What would a "rightist" be?

I interpret a "leftist" to be someone that wants to forcibly impose equality on others, be it equal opportunity or even equal access to all resources for everyone at any time regardless of history.

What would the opposite of that be? I would interpret a true "rightist", in that case, to be someone that wants to forcibly impose inequality and steal from most people and give it to a few and make these few rich and everyone else poor, and people with lower abilities etc. would be forcibly killed, etc. etc.

A lot of people claim to not want either, and to want liberty. In that case, you'd be neutral; a centrist.

But does this mean government tends to be rightist, and show the superficial banner of being leftist?

 

Anybody who wants government to F**K O**! Screw the environment and screw the world! We're taking this country back!

 

Rightist is someone that defends private property, individual rights over collective rights, that defends capitalism, it is that the means of production must be private.

While a leftist is not what you said. A leftist defends that the means of production can't private. And there are many reasons for that. Mainly because you are not the only creator of anything.

And liberty? What means? :-S Because to be free for me is absolutely different that for you the meaning of freedom. For me to be free you must be free of any kind of coercion. And an individualist always support one kind of coercion.

 

That would be a..nationalist?

I am saying that since leftists want to forcibly impose equality, rightists would want to forcibly impose inequality, and tax the rich less than the non-rich, for instance. A "libertarian" should be just about neutral and not right nor left.

 

I can actually smoke to this post, although I'm sure our political intentions and preferences are different. +rep

 

What means:

"I can actually smoke to this post" ?

I don't understand this expression. I am not able to get the meaning.

 

Or drink to the post, either one. Look it up on google

 

I'm not sure there's anybody that isn't in favor of force of some type on some level. We all believe that pedophiles should be forced not to have sex with children, for example.

Is there anybody, left, right or center that doesn't believe in force? Personally, I don't believe in the use of force to make others do what I want, most of the time (see the aforementioned pedophile exception). But I still find myself perfectly willing to use force to keep others from using force on me, which I think is how right-wingers and left-wingers alike look at it.

 

A god fearing american that is aware and oposes the dangers of muslims and liberal comunists to the best country in the world.
AMERICA FIRST.

 

Forced to accept Gay Marrage & Open Borders & Diversity & Social Justice & turn in Firearms & no 2 cycle Boat Motors on Tahoe & No Jet Ski/Waverunners on Whiskeytown Lake & No Motorcycle Racing in the Desert ....

 

This thread is like a visible cloud of delusion. Thick enough to cut with a knife.

 

Democrat Party will always be Rememberd as the Party of Segregation & The Klan .

 

If that's what you would like to tell yourself be my guest but it doesn't reflect reality.

People who aren't mentally challenged recognize that the southern white racist democrats of the pre-Vietnam era are the Republicans of today. I don't know how many times this can be explained and in how many different ways. If you honestly think Lincoln era republicans have ANYTHING in common with the modern day GOP, you sir are an idiot.

 

Your Mother screwd an Idiot if you asked me .

 

My mother "screwed" a southern baptist, conservative christian business owner who idolizes Ronald Reagan. Good one though.

 

It woulda been better if she was Jewish ...

 

I'm talking about force, specifically, which is used to higher the quality of life and/or opportunity for some at the expense of others.

 

EXPENSE OF ILLEGALS RIGHTS ...Or Gays Rights or Social Justice seekers Rights ...??

 

I wouldn't say this is the definition of leftism. Although I would say most leftists have egalitarian principals, because egalitarianism is greater than totalitarianism for the majority of people. Totalitarianism is the opposite of egalitarianism, so if your stance is a criticism of equality it should be asked what is a better alternative? Forced inequality? Why?

This is often the manifestation of certain kinds of absolute far-right ideals, such as fascism, militant dictatorships, etc...The left and the right hold potential for injustice. The "cult of personality" could be a left or right wing phenomenon, populism is abundant in the rhetoric of both sides. In my opinion there is a wide spectrum of beliefs associated with the left and the right, and they often converge in motives or principals but disagree in means. The right wing utopia is a free market society where everyone is rewarded for their hard work and the free market by its nature alone corrects all evils of society. The left wing utopia is one where the systems of distribution of services are fairly offered to the public and poverty is abolished. The right will say the common good can only come from individuals acting in their own interest and offering only what they voluntarily choose to offer. The left will say the common good can only come through people working together.

There should be certain bi-partisan issues that both sides agree on; such as the basic universally recognized rights of individuals to exist and express themselves without the threat of violence.

It begs the question as another poster mentioned as to what "liberty" entails. Different people have different conceptions of liberty. Does liberty include a right to exist? Then how can this be reconciled with a system that withholds life-sustaining resources based on income?

 

A Rightest is the opposite of a dirtbag.

There is an absence of Rightist influence in the photo of Leftist Utopia, below:

 

I don't think that's true. Fair or not, republicans are seen as the party of racism.

 

I think both sides believe in that. In gross, broad terms, I think the left believes in using force the raise the quality of life greatly for the poor at the expense of a negligible (or no) cost in the quality of life for the wealthy, whereas the right-wingers believe in using force to lower the quality of life greatly for the poor in exchange for a negligible (or no) rise in the quality of life for the wealthy.

 

Actually, the Left believes in forcing whatever on whoever is necessary to achieve maximal control. The Right say they believe in smaller government and individual liberty but then enact the Patriot Act and later join the Left in approving the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that will legally allow the U.S. military to arrest American Citizens in the United States, and throw them in jail indefinitely if they are even suspected of being terrorists, or supporting terrorism, without a trial or conviction.

Obviously, BOTH SIDES ARE BSing CLOWNS!

 

I don't think either side believes in that one. I'm still bewildered as to how that was allowed to happen. Nobody around here seems to think it was a good idea.

 

History is not prone to such desire for political correctness (Yet)