Why the Left Loses elections

Post Reply New Topic

That is because all propaganda that supports the existing system is uplifting, inspirational, and positive. Which is why in any authoritarian society, the majority either eats it up or prefers to believe it because doing so makes them feel better and they feel (and probably are) helpless to do otherwise.

Conservatives are so optimistic and positive. Especially the doomsday preppers JK. But seriously, since when does how uplifting something is determine whether or not it's true?

What I want to know is how you get past the "I am not a robot" captchas.

I don't know how it looks in the US but IMO here the left started to lose elections because they almost openly look down with disdain at working class people they claim to represent.

It shows the sociopathy of the political right when the charge of 'envy' is directed at those who want a better and fairer world .

It's bad to directly compare political divisions in Europe or the British Commonwealth to the US. In Europe, the Left is unapologetically Marxist. In the US, the Left is made up of anyone who thinks the government has a legitimate role in improving the lives of the less fortunate, unless that role is fulfilled by improving the lot of one group at the expense of some other group in less political favor e.g. freeing up jobs by deporting large numbers of immigrants. There is much less ideology, in fact in the US the Right devotes much more mental energy to ideology than does the Left.

There is a lot of difference, also because the middle status quo is different here and there.
I don't even mention my own country where the dominating parties are usually neither coherently left nor right since the transformation to current democracy. The currently ruling one is very right-wing in ideology and strongly socialist in economy. Not my favorite but that's who won here.

I'm not sure if Left has little ideology in the US - it's just different. More about racism and other minorities and how they are harmed by the evil privileged ones.

We can take personal responsibility or choose to blame others.

When we take responsibility, we can learn to change ourselves to be better in the future.

When we blame others, we think we don't need to change.

The truth is that we're likely nearly always better learning to *better ourselves*.

I might have a different notion of what ideology is. To me, an ideology is an overarching principle that explains everything, such that political arguments can be settled by finding the correct quote in the writings of whoever is seen as having founded that ideology.

If a member of a disadvantaged group were to ask a Marxist to explain the cause of their predicament, the Marxist would tell them they're a victim of Capitalism and recommend they read Marx to help them understand.

If that person then went to somebody on the Right, they would be told that the Government has robbed them of economic self-determination and recommend they read Ayn Rand in order to understand better.

In the US, I see way more of the latter than the former. It's not ideology to express concern over minorities. In the US, non-immigrant minorities are routinely cited as victims of Leftist policies by the right.

That is often the case here also.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ideology

Prophet-like, know-all-the-answers authorities are common but not necessary to form an ideology.

i think the term "bootlicker" was invented to describe a lot of the people i encountered who lobbied similar messages

i have decreasingly little patience for the little people who seem to spend much time defending the greed and actions of those who are raping the values the country was founded on and could get away with murdering their entire family (and have in fact gotten away with [im]morally equivalent crimes in the past)

it just sounds like:
"oh, what's that? you want a more fair system? well you're just envious....shut up and fall in line, i lost all hope and you should too".

There is no fair, if there were 'fair' there would be no childhood cancer. You make your best version of fair by striving... Or, at least I do. If I had nothing to work for I'd go mad. This means something I have expended actually energy on and earned recognition for in the form of a paycheck. It doesn't qualify as standing on a corner and screaming, or somehow trying to twist someone's arm, in my opinion. Unless you are old, young or disabled. You look older, you are disabled... you should be set. Yet, it's always you who is saying that you are being hard done by. I don't get it.

Here in the real world blame is assigned based on who's fault it is.


Yes we are. Or did you mean only people on the right?

Nature is unfair so let's not try to make things fairer in society? What a defeatist attitude.
Well I guess you don't work in marketing JK.
You use that phrase a lot. Do you think the entire purpose of the left is to give welfair to able-bodied people?

In some of the discussions I have been involved in regarding the left, there seems to be an opinion that enough people are not being labled as disabled. Meaning they feel they are disabled but the determining powers do not agree... I am not a doctor. I can only speak from personal experience, but I fought like hell not to be labled. It perplexes me. I am unfamiliar with people who have ND functioning brains who have insight into their limitations. When I was depressed, I was the last to know. When I was an autist, I was the last to know. I had to be dragged in front of two Phds to be convinced. I believed they were lying to me! I could walk, I could talk, I could think, I could accomplish tasks, etc...

I understand people who have NT brains but physical disabilities being aware they are disabled. Or chronic pain, etc...
I also understand people so profoundly effected by Autism that they cannot speak, make their needs known, communicate. Or, even Autists with physical disabilities understanding that they can't walk. That makes sense. After all, we can observe and compare.

I do believe there are quite a few people irl and on this board who are self-diagnosed and upset because they feel there's something wrong with them, but can't convince the disability office. They tend to get mad at conservatives because they think if a democrat were in office the qualifications for disability payments would be more lax and I'm standing between them and the payout. I look at these people and think they must be nuts! Why would anyone WANT to be diagnosed with anything? I know people like that. My husband's first wife spent her entire adult life lying about having one thing or the other. Trying to get on disability. When in reality all that was ever wrong with her was she was a lazy, drug addict who eventually did get on disability because she fried her brain doing computer duster. It was the worst blow to my ego to be found autistic. I am gradually making my peace with it, I've made a few good friends here. But, like I said, I don't get the ones who are mad because they can't get anyone to take them seriously and get a diagnosis. If you're autistic, eventually someone is gonna tell you.

I tend to see voting as an individual responsibility. It's wrong of me to ask you to vote for what I want, it's wrong of you to ask me to vote for what you want. But, regardless of who is in office the young, old and disabled should be looked after because they can't look after themselves.

Just my opinion... If it doesn't apply, let it fly.