Horowitz to O'Reilly: Biden, Top Liberals Want to Destroy America

There you go. I see you're not calling them liberals anymore. You've described them correctly. Far left progressives that are mostly illiberal.

 

Trying to sell their policies as better than the other party. Again, a separate issue is whether one agrees or disagrees, but the DNC is more policy focused than the GOP and trying to win the independents.

 

Realize there's are real difference between social protests and the wholesale violence and destruction of the Floyd riots.

 

Neocommunist.

 

You mean there's less of a disagreement among dems?

 

But there was no wholesale violence. yes, there was violence, and some 18000 arrests among the various states, most of whom are misdemeanors. But when it came to actual looting and bombing, the people who were doing that were linked en masse by conservative groups to the whole BLM and Antifa. Even they tried to blame antifa on January 6th despite all the evidence to the contrary.

 

There is disagreement at times, but at the end of the day, they let their egos aside. Not so much for the GOP and the Speakership fight proves that point.

 

Yes, some would describe them as the neo communists or neo liberals. Nothing liberal about them at all.

 

Oh puhleeze, stop with the arrogant "teaching." People who frequent political forums don't need it, and it's actually quite rude when you assume we don't know something.

My question, for the third effing time, was "What do Libertarians have to do with this issue?" I know what they are. I know the nuances in their party. I understand their views, and agree with a lot of it. You brought them up on a hate thread about liberals trying to destroy America, not Libertarians. That's why I asked. If you don't understand, don't reply with more of your didactic inanities, thanks.

 

That us not authoritarianism. Here, let me help you. From the Encyclopedia Brittania:

"Authoritarianism is a principle of blind submission to authority, as opposed to individual freedom of thought and action. In government, authoritarianism denotes any political system that concentrates power in the hands of a leader or a small elite that is not constitutionally responsible to the body of the people."

It's what Trump tried to turn America into. It's what Russia is, and North Korea, and many third world dictatorships where the people have little or no voice. If anything can be said to be the polar opposite, it's democracy, not your simplified and inaccurate "live and let live" cliche.

You've been taking upon yourself here to grandstand and act like you're the only one who understands authoritarianism. Ain't payback annoying?

 

Horowitz misunderstands this issue. His party affiliation isn't relevant.

 

No wholesale violence at the Floyd riots...

 

There's more disunity among GOPs 'cause the GOP believes in free speech and democracy. The dem party doesn't believe in free speech and democracy.

 

They're way far left and way authoritarian. Yes, they're neocommunist.

 

What do you even mean by 'allowed'? Where does that idea even come from? Are you aware that the BLM riots led to some 1,000 arrests?

The BLM riots were not a right/left political thing. The Capitol riots were, indeed, a politically far right thing.

Both were driven by rage, as are all riots, but the source of the rage, that is what makes them different.

The Floyd riots were the results of cops killing blacks (and often getting away with it) and the capital riots was result of Trump's inculcating into the minds of his followers that the 'big lie' that the only reason Democrats won the election is because they rigged it, which was the cause of the juggernaut of rage which occurred on Jan 6.

BLM riots were driven by vengeance against cops. Capitol riots were driven by Trump's lies about Democrats and follower's wanting to disrupt the final certification that was occuring at the capitol in order to 'stop the steal'.

That is the difference. (of course, both were bad, very bad, but there isn't much that beats the historical significance of an attack on the nation's capitol, except maybe for Russia interfering in our elections and a President who did nothing to stop it.)

 

That encyclopedia definition for authoritarian fits nicely to describe the dem party and the voters in the dem party.

BTW, other encyclopedias got the definition for fascist wrong when encyclopedia definitions demanded all fascists be righties. I mean, Mussolini (the father of fascism) was a lefty (who hated communism) and Hitler was a centrist so encyclopedia definitions can and have been wrong.

 

I answered your question in #39 of this thread.

 

Neoliberalism is the school of thought that private enterprise is the panacea for all of a nation's ills. It's much closer to libertarianism.

Democrats or liberals are in no way, communist. I know of no liberal who favors total state ownership of everything, and to claim that is a false accusation.

But, of course, right wingers have been accusing dems of this since ever since I can remember, and I'm 71.


'tis nothing new, and it is definitely boorish.

 

I didn't post Horowitz's party affiliation was relevant. I posted that Horowitz's political ideology was relevant.

 

Well, how would you describe George Soros and Barack Obama, for examples, as other than neocommunist? I mean, Soros and BO use the capitalist system to further their socialist, er, communist agendas.

 

That's rich since it was many on the right who attacked the capitol and wanted to disrupt democracy who were inspired by a Republican president whose propaganda techniques drove them to it and now you are manifesting Orwell's prophecy insofar as claiming the opposite of reality, that black is white, up is down, right is wrong, and democrats are 'authoritarian'. One could rightfully argue that such a claim is right out of the 1984 novel.

I find it amusing when I ask many on the right as to what is it about dems that makes right wingers believe Dems are 'authoritarian' and they come back with 'vaccine and mask mandates', to which I reply: "Really? No, my friend, Auschwitz is authoritarian, mandates to preserve the health of a nation is not authoritarian by any stretch of rationality. in a Democrats world view, we believe that all aims are to be achieved via the ballot box. That is the OPPOSITE of 'authoritarianism'.

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting --wikipedia


There is NOtHING in any democrat's philosophy, no matter how far to the left they are, that excludes 1. Democracy, 2. Constitution. 3. Separation of powers. 4 coalitions

I have seen Republicans

1. Argue that America is not a democracy, enact policies in numerous states creating hurdles between the voter and the ballot box.

2. Trample on the constitution (the election of Trump)

3. Ignore the concept of separation of powers (Trump did this in spades)

4. Game the system so that they have the advantage over other political groups.

Therefore, it would seem to me that the people who are more inclined to be more authoritarian are republicans

 

The first thing I would do is abstain from weasel words, or remove them from the argument.

You do that by, 1. making a claim (you did this) 2. substantiating that claim you made (you didn't do this).

Now, any claim I made I will substantiate on request.

FYI

Nothing Obama did was 'communist'. He was elected by a majority, so his policies are the result of democracy.

Soros is a vulture capitalist. You might disagree with him, but that's democracy.

Also, FYI, it's tacky to quote yourself (as you've done in your sigs, just remove the quotations).

 

I'm using the dictionary definition for authoritarian that another poster provided:"Authoritarianism is a principle of blind submission to authority, as opposed to individual freedom of thought and action. In government, authoritarianism denotes any political system that concentrates power in the hands of a leader or a small elite that is not constitutionally responsible to the body of the people."

That exactly describes the dem party.

BTW, the protestors at the capitol were protesting against the authoritarianism of the pandemic rules 2020 election results.

I mean,if anything, the 2020 pandemic rules election results were authoritarian...Well, the 2020 results certainly weren't democratic if you go state by state.

 

Talk about weasel words...The leader of N.Korea was originally elected by a majority. The leader of China was originally elected by a majority. The leader of Iran (I know, not communist but fascist) was originally elected by a majority.

 

I wasn't discussing Democrats or liberals as commies. Keep up.