3 ms·

Antisemitism went to the left? Do you really think a neonazi would vote for the democrats? Don't you remember Charlottesville? And free speech went to the righ

Antisemitism went to the left? Do you really think a neonazi would vote for the democrats? Don't you remember Charlottesville? And free speech went to the right? Have you not seen the recent wave of censorship since Trump won the presidency? Just today, a cartoonist from the Washington Post resigned after her cartoon mocking Bezos grovelling at Trump's feet was barred from publication. You are right that the democratic party often switches sides, like they did on immigration. That's because the democratic party is primarily an economically liberal party that holds some progressive values only when it may help win the white house, and doesn't clash with the liberalist line. Socialists on the other hand have consistently been: - Internationalists - For welfare and social programs - For high taxes and large public services - For nationalization of critical infrastructure - For unions, workers rights and corporate regulations The one thing they gained since the 40s is all the social justice stuff, which is old too by now.

foxglacier 2y ago
You don't have to be a neo-nazi to be antisemitic. You can also get carried away with the free Palestine stuff and blame all Jews instead of just Zionists. That's what leftists sometimes do. > Just today, a cartoonist from the Washington Post resigned after her cartoon mocking Bezos grovelling at Trump's feet was barred from publication. Yea maybe that's the start of free speech going back to the left, but for the past few years, it's been clearly a right wing thing. You might be right about idealists who have actual principles maintaining them (as you listed) but that's not normal people. Normal people's opinions blow with the wind of their tribe.
- petsfed 2y ago
  > Yea maybe that's the start of free speech going back to the left, but for the past few years, it's been clearly a right wing thing. I just don't buy this. The main way that the left has "suppressed" free speech has been to enforce the social more that if you say shitty things, you can expect shitty responses. "I can't call black people the n-word without people getting angry with me" has been a criticism since we collectively decided that the n-word was a slur, and it was never a freedom-of-speech issue, just a polite society thing. I do have clear memories of people ranting about free-speech vis a vis "political correctness" during the Clinton years, and it was just as specious. Literally the only difference is that, unlike the 1940s, the subject of slurs actually have some power to socially punish those who use them.
  - foxglacier 2y ago
    Nobody's trying to ban people from getting angry when you offend them and it would obviously be anti-free speech to do so. Leftists want hate speech to be a crime. Rightists protest against those laws in countries that have them.

foxglacier 2y ago

You don't have to be a neo-nazi to be antisemitic. You can also get carried away with the free Palestine stuff and blame all Jews instead of just Zionists. That's what leftists sometimes do. > Just today, a cartoonist from the Washington Post resigned after her cartoon mocking Bezos grovelling at Trump's feet was barred from publication. Yea maybe that's the start of free speech going back to the left, but for the past few years, it's been clearly a right wing thing. You might be right about idealists who have actual principles maintaining them (as you listed) but that's not normal people. Normal people's opinions blow with the wind of their tribe.

petsfed 2y ago
> Yea maybe that's the start of free speech going back to the left, but for the past few years, it's been clearly a right wing thing. I just don't buy this. The main way that the left has "suppressed" free speech has been to enforce the social more that if you say shitty things, you can expect shitty responses. "I can't call black people the n-word without people getting angry with me" has been a criticism since we collectively decided that the n-word was a slur, and it was never a freedom-of-speech issue, just a polite society thing. I do have clear memories of people ranting about free-speech vis a vis "political correctness" during the Clinton years, and it was just as specious. Literally the only difference is that, unlike the 1940s, the subject of slurs actually have some power to socially punish those who use them.
- foxglacier 2y ago
  Nobody's trying to ban people from getting angry when you offend them and it would obviously be anti-free speech to do so. Leftists want hate speech to be a crime. Rightists protest against those laws in countries that have them.