4 ms·

Going onto /r/politics for left wing political commentary is like going on /r/The_Donald for right wing political commentary. Why dive into one sphere of the in

Going onto /r/politics for left wing political commentary is like going on /r/The_Donald for right wing political commentary. Why dive into one sphere of the internet and use that to sum up a majority ideology? If I were to do that for the right-wing, and apply your formatting; "Every story on the landing page is Trump-related. I looked at one story, the comments are all juvenile, mindless Trump-worshiping. Utter waste of time reading it. That is 'right-wing politics'?! I was very disappointed." - to be so single-minded about the political spectrum is childish. You want to understand left-wing politics? Don't go on Reddit, and pick up a book. "The Limits of Neoliberalism", "The Coming Insurrection", "Debt: the First 5,000 Years", "Politics in a Time of Crisis", or "On Intersectionality: Essential Writings" are great reading, or something by Chomski perhaps. If I was more aligned with the right-wing I'd like people to read "The Free Economy and the Strong State" or "Leviathan", or "The Conservatives Mind". Also all great reading. Not for them to go on Voat or read YouTube comments, and think that the right-wing just wants Trump on a throne because he has some sort of divine right.

yesenadam 8y ago
>to be so single-minded about the political spectrum is childish Uh, what? You've utterly misunderstood; knowing nothing about me hasn't stopped you insulting me.. I consider myself left-wing, I just had never seen anything remotely like that on reddit, still haven't - not that I've seen much of reddit. Sorry I didn't make that clear enough. Not very interested in your recommendations after that, thanks; who would be?
belorn 8y ago
The problem I have with that view is that the information that get reported from current left-wing political parties and politicians do not match books like those. It could be that: 1) The journalist reporting is wrong. 2) the current left-wing political parties are not left-wing. 3) the books are not about current left-wing politics, which has changed compared to when those books were written. For example, Debt: the First 5,000 Years has quite a lot to say about bridge gifts and gender roles which do not blame white men or use some "Patriarchy" theory where women are slaves to men. It does not make women to victim and men to conquers, but rather looking at the issue from a tribal/family resource perspective from an age when those practices were more common. That would be right-wing political view for a lot of people.

yesenadam 8y ago

>to be so single-minded about the political spectrum is childish Uh, what? You've utterly misunderstood; knowing nothing about me hasn't stopped you insulting me.. I consider myself left-wing, I just had never seen anything remotely like that on reddit, still haven't - not that I've seen much of reddit. Sorry I didn't make that clear enough. Not very interested in your recommendations after that, thanks; who would be?

belorn 8y ago

The problem I have with that view is that the information that get reported from current left-wing political parties and politicians do not match books like those. It could be that: 1) The journalist reporting is wrong. 2) the current left-wing political parties are not left-wing. 3) the books are not about current left-wing politics, which has changed compared to when those books were written. For example, Debt: the First 5,000 Years has quite a lot to say about bridge gifts and gender roles which do not blame white men or use some "Patriarchy" theory where women are slaves to men. It does not make women to victim and men to conquers, but rather looking at the issue from a tribal/family resource perspective from an age when those practices were more common. That would be right-wing political view for a lot of people.