Quote:
Originally Posted by cathexis
So, simply put, the current political clime is fulfilling the prophesy prevalent in the 1980s, a time of recession and great fear as we had hostages held in Iran. Analysis of the minor political partys' results of 1980 is quite intriguing. Thus was my grad thesis in Marxist Studies/Political Philosophy.
On the Far Left were CP-USA, various Trotskyist parties, moving toward the top of a large circle was the Green Party moving to Dems with Jimmy Carter and across to Reps with Ronald Reagan. As the circle moves right and down one finds Lyndon LaRouche then David Duke. As the circle nears the very bottom, the Libertarian Party meets the right wing Anarchists-followed by the left Anarchists. This is where the circle meets.
The Right Wing was overwhelmingly extremist with KKK and conspiracy theorists like Lyndon LaRouche followed by the American Nazi Party with Right wing Anarchists backed up to the Left Anarchists with political positions almost imperceptibly different. Then up the curve were the Trotskyists and Stalinist Communist Parties.
The parties formed a political circle that comes together rather than the traditional line view of the political spectrum.
Coming election, it will be interesting and informative to look at the percentages these small "Alt-Right" and Libertarian. We could get a glimpse of what might be in store.
|
You're talking about Horseshoe Theory and there are very few two-word phrases that will get leftists online as riled up as that one.
I just feel like capitalism is totally fine when it comes to discretionary consumption items, but it never should have been applied to staple items, justice, health, education, warfighting, or politics.
And it seems willfully obtuse to insist capitalism has to be all or nothing. To insist that if we take profit out of life-or-death matters then the next thing you know we'll all have matching government haircuts and uniform scrubs, is disingenuous to the extreme, but we fall all over ourselves trying to disprove it..
The "mistake" of the mainstream dems (mistake in quotes because it is applied with the benefit of the doubt) was in believing that conservatives actually wanted the outcomes they claimed to want. Dems believed conservatives would work with them if they could get to a result that lay somewhere within the scope of what they could find tolerable.
This was never going to be the case, as conservatives don't actually want any of the things they talk about. They just want wealth and power. So dems compromised themselves making a good faith argument to a bad faith premise.
As i said, "mistake" gives the benefit of the doubt. Wealthy people are wealthy people first and foremost. To me it seems like the past 30 years have been "capitalism with patriarchy and white supremacy" vs "capitalism with ladies."
"Capitalism with ladies" is the lesser of two evils, by far (freedom from forced birth is still a pretty good deal), but neither party wants equality.