jobs won't exist if there is nobody to purchase the goods/services because they can't afford to.

    "It is not the employer who pays the wages. Employers only handle the money. It is the customer who pays the wages.
    Henry Ford "
    (he didn't react so well to unionization however!)

    I am not saying that lower wages for people is desirable, I am merely pointing out that you cannot support higher wages and lower
    employment at the same time, the forces oppose one-another
    I've never really studied economics and that may be but at some point, people are dis-incentivised to work legitimately and turn to crime. People will try to survive by whatever means. If wages are zero, ie real slavery, would employment then be 100%? I get what you are saying though.

    I would call it a job that no-one applies for. For if they did, they would simply starve to death. The price for this job would be so low that there would be no demand for it. Unable to fill the vacancy, the company would be forced to raise the price to "sell" the job.
    Of course, in reality, taxpayer subsidies paid to employers and employees keep these jobs on life support.
    That is the case with Walmart in the USA (all I really know about, but I bet there are others), people working there make so little they qualify for government assistance. That is a direct subsidy to rich people. They take that and want tax breaks too. It's a little different here in Canada, there are no foodstamps. Welfare can only be obtained by people who are disabled or not working for more than a few hundred dollars a month (or less). If people have no choice, they take what they can get.

    It looks impossible if you believe that government regulation is holding back the excesses of capitalism, but I think your oligarchs want us to believe that.
    You may be right, but in the past, men were even more disposable to capitalists. A friend of mine was telling me about one of his older relatives (>90) and he worked on a local bridge that is still standing, circa 1936. Men were worked till they dropped and simply replaced because there were so many with nothing and no other choice. Now we have rules to limit and reduce that. This sent the capitalists running to asia, what is the average chinese workers life like? Capital doesn't care about lives, just making more of itself. The sociopaths that have the bulk of the wealth probably see everyone below them as bugs, not even human thus justifying keeping the game going. We are to be grateful for even having that much.

    I believe that government regulation is what enables cartels, stifles competition, allows the proliferation of jobs that don't pay a living wage and allows the propagation of inflation which is the ultimate tax on the poor.
    Yet it is the oligarchs that purchase these regulations to shut out the competition from smaller businesses. I agree about the government regulations, you may be right about the jobs but increased competition drives prices down, a living wage may not be possible for everyone, or even more than now. Also, some companies, who have enough capital can operate at a loss until all the competition is gone.

    The economic system needs to be designed to serve the people, not the other way around. We are not commodities to be traded by people who simply have more by virtue of winning the genetic lottery. I am all for reducing government but usually that is a codeword for screwing the most vulnerable into accepting less and then giving that to people with too much already.

    The hardest part will be for the generation that has to change, those that come after will not have known any different. So our politicians keep pushing the pain off into the nebulous future rather than solve problems because they know the solutions will be wildly unpopular. Easier to deceive, divide, and conquer. Pays much better.

    However, the gains we would have to make in productivity would have to be massive, and if anything, we are becoming less productive.
    Name:  chart-wages-vs-productivity-1024x5811.jpg
Views: 24
Size:  11.1 KB

    Not sure where to reference this graph or who plotted it but I grabbed it from
    December | 2012 | Class Warfare Blog

    I'm pretty sure its the governments numbers from the US.

    Note where the graph first diverges, right around when Nixon went off the gold standard. And see how it really separates with the introduction of free trade. Society has been conned by the 'trickle down' theory. Its a big 'hoover up' in reality.

  16. #56
    Mr. Andry's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    203
    Liked
    1371
    Reputation
    485658
    Quote Originally Posted by NonNegotiable View Post
    Not to mention the de facto slavery of having millions of undocumented/"migrant" workers willing to work for pennies, artificially keeping wages low, ("Nobody wants this job because the wage is too low? Well, we could offer more money, or we could pay Juan even less under the table!"). A can't see a truly free market ever existing alongside a slave economy.


    Oh, wait, but that makes me racist, doesn't it?
    The current Canadian Conservative government is shipping in workers from the third world to rape our resources for less citing the reason being that not enough Canadians have the skill. Rather than invest in training, they ship in cheaper, more exploitable people. If the countries they ship them in from do not have the resources, how do they have the skills?...

  17. #57
    ThomasCovenant's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    744
    Liked
    2887
    Reputation
    1005242
    You've made some good comments there Mr.Andry. To do them justice I'm going to have a proper think and then come back to you on a few of them.

  18. #58
    NonNegotiable's Avatar
    Experienced Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    869
    Liked
    5024
    Reputation
    1824336
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  19. #59
    hhb3's Avatar
    MGTOW Master

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,358
    Liked
    7494
    Reputation
    316366
    There is not a dime's worth of difference between the two political parties in the United States.

    Politicians just suck until everyone is broke.

  20. #60
    Rouleur's Avatar
    Junior Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    173
    Liked
    854
    Reputation
    701580
    Quote Originally Posted by hhb3 View Post
    There is not a dime's worth of difference between the two political parties in the United States.

    Politicians just suck until everyone is broke.
    I've heard this stated a few times in this thread, but which party resisted the attempts last spring to seriously further infringe on our gun rights, and which party was pushing legislation for more gun restriction?

    You can't say there isn't any difference between them. They have similarities in some areas.

    Read the Republican party's platform, then read the Democrat's. Are they the same?

Similar Threads

  1. Left for Dead 2
    By Nacho Vidal in forum Games, Gizmos and Gadgets Zone
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-01-14, 04:20 PM
  2. Hypocrisy of the Left
    By Strat in forum Politics and Economics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 18-12-13, 12:45 AM
  3. The Right To Be Left Alone
    By zed in forum MGTOW General Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 16-08-13, 11:11 PM
  4. The ex that never left
    By MrLahey in forum Anecdotals
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-09-11, 08:11 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •