Anonymous #1 1d

Literally look at the original post he is LITERALLY SPELLING OUT “IF YOU GO FAR LEFT ENOUTH YOU GO RIGHT” How is that not like clearly horseshoe

-14

Anonymous OP 1d

What do you think the far left actually is

48

Anonymous OP 1d

yeah that’s what the post said 💀💀 pro gun isn’t inherently right wing EVERYONE BOO THIS GUY

35

Anonymous #1 1d

Giving people guns Taking away peoples private property The elite, the state ruling as a dictator Etc etc . I’m not pro gun myself, I get it kinda but genuinely I will never own a gun, I don’t think you need one. I also hate cars etc

-7

Anonymous OP 1d

You think the far left is allowing people to have guns…

28

Anonymous #1 1d

Did you not see the original post “If you go left enough you get your guns back”

-6

Anonymous #1 1d

I quite like how in Europe they don’t have as many guns for example

-5

Anonymous OP 1d

And their schewls don’t get shot

-5

Anonymous OP 1d

“Giving people guns” was your example of being far left. So letting people have guns is being far left, yes or no?

12

Anonymous OP 1d

“I also hate cars” so you’re far left?💀

21

Anonymous #4 1d

I just like public transit and biking places, personally. Doesn’t mean I’m far left like communism, just left, I care for the environment etc Your personal “carbon footprint” pales in comparison to the average corporation

0

Anonymous OP 1d

You sound like Josef Stalin dawg, might be time for some introspection.

10

Anonymous OP 1d

Yes or no cmon hurry up

1

Anonymous #4 1d

I don’t think we should ban cars??? just heavily discourage them By providing viable alternatives, eliminating minimum parking requirements near transit, zoning for mixed use development, congestion pricing where feasible, low-emission zones, micro-mobility options like bike share, narrower lanes/continuous sidewalks/protected lanes to make pedestrian and bike access safer, car-sharing networks

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Me hating cars doesn’t mean I think we should ban them I just don’t like getting into the metal cage I like riding my sports utility vehicle or taking a multi-million dollar train

1

Anonymous #1 1d

No? Gun regulation was my example of the horseshoe theory So far left and far right in a sense

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Then your answer should be yes lmao. You said allowing people to have guns is far left

1

Anonymous #1 1d

Ok

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Why is allowing people to have guns radical?

6

Anonymous #1 1d

Did you not see all the posts about gun laws earlier mapped against political left and right

-3

Anonymous OP 1d

That’s not an answer

7

Anonymous #1 1d

#1 “if you go left enough you get your guns back” is my evidence for the horseshoe theory stuff you’re talking about

-4

Anonymous OP 1d

You’re not answering.

10

Anonymous OP 1d

Carl Marx was actually right wing because he advocated for gun ownership?

12

Anonymous #10 19h

The current American ones do, for the most part. Liberals don’t, but leftists do, especially against a tyrannical government

-3

Anonymous landtrust 19h

wtf are you talking about, free speech and communism aren’t antithetical. Have you never heard of Rosa Luxembourg?

14

Anonymous #10 19h

Free speech sits in enlightenment philosophy. Communism sits in Marxist philosophy and “free speech” is regulated

-4

Anonymous landtrust 19h

When did Marx say speech needs to be regulated? Give me a direct quote

11

Anonymous #14 18h

I think anyone celebrating her is just stupid, hasn’t paid attention, and forms their thoughts based on vibes and what their social media feed tells them. She’s still an antisemite and she is absolutely not their ally. I appreciate her votes to release the Epstein files and against aid to Israel, but that’s it. Same with Massie (although he’s not in the same league as her at all)

4

Anonymous #14 18h

People on opposite sides of the political spectrum can agree on individual issues. That doesn’t mean those two ends are the same, it just means that politics can’t be accurately summed up using a single sliding scale.

10

Anonymous #13 18h

American fascists literally do not support gun rights what are you tripping on dawg

7

Anonymous #10 18h

Here

-3

Anonymous landtrust 17h

I don’t think that’s a commentary on limiting speech…

10

Anonymous moderatemonkey 10h

It is

-3

Anonymous landtrust 10h

Where exactly does Marx reference speech?

9

Anonymous landtrust 10h

Are you illiterate?

14

Anonymous moderatemonkey 9h

“Our intended abolition of bourgeois property… the standard of your bourgeois notions of freedom” takes on not just free speech, but all forms of individual liberty. He just calls it “bourgeois notions of freedom” instead of “free speech” because calling it free speech validates it

-3

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 9h

Nope are you?

-3

Anonymous landtrust 9h

Isn’t this you?

6

Anonymous #15 9h

“89 weeks ago”

-2

Anonymous landtrust 9h

Hey remember that time when you resurrected an 88 week old post about Hitler?

10

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 9h

No?

-2

Anonymous landtrust 8h

Yeah it was the same day multiple people accused you of using fascist dog whistles It was crazy.

7

Anonymous landtrust 8h

In no way is he saying we need to regulate speech. He’s saying the capitalist idea of freedom is flawed and harmful to the working class.

6

Anonymous landtrust 8h

He’s saying that the bourgeois notion of freedom is rooted in property rights and ownership. He’s not saying anything about speech

9

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 8h

Intentionally vague. Bad faith

-1

Anonymous #10 8h

Free speech is one part of the bourgeois rights he’s referring to. Also look at what communist countries do in practice, no free speech.

-1

Anonymous landtrust 8h

No he’s not, he’s clearly referring to property rights. And it’s true that most communist countries restricted free speech, but that doesn’t make it inherent to communism. The USSR adopted a Leninist system, which included limitations on speech. Since they were the first communist country, other countries based their systems after that. Many communists, especially early on, supported free speech. Most notably, as I mentioned earlier, Rosa Luxembourg.

7

Anonymous #10 8h

He’s saying the ideas of “free speech” come from property rights. And he also said he believes in the abolition of property rights. Therefore…

-2

Anonymous #10 8h

Limitations on speech does not equal free speech

-2

Anonymous landtrust 8h

Dude you’re objectively wrong just stfu😭 we all know you’re a MAGA or worse anyway atp

4

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 8h

I was sympathetic towards Trump before he was elected because he promised to end the war in Ukraine and Gaza. But now I know he’s lying, and he done worse. I’m a moderate with inspirations from both sides

-2

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 8h

Also, it’s an objective fact that “free speech” is a bourgeois notion of freedom. You know Marxism isn’t just another enlightenment ideology, right?

-2

Anonymous landtrust 1h

Saying that our idea of finding freedom in law is flawed is not the same as saying speech should be limited. He never once even references speech. Do you think he means every law written is always only to the benefit of the bourgeoise? Do you think Marx is pro murder of pregnant women? Instead of finding the exact quote (like what was asked in the first place) you just found a quote you vaguely obfuscate the meaning of. Maybe try finding an exact quote again, Marx likes to be specific so

4

Anonymous landtrust 1h

Im sure if he’s anti-speech there’s a quote about it.

2

Anonymous moderatemonkey 56m

Again, I already explained to you why explicitly saying “free speech” validates it as a philosophy. He instead refers to it as “bourgeois notions of freedom”

0

Anonymous landtrust 51m

He refers to laws in capitalist society as “bourgeois notions of freedom” and I never said “free speech” is explicitly just said speech. Do you think Marx is an anarchist?

0

Anonymous moderatemonkey 49m

Laws such as.. free speech. Marx is not an anarchist

1

Anonymous landtrust 40m

Right but he specifies “in capitalist societies”, that is the quality that is being criticized, not the actual speech itself. If he’s not an anarchist then obviously he supports laws. Would there be overlap between Marx’s ideal society and a capitalist society? Like murder for example?

1

Anonymous moderatemonkey 34m

Marxism doesn’t think in utopian “ideal society”. Him and his bud actually criticized this idea of aiming for a perfect society and instead pushed for scientific socialism, which would base its laws off of what would develop society materially.

1

Anonymous landtrust 18m

I never said “utopian” I said, “Marx’s ideal society”. He obviously has a vision for how society should operate. My point is that if laws in a Communist/ Socialist/ Marxist/ etc society exist that would necessarily overlap with a capitalist society, maybe the criticism isn’t on the premise of the laws but rather the effectuation the laws in society. He’s not saying laws are bad…

1

Anonymous moderatemonkey 17m

Effectuation of the laws*

1

Anonymous moderatemonkey 15m

Marx is not an idealist. There is no such thing

1

Anonymous moderatemonkey 14m

Certain speech is tolerated in Marxism. Speech which is viewed by the state as promoting social development. In practice this means speech which criticizes the state for the most part isn’t allowed. For example, there’s very few examples of Stalin’s regime tolerating criticism

1

Anonymous landtrust 10m

Oh my god, it’s like talking to a wall. Well rewind… Does Marx think laws should exist?

1

Anonymous landtrust 9m

And Stalin didn’t have a classless society?

1

Anonymous moderatemonkey 9m

Marx doesn’t think laws should exist. Laws DO exist and Marx simply observed them. Unless you’re referring to social laws, then yeah Marx supports laws that develop society according to the law of development

1

Anonymous moderatemonkey 8m

Who said anything about classless? Stalin had a communist country

1