Just admit you want communism. I mean, you’re conveniently ignoring the fact it’s never worked and has led to the deaths of millions, but that’s what you want. It’s what all lazy people want.
2 Likes
Arguing the intersect of contractual law with established property law precedent would be pointless with him.
He knows everything about worker co ops and how they run without ever having been an owner in any company - much less a worker co op.
2 Likes
I see my sarcasm also went right over your head.
My education is based on how law actually works not fantasy fairy land of lazy dumb fucks.
1 Like
I will try to go into detail later (which might be unwise for me to do, because things are on your side in the current day).
But for now, I’ll ask, are you telling me you’re unaware of progressive policies, (which have used billions of dollars and in some cases even physical force and threat of violence) over the past 60-plus years? If you’re unaware of them, then are you really a progressive?
None of them worked. Edit: Some did, I suppose from the progressive point of view. Others just had or have billions going down the drain.
2 Likes
No, it just sucked and was as non-funny as can be. Not as funny as you thinking you’re so clever that I was lost on your statement.
Were they progressive or from the Democratic party? But I guess you probably think they are one in the same.
Your post says otherwise.
Another pointless point.
And you leave out the fact that capitalism has led to the deaths of millions. Just admit it your sycophantic adherence to an ideology is more important than having people leading decent lives. It’s all about your cartoonish understanding of people who want a more just society rather than giving control over to corporate interests and their lackeys(politicians)
Please enlighten us then on the law and how contractual provisions override the law against perpetuities as well as the general principles of property law going back to common law.
I’ll wait.
I don’t really think you want to start playing the death toll game - it’s not going to go the way you think unless you use some severely biased sources.
Contrary to what you believe I would love a more just society. Therein lies the rub. When humans are involved you can never get a just society. Show me any one society in history where the system is “just” for the majority of people. It doesn’t/hasn’t ever existed and there is no evidence to believe it would based on human behavior. Your version of “just” may be someone else’s version of hell (as it was for many under the "just’ rule of the communists). One person’s pros is the other’s cons.
Stop projecting your childish and ill-thought out beliefs.
Life is suffering and paradoxical. Instead of bitching about it, live with it, embrace the suffering and try to make the most of the shit storm that is human existence. Life can still be fulfilling, but many who push the rhetoric you are pushing have lived lives filled with regret (whether they admit it or not).
2 Likes
That’s a fair question then. Can you sum up in one to three sentences the aim of progressivism? Then I can answer.
Actually I think the confusion lies in that I am only taking into account what is progressive in the view of the current liberal.
I am not speaking of social reforms of a very long time ago, some of which I think were alright.
I think I see what people are getting mixed up with here
You consider progressivism to be a faction of the far left. Albeit not the ridiculous gender bending, alienating the majority in order to bend over backwards for the minority style of far left we see today.
Keep in mind I’m talking about fringe extremes here, as are you. I don’t believe this extreme that I describe is “winning” necessarily, as mounting backlash and lost revenue is due to moderate hollywood in particular over the next 5-10 years.
What i’ve described is amusing. As in theory you’d THINK propagating such ridiculousness would benefit say… autistic people, people with rare diseases, impoverished individuals, the mentally ill, legitimately aggrieved individuals. But no… it only serves to alienate while benefiting a very vocal, tiny minority who for whatever reason now seem to hold a great deal of power.
There’s even this hilarious diversity/iNcLuSiOn quota that is going to be a requirement for oscar nominated films in 2024. Somehow a select few thought this was a good idea AFTER last years oscars broke recirds for low viewership
These inclusively/awareness campaigns… it’s predominantly virtue signalling. As a matter of fact getting access to treatment for mental illness entails a longer wait time than ever before but I digress.
But this is what many think about when you talk about progressivism. They think about drag queen story time, men competing in womens powerlifting, excusing narcissistic or sociopathic behaviour because you fit in with a set of guidelines that apparently provies one with a free pass to treat everyone like crap. South park has made a few great episodes about this in relation to mental illnees (anxiety, depression), and trans issues.
In reality, the true definition of progressive from a political context is “favouring societal reform”. This construct can relate to both the left and the right.
When you think of progressivism (correct me if i’m wrong) you think of societal overhaul re healthcare, environmental conservation, wealth redistribution, abolition of private property or social class, lack of private corporatism etc
Am I right?
Now this isn’t necessarily the definition of progressive either
People need to stop defining progrssive and conservative as one in the same with the sociopolitical philosophy they adhere to.
‘Conservative’ is a broad term that can paint many portraits. Same with progressivism.
1 Like
While I agree with you, I subscribe to the realism philosophy in law and everything else.
It is great to know what it is SUPPOSED to be by definition and on paper and an entirely different thing as to how it is actually applied and used in real life by everyday people.
Respectfully, I disagree
When I think “left wing” or “progressive”
I generally think of someone who is environmentally conscious, someone who advocates for the nordic model etc. Someone who favours what I would consider to be excess government intervention
Conservative to me?
Someome who votes liberal (Australian liberal party is the main right wing party here), or fpr nationals. May favour excess government intervention. Wants to pay less tax, not particuarly environmentally conscious… pro trade liberalisation, advocates for dismantling regulation over state owned enterprise.
Etc
Not trying to be offensive. But Americans tend to see the world through a uniquely American lens. Last time I was in the US was when the divide was REALLY kicking off. The dynamic unfolding over there at the time wasn’t occuring in Aus.
Keep in mind, Melbourne (and sydney) are amongst some of the most culturally and ethnically diverse cities in the world.
Not to say Aus doesn’t have its problems. But Americas divide goes beyond clashing cultures.
Using “liberal” or "conservative’’ as an insult here, or even in Israel, Europe when I was over there… gains little traction outside of fringe groups that have very little say in what goes on.
Not that anecdote means anything, but recently my left wing relatives from the US came over and they were constantly complaining about republicans. The Aussie side of our family knows about the US sociopolitical spectrum.
However there isn’t the same divide present here. It isn’t so much ‘left vs right no matter what’ over here and as a result it was quite amusing, I went as far as to crack jokes over it.
My cousins were talking about how they’d never be friends with a republican… yet here in Aus it doesn’t really matter who you vote for unless you partake in university politics which tends to skew to the far left WHILE students are still in university. Even then… a decent portion of the student body will sign up as members of right wing political factions.
After graduation most seem to moderate. Towards centre left with an authoritarian slant or centre right with an authoritarian slant.
That’s how the nanny state is born XD
America has issues that I predominantly deem to be ‘unique to America’. Even then… still one of the better countries to be in if you are lower middle class or above.
2 Likes
I was talking about America.
Take a poll on what the average person thinks those terms mean in America and your version is going to be the small minority.
That was my point lol.
2 Likes
Another point I want to touch on
You find that for the American trends Australia does toe the line on, Aus is generally 10 or so years behind the curve
I am seeing fragments of radical sociopolitical agendas being pushed within SOME metropolitan universities.
That’s about as far as it seems to have gotten here. People such as myself will push back considering it is acceptable/appropriate to link up with right wing student groups here. Even if the dynamic shifted to that of America where dissenting opinion is met with persecution from an opposing side… i’d still speak my mind
I wouldn’t consider myself conservative, I f¹lip flop on who I vote for depending on what I believe needs to be focused on at the time.
And keep in mind… I’m no authority on Australia, Europe, Israel, America… or anywhere for that matter.
I’m just giving my opinion, no one here is obliged to agree or listen to me. I find this forum is a fun break away from reality.
It baffles me as to how universities and the likes have chosen to pander towards the LGBTQIA+ (is that how it’s pronounced?) Community with an EMPHASIS on the QTIA+.
The homosexuals in my family have nothing to do with the QTIA+ faction, and it appears the gay community is splitting off into factions and dividing itself as the ever more radical tqia+ faction (that has NOTHING to do with what sex you like) is seemingly becoming it’s own thing.
Like… if universities really wanted to represent struggling, aggrieved demographics… what about people with autism, (real) ADHD (which is real… but there’s a lot of misdiagnosis nowadays in the name of making a quick buck), rare genetic disorders etc.
Roughly 1 in 30,000 have gender dysphoria. The wave of young impressionable kids identifying as trans or non binary (and I could just be wrong/an asshole) seems akin to the satanic panic wherein every child was influenced into thinking they’d been a part of a satanic cult
If 1 in 100 kids are REALLY trans… why aren’t 1 in 100 opting to access gender affirming healthcare? Why are so few getting sex changes. Granted it’s difficult in Aus to qualify… doesn’t seem that hard in parts of the US.
Because it’s invasive, painful and you need to REALLY believe that is who you are to go through with something like that
The true prevalence is around 1 in 10-30,000. Im about to go on a rant.
That and… persecution for being gay in Australia is rare outside of drug infested, backwater rural towns. Even there… no anti sodomy laws, probably aren’t getting beaten up… might get an odd look from time to time.
Sure… you have to be 18+ to see a drag show or go to a pride parade… but both events generally have sexual connotations
for comparision having same sex relations was illegal until 2002 within the state of Texas. So why are universities pretending gays and occasionally (but bot usually) are so oppressed? I probably AM missing something. But I’m outlining my train of thought here.
I understand universities educating students about Australias wonderful, genocide ridden past. But with that, unlike the woke stuff… I don’t see any blatant guilt tripping.
Lets say universities were to adopt my advice, and cater towarrd supporting aggrieved demographics that are affected in larger numbers. I… dont want that either…
I’ll share my most radical view on here. As my future prospects have recently been thrown into dissaray
I don’t think people who are likely to pass on serious hereditary diseases shouldn’t be allowed to reproduce… as in… I actually think the parents should be tested before having children provided it is feasible to do so and they should be punished if they still decide to have a child who inherits familial onset ALS, huntingtons disease, vEDS (life expectancy is 38 for this one) etc.
Serious congential disease entails a lot of suffering on behalf of the individual, it uses up a lot of resources, it’s traumatising for the family, siblings etc. You can argue this is inhumane… I argue “with my approach the diseased individual never knew about existence. The parents can adopt or use a surrogate (depending on circumstances) and have a child who isn’t going to die young and/or always be in bad shape.”
I also think it would be a good thing if neonatal screening was developed for autism spectrum disorder, including high functioning subtypes such as myself. Iceland has almost elominated down syndrome through a similar mechanism
There’s a lot of supoort for autistic men and women… provided they are below the age of eighteen. In all but the highest of high functuomingg, all the support in the world isn’t necessarily enough to allow the autistic individual to function independently. Hence when autistic people reach adulthood, the rates of drug addiction, depression and suicide are one of the highest out of ANY demographic you could possibly analyze.
For most, having autism to any capacity =/= living on mars when everyone else lives on earth yet inhabitants of both planets are cohabiting on earth. It is an isolating, draining existence.
The high IQ autistic individuals are few and fsr in between. 30-40% of autistic individuals are intellectually disabled (IQ of 70 or below). If you have an IQ this low you are retarded
I had an IQ in the mid 120s as a teenager. This makes me an exception to the norm. For the most part, I’m not usually fond of a autistic people… including myself.
1 Like
I’m not sure I understand. The same party favors excess government regulation AND less tax, and is “pro trade liberalisation?” How do you dismantle regulation over state owned enterprise? Do you mean privatization?
Talling about Australian dynamics here
Both the left and the right support excess, inintrusuve nanny state nonesense.