What is a lefty?

From my own perspective I use the term "leftist" to differentiate between classical liberals from the extreme left. Unfortunately the dems seem to have left liberalism in the dust and opted to go full blown leftist.

bull... most democrats are centrist & certainly are corporate. that is the antithesis of liberalism. & that's why a lot of the working class have felt like they were abandoned by their party. the 'liberal' left hasn't existed in any big numbers since the days of carter. i practically bust a gut everytime obama or hillary are called 'liberals'.
I disagree. While the Hillarys of the world are happy to play the corporatist game to accumulate money, their agenda is flaming left. Govt control, wealth redistribution, identity politics, "social" justice, class warfare, straight up leftist ideology.
 
From my own perspective I use the term "leftist" to differentiate between classical liberals from the extreme left. Unfortunately the dems seem to have left liberalism in the dust and opted to go full blown leftist.

bull... most democrats are centrist & certainly are corporate. that is the antithesis of liberalism. & that's why a lot of the working class have felt like they were abandoned by their party. the 'liberal' left hasn't existed in any big numbers since the days of carter. i practically bust a gut everytime obama or hillary are called 'liberals'.
I disagree. While the Hillarys of the world are happy to play the corporatist game to accumulate money, their agenda is flaming left. Govt control, wealth redistribution, identity politics, "social" justice, class warfare, straight up leftist ideology.

you do realize that hillary was once a republican don't you? & she's quite a war hawk as well.
 
From my own perspective I use the term "leftist" to differentiate between classical liberals from the extreme left. Unfortunately the dems seem to have left liberalism in the dust and opted to go full blown leftist.

bull... most democrats are centrist & certainly are corporate. that is the antithesis of liberalism. & that's why a lot of the working class have felt like they were abandoned by their party. the 'liberal' left hasn't existed in any big numbers since the days of carter. i practically bust a gut everytime obama or hillary are called 'liberals'.
I disagree. While the Hillarys of the world are happy to play the corporatist game to accumulate money, their agenda is flaming left. Govt control, wealth redistribution, identity politics, "social" justice, class warfare, straight up leftist ideology.

you do realize that hillary was once a republican don't you? & she's quite a war hawk as well.
Hillary is a politician she'll go whichever way the wind is blowing. That doesn't change the fact that in general the dems have moved to the far left. Many of the centrist liberals that I know will say the same and is why many of them now vote rep. Most didn't vote for Trump, they also didn't vote for Hillary.

I also don't think being a war hawk is a "right" thing. There have been plenty of war hawks on the left both in the US and internationally.
 
^ True this. My mother is a... I guess classical liberal is the new word salad for it. She's turned her back upon the DNC for their foolishness. Even while chastising Father and I for looking on the world in a negative light, she has no choice but to admit that her party has betrayed her, and "classical" American ideals like freedom and independence. Rather astounding to me as she's always been the one illogically crying about this or that, but she's seen the truth - that all people are inherently a touch "bad" and no one can be flippantly trusted. I suppose it's been an ongoing process for her, the sunset darkening of her rose colored glasses ideological utopia over the years.

When she went Republican, I was a bit... disappointed perhaps, that she was slipping into the typical rhetoric one sees from partisans - myself being an independent - but I think she feels she has no other choice as there is no party out there for her and she feels inclined to donate to some theme or another as her 'contribution' to American politics. It is a bit sad, but I understand her, and many others like her, who don't have the time, energy, nor desire to delve into the deeper requirements of informed non-affiliation. Belonging to a party is the... shall we say politically lazy persons natural state; obliquely involved, but not hassled with the details. In the end though, given what I've seen, I suppose it's the best that could come of the situation the DNC has put their members, or perhaps I should say former members, in.

I take comfort, at least, that she doesn't turn her cheek upon the whole disgusting affair of politics and decline to vote at all, like so many in America do (as I recall the stats, some 58% of American's don't even bother voting for president yea? How astounding is that figure? It baffles my mind, truly.)


Anyway, yes, I think members of both parties are precluded to war for various reasons - neither is innocent of war hawking.
 
My acquaintances, whom I would call "classical" liberals, haven't gone so far as to become reps, they're just no longer card carrying dems. It seems they are more inclined to vote reps at the state and local level. The suburb I live in has traditionally had fairly heated contests in local elections. In the last 5 years it has been an absolute slaughter for the dems. Even on the school board, where dems held sway for a long time, they have been routed. Some of those pushed out had been around for 25-30 years. I believe of 9 members 1 identifies as dem and she is up for re-election next year and, I believe, will be crushed.

What I find interesting are the reasons many former dems give for their change of heart. The most common is that the dems have changed, they just go farther to the left by the day. I'm friends with a gentleman that served on the city council for about 15 years, he was well thought of and well respected. In this last election he was absolutely annihilated. He garnered 22% in a two man race. I saw him about a month ago and we got to talking, he couldn't understand what happened. I pointed out issue after issue where 5 years earlier he was vehemently opposed to his current stance. I pointed out to him that I've known him for 25 years and many of the stances he took politically I know he doesn't believe in. As far as I'm concerned he sold out his own beliefs in order to maintain his "progressive" credentials. Locally it's much harder to get away with such things.

As far as people not voting, I can't say I blame them. At the national level it truly has become a joke.
 
From my own perspective I use the term "leftist" to differentiate between classical liberals from the extreme left. Unfortunately the dems seem to have left liberalism in the dust and opted to go full blown leftist.

bull... most democrats are centrist & certainly are corporate. that is the antithesis of liberalism. & that's why a lot of the working class have felt like they were abandoned by their party. the 'liberal' left hasn't existed in any big numbers since the days of carter. i practically bust a gut everytime obama or hillary are called 'liberals'.
I disagree. While the Hillarys of the world are happy to play the corporatist game to accumulate money, their agenda is flaming left. Govt control, wealth redistribution, identity politics, "social" justice, class warfare, straight up leftist ideology.
If they are accumulating corporate money you can bet they are representing corporate interests otherwise the money dries up.

Of course Hillary speaks in the traditional language of liberalism, she needs votes. But as we know from her emails that she assures her pay masters in private conversations that they can be confident that her public discourse is fraudulent.
 
Last edited:
From my own perspective I use the term "leftist" to differentiate between classical liberals from the extreme left. Unfortunately the dems seem to have left liberalism in the dust and opted to go full blown leftist.

bull... most democrats are centrist & certainly are corporate. that is the antithesis of liberalism. & that's why a lot of the working class have felt like they were abandoned by their party. the 'liberal' left hasn't existed in any big numbers since the days of carter. i practically bust a gut everytime obama or hillary are called 'liberals'.
I disagree. While the Hillarys of the world are happy to play the corporatist game to accumulate money, their agenda is flaming left. Govt control, wealth redistribution, identity politics, "social" justice, class warfare, straight up leftist ideology.
If they are accumulating corporate money you can bet they are representing corporate interests otherwise the money dries up. Of course Hillary speaks in the traditional language of liberalism, she needs votes. But as we know from her emails that she assures her pay masters in private conversations that they can be confident that her public discourse is fraudulent.

I agree, however people seem to automatically assume that corporate money puts you on the "right". I don't buy that. The leftist ideals are about centralizing authority by any means necessary. If getting into bed with big money accomplishes that they are happy to take part. In many ways centralizing authority works to the benefit of big corporate interests as well, A match made in hell,
 
From my own perspective I use the term "leftist" to differentiate between classical liberals from the extreme left. Unfortunately the dems seem to have left liberalism in the dust and opted to go full blown leftist.

bull... most democrats are centrist & certainly are corporate. that is the antithesis of liberalism. & that's why a lot of the working class have felt like they were abandoned by their party. the 'liberal' left hasn't existed in any big numbers since the days of carter. i practically bust a gut everytime obama or hillary are called 'liberals'.
I disagree. While the Hillarys of the world are happy to play the corporatist game to accumulate money, their agenda is flaming left. Govt control, wealth redistribution, identity politics, "social" justice, class warfare, straight up leftist ideology.
If they are accumulating corporate money you can bet they are representing corporate interests otherwise the money dries up. Of course Hillary speaks in the traditional language of liberalism, she needs votes. But as we know from her emails that she assures her pay masters in private conversations that they can be confident that her public discourse is fraudulent.

I agree, however people seem to automatically assume that corporate money puts you on the "right". I don't buy that. The leftist ideals are about centralizing authority by any means necessary. If getting into bed with big money accomplishes that they are happy to take part. In many ways centralizing authority works to the benefit of big corporate interests as well, A match made in hell,
Yeah, I think that is correct, corporate money does place one on the right. The history of leftism is one that is antagonistic to oppressive power structures. Where conservatives strive to maintain those structures. Corporations represent that oppressive power structure in our society today.
 
Well "antagonistic to oppressive power structures" is sure as hell not where the left is today... They've gone in full tilt to controlling every aspect of a persons life, even down to a persons thoughts. It's disturbing to those of us free thinkers who used to at least have something in common with the left. I find myself in a position of wanting nothing to do with them because of how they've acted and the bullshit they are trying to shove down others throats... It's uncomfortably close to the way I feel about preachers turned politician honestly.
 
Well I'll support that, I've been telling the lefties that their party has been stolen by extremists for quite a while. Ya'll need to start a new party.
 

Forum List

Back
Top