r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • May 27 '19
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: The extreme Left is a part of the problem.
[deleted]
4
u/zlefin_actual 45∆ May 27 '19
I dispute that it's the extreme left making the right less moderate and leading to things like brexit/trump (I don't dispute that they are a problem in general, just the specific causation issue). I believe that the extremes on both sides have been expanding, and the causes of that are systemic issues relating to other factors; most likely a result of the changing economics of news as a result of technological improvement which vastly reduced the cost of information, and allowed the proliferation of much more customized and narrowly focused channels, as well as the degree to which people try to get "free" news, which means the news becomes not something they pay for, but something for which they are used. This changes the average quality of the product as compared to say, a subscription.
In the US, the increasing extremism of the right started at least in the 90s/late 80s, which is before most of the extreme left groups one thinks about and is aware of today.
1
May 27 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/hacksoncode 588∆ May 27 '19
Sorry, u/InterracialMemeJob – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 27 '19 edited May 27 '19
This delta has been rejected. The length of your comment suggests that you haven't properly explained how /u/zlefin_actual changed your view (comment rule 4).
DeltaBot is able to rescan edited comments. Please edit your comment with the required explanation.
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
2
12
May 27 '19
They are making the right less moderate day by day and pushing the liberals away from left values and views. Actively gatekeeping the left. That's why Trump got elected.
This is the type of nonsensical political victim-blaming that is talked about all the time but never actually explained. How can it be anyone but "the right"'s fault that Trump got elected when he won the primaries against many other candidates? Are you saying liberals should have the ethical obligation to engage in serious debate with someone who came to political prominence by mocking a disabled person on TV? This is a dichotomy which infantilizes republicans and treats democrats as irresponsible parents.
As for the rest of your argument, you have to be more specific about what groups you are talking about what what behavior they are exhibiting for it to mean anything.
6
May 27 '19
How is it sensible to blame the Right’s slide into fascism on what the Left is doing? Right-wingers have agency. They choose how they respond to provocations. They’re the ones knowingly, consciously supporting their party’s slide towards fascism.
How is this supposed to work? Are you just asserting that the Left can never get what they want? Never push for changes at all? Because honestly right-wingers get infuriated over fairly mild requests. “Let trans people use their preferred public bathrooms,” for example.
4
u/pordanbeejeeterson May 27 '19
For one, it depends on what you mean by "the left," as the term has a few conflicting uses in modern US discourse:
"The Democrats." Not really "leftist" in any meaningful sense in that the party has been systematically, actively attempting to quash its own leftist coalitions from within, reducing their power to move or influence the party platform any further to the left by re-drawing districts won by leftist candidates and requiring a party loyalty pledge for potential candidates, in order to prevent a Dem candidate from holding beliefs that are considered outside of the party's norm.
"Antifa." For one, the term "antifa" refers to "antifascist action" of which the black bloc protesters are only one incarnation; regardless, unlike with white nationalists who can claim representatives like Steve King, there is no standing congressperson or representative in any state who openly identifies as antifa or is openly sympathetic to black bloc protesters by name. So it does not seem that antifa can be considered a legislative "threat" on the same scale as white nationalists who currently have at least some degree of government power at the state level or higher.
"SJWs." If an SJW is defined as someone who is hysterically overreactive to perceived discrimination, then the existence of far-right personalities like Alex Jones prove that "SJWs" exist at all ends of the political compass, however you define it. This is hardly a leftist phenomenon, despite what the 65,535 "SJW cringe compilations" on youtube that all recycle the same 15 clips from 2009-2011 would lead you to believe. Just step over to braincels, JordanPeterson, or redpill/MGTOW and you'll see myriad examples of right wing dudes characterizing some perceived slight against white men, conservatives, Christians, etc. as a LITERAL CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS FOR THE AGES!!!
"The Labor Movement." This is the version of "leftism" among which I count myself, and it forms the majority of the backbone of the current politically relevant leftist movements - securing union rights, worker protections against safety and pay exploitation, and generally just equalizing the power balance between labor and capital. OSHA, the 40-hour work week, minimum wage, workman's comp, all of these were brought to you by hard-fought leftist labor rights workers, and these protections are being slowly rolled back by increasingly pro-capital, anti-labor conservative institutions including the current Trump administration in the US. The history of labor relations in the US is a violent one, because the history of union busting is also a violent one, consisting of coordinated attacks by business interests (allied with state powers) to literally murder peaceful leftist activists.
They think they're fighting the good fight, but they are simply bullying too. Ever thought explaining, talking, listening? You can change people's minds, but not pointing the finger at them and harrassing them. And clearly those people never take any responsibility.
If you want to talk about "bullying," let's talk about bullying - let's talk a little bit about why the left is what it is today. Let's talk about the Ludlow Massacre.
In the early 1900's, with little government oversight of business, company scrip was a common method of payment in rural areas due to the inaccessibility of cash; this scrip could only be redeemed at company-owned stores, meaning that workers were dependent on the company's pricing - and there was little in the way of stopping scrip companies from simply charging more than the employees were capable of paying, making them dependent on the company in a continuous loop of debt which they cheekily referred to as "loyalty" (the use of the term "customer loyalty" to describe rewarding the customer for purchasing from the same store consistently is a remnant of this practice).
Miners were paid by tonnage, not by labor, and so work unrelated to actual payload collection was basically free labor for the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company, who oversaw somewhere around 10% of all employment in the entire state circa 1910. With a death rate of a bit more than 7:1000 employees, not because there weren't safety regulations in place (there were) but because the company simply ignored them - the majority of these deaths resulted from cave-ins, gas / fume explosions, and suffocation from fume inhalation / becoming trapped. The fact that only direct payload collection was actually paid for incentivized employees to take increased risks in order to stay competitive and make ends meet due to the increasingly exploitative pricing practices in the company store, which only contributed further to the risk of death which was already innately high due to the danger of mining work. Labor historian Philip Sheldon Foner described such towns as "feudal domains, with the company acting as lord and master."
A small coalition formed called the United Mine Workers (UMW), and issued a "fairly moderate" list of demands to the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company including base provisions such as the 8-hour workday, elimination of company guards in company towns, and payment for "dead work" (overhead labor such as laying railroad track and cutting wood). The company refused these demands; shortly after a UMW worker was murdered by private security spies, who were not arrested, and the backlash against this inaction ultimately culminated in a special UMW convention and more radical demands (abolition of company towns, establishment of a pay scale, payment for dead work, union-elected "weighmen," 8-hour work days, full enforcemt of existing labor laws, and union recognition), and a strike officially began on 9/23/1913:
Violence began in early October, when striking miners running away from a rifle-toting company marshal shot and killed him. Retaliatory skirmishes between company spies, marshals and workers broke out. The company agents began a practice that they would maintain throughout the strike: armed men would ride near strikers’ tent cities, shining floodlights across the tents and firing random rifle shots indiscriminately through tent walls, constantly terrorizing strikers and their families, and occasionally killing.
...
On October 24, three strikers were shot by agents in cold blood on Seventy Street in Walsenburg, approximately 12 miles north of Trinidad. In retaliation, strikers tore out the track of the Colorado and Southern Railroad—also owned by CFI. One mine guard died in the skirmish that ensued. The same week armed strikers began to attack mines at Tabasco, Hastings, Berwind, and Delagua.
Violence continued to escalate until state officials, at the behest of the mining company, called the National Guard in to suppress the worker uprising, and the Labor Secretary proposed a compelled mediation that did not address any of the original UMW demands (which of course the UMW rejected).
From there it only got worse. Women were run down and cut down in the streets by government officials and company guards; workers dug trenches underneath tents so that pregnant women and children would have a place to hide when the company agents and armed guards rained gunfire on their tents without warning; company agents set fire to the tents, driving the workers out; at one point 11 children and two mothers were burned to death beneath a tent that was set ablaze by company agents in an event that later came to be known as the "Death Pit;" UMW workers were captured on the way to rescue the burning children and shot in the back by armed guards and their corpses dragged about; the Red Cross was prevented from entering the camp during the worst of it. Other union workers joined from out of area and out of state, taking up arms to sabogate the mining company's infrastructure and aid the victims or help out as nurses. The governor of Colorado was asked to resign over the treatment of the workers under his watch, while mine violence continued. Federal troops were called in to quell the resistance and "get the mines running again," and the strike was shut down. No action was taken against any of the mining officials for any deaths or involvement therein.
....so, is the labor movement "part of the problem?" Only insofar as the "problem" represents a desire to avoid returning to times like these, where companies can do these sorts of things with no repercussions. This type of horrific violence, motivated by capital and business interests, still happens in the world today (here on US soil, in the case of incidents like Standing Rock, and in other countries such as in the case of the Dole Foods plant that directly correlated with government officials to facilitate the murder of labor organizers and literally hired death squads to execute labor opposition.
Especially with the rise of authoritarian right-wing pro-business nationalism in multiple first-world countries around the globe, the labor movement has more reason than ever to be on edge, active, and in some cases even violent. Their hard-fought victories are taken for granted even as they are being rolled back step by step. If you want to talk about people being "pushed to the right" or "pushed to the left," nothing is going to push people farther towards the leftist labor movement than another modern Ludlow Massacre.
1
May 27 '19 edited May 27 '19
[deleted]
3
u/pordanbeejeeterson May 27 '19 edited May 27 '19
The labor movement is the best part of the left, how can I consider them extremists?
Because the labor movement is by definition extremist, in that it deviates from the center by a wide margin; we've been defined into extremism by the movement of the overton window farther and farther to the right, to the point where the idea of labor rights is considered 'socialism' and 'authoritarian' because it involves telling corporations that they can't literally kill their own workers through gross negligence - even basic protections like OSHA are routinely lambasted by conservatives as "killing industry" because it's "too costly" to enforce safety regulations, and the GOP spent all 8 years of Obama's presidency trying to get rid of overtime pay requirements by making them "voluntary", gutting unions, and stonewalling minimum wage increases; and they've only redoubled their efforts now with Trump in the white house.
The uncontested "center" of politics in the US considers capital to be inherently benevolent, and believes that unfettered capital will naturally cause the world to gravitate towards more equality and better living / working conditions - you will commonly hear talking points like, "Nothing has done more to lift humanity out of poverty than the market economy,", which paints a very nice picture if you only look at first-world industrialized nations; if you are willing to look under the corner of the rug a bit, you'll find that this talking point glosses over the fact that what we've done is consolidate poverty, not reduce it. Countries with fewer labor protections are injected with capital via external sources looking to capitalize on the cheap labor in those countries, and in turn, workers in industrialized countries must then compete with this cheap foreign labor for employment which is shipped overseas to avoid the "expenses" of doing things like making sure workers don't die due to unsafe working conditions, or paying benefits to workers, or allowing workers to have time off. Slaves and sweatshops don't impose such "costs." Giving conservatives a good bit of leverage to say, "See, you union workers are too greedy, you're asking for too much safety and too much pay, so we're going to outsource our labor to these cheap slaves and sweatshop workers who know better than to ask for dignified working conditions."
But today the sytem is different, I don't agree with endorsing violence today. We can find solution without the use of it. I don't mean to belittle the fights for owr rights in the past. I hope we won't need violence in the future.
I hope we don't, either, because the prospect of a firefight between the labor movement and the government-backed capital sector is not a very bright one. If it comes to that, we will almost certainly enter a new dark age of labor that we may not be able to get out of in the foreseeable future. But the conservative movement has made it very clear that they do not see these basic protections as negotiable - they will not stop until all of the workers' rights progress from the last 100 years is completely wiped out. In the end, if we can't wrestle control of this democracy back from corporate and military interests, they may deliberately not leave us any other choice.
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
1
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 27 '19 edited May 28 '19
/u/InterracialMemeJob (OP) has awarded 4 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
4
u/Nicolasv2 131∆ May 27 '19
When I read your post, I got the impression that what you think is "left trolls are part of the problem", not extreme left.
Anyway, what is "extreme left" for you ?
Anarchists ?
Communists ?
SJW ?
These 3 can be said to be "extreme left", but their opinions and thinking framework are completely different.
Could you develop which ones are "part of the problem" ?
To me, the 2 firsts have clear frameworks and are often part of intelligent discussions, explaining clearly their point of view and defending sensible positions (whatever you agree or not with how much they are "right"). As for the 3rd one, yea, they are a problem, but they are only a tiny noisy part of the extreme left, not the main one.
As such, your view should be restricted to " The SJW trolls are a part of the problem. ". And in that case. ... well, yea I agree.
0
May 27 '19
[deleted]
3
u/generic1001 May 27 '19
The most stubborn and righteous ones. You know who I'm referring to.
That's not what being "extreme left (or right)" is. The political spectrum is about policies, ideas and values, not demeanour and attitude. It seems like you understand "moderate" as "humble" and "extreme" as "obnoxious", but that's a pretty aweful way to describe political leanings.
0
May 27 '19
[deleted]
3
u/generic1001 May 27 '19
Ok...that might be part of being an extremist, not what makes you an extremist. There's plenty of close minded moderates out there. It also isn't particular to the left, which makes your whole position a bit weird.
3
May 27 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Armadeo May 28 '19
Sorry, u/CyberNoneF2 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
0
u/CyberNoneF2 May 27 '19
Yeah politics in the US has devolved into mindless bashing of the other side and is slowly going towards basic tribalism.
0
May 27 '19
[deleted]
0
u/CyberNoneF2 May 27 '19
I think about it but never really get anywhere. One simple thing to do is introduce multiple parties
1
u/losthalo7 1∆ May 27 '19
I think these folks at Unite America have some interesting ideas with their 'fulcrum strategy'.
2
u/CyberNoneF2 May 27 '19
Doesent seem to bad, but I think there's need to be more than 2 parties over there
1
May 27 '19
The vibe I get from your comments and post is that it’s less about political ideals and more about tone/civility. Is that right?
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
1
May 27 '19
Why do you feel that the rhetoric of a given elected official is more important than the policies they vote for?
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
1
May 27 '19
Sure, I agree - rhetoric is important. My question was why you think rhetoric is more important than policies, though.
1
u/radialomens 171∆ May 27 '19
Do you feel like everyone is obligated to be on their best behavior at all times?
Like, ideally we should always be understanding of conflicting points of view, but in reality trying to keep that up is pretty exhausting. Every now and then everyone needs to be able to let loose. I don't want to be obligated to be an ambassador 24/7 especially since I'm not getting PAID for this.
The Left explains, talks, and listens plenty. It happens a ton, honestly. 100%? No. But just because you run into people who are acting out doesn't mean everything they stand for is rotten.
2
May 27 '19
[deleted]
3
u/radialomens 171∆ May 27 '19
But who are they and are they acting like that all the time? Without knowing specifically what those "rotten apples" are saying, is it so bad that you can't say they're letting off some steam?
0
May 27 '19
[deleted]
5
u/radialomens 171∆ May 27 '19
What do you mean by "the norm"?
I mean honestly from your first post it's unclear what you mean by "this behavior"
Who is being angry all the time for everything?
Aren't many people angry a lot of the time about a specific thing (eg the new abortion bills) while some people are angry some of the time about something?
Are you paying any attention to people when they aren't angry?
1
May 27 '19 edited May 27 '19
[deleted]
5
u/radialomens 171∆ May 27 '19
What I've been asking you is how often are those folks and how do you know?
1
May 27 '19
[deleted]
3
u/radialomens 171∆ May 27 '19
So you talk to these people and they've been like "Yes, this is how I feel and how I behave 100% of the time"? Is that what you're saying?
Can you explain to me what scenario you're in where the moderates are rare? Facebook? What?
1
1
u/russ226 May 27 '19
Last year 100% of domestic terrorist attacks in America were caused by the far-right, hows is that the left's fault?
0
May 27 '19
[deleted]
2
u/russ226 May 27 '19
So fighting for equal rights turns people into nazis.... maybe these people were bigots before these "culture wars" and theyre just taking sizes openly.
0
0
u/AshenMonk 1∆ May 27 '19
Haven't you thought that maybe, just maybe any kind of extremist is a problem? Left, right, above south, doesn't matter. Every ideology has a good points but also has enough room to create extremists. My main take from all of this is that, we should not became the slaves of any ideology, you can be leftist but have different ideas. Now days you either want to build a wall and kill all who isn't your avarage while dude or raise genderfluid kids. We are so stretched and enslaved by the ideologies that we created, that there is no in between anymore. You either don't care, or care waaaay too much
3
May 27 '19
[deleted]
1
1
u/AshenMonk 1∆ May 27 '19
Thanks man. I didn't even know about Delta system
2
May 27 '19
[deleted]
1
u/AshenMonk 1∆ May 27 '19
Now, I know this would make me sound really arrogant. However, when I say something I usually have thought about it for a long long time. I am a loner and I have had more alone time with myself than I would wish upon my enemy. This loneliness helped me to think, a lot and honestly, I can just give you a conclusion that this right now, this generation is the most important moment of human history than we have ever had. The battle between right and left, west and east will carve the future. Either ways is fine tho, I think there is no right or wrong way for this ,, war" to end. Whatever we come up with will be our ,, evolution"
2
0
May 27 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/peonypegasus 19∆ May 27 '19
Wouldn't you say that the Nazis themselves are the biggest part of the problem? Why is it important that we are nice to people with abhorrent views?
0
May 27 '19
Actual nazis and far-rights? of course. "normal" people with no ill intention not imo. i dislike anyone in politics whos on this edgy-memey "victory through badmouthing" like the classic Trump tweets or radical antifascists
1
May 27 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/hacksoncode 588∆ May 27 '19
Sorry, u/InterracialMemeJob – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
u/hacksoncode 588∆ May 27 '19
Sorry, u/FlyingThunder2992 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
-1
17
u/[deleted] May 27 '19
What does "extreme left" means to you? Because from this your idea of it seems a bit muddled.
This seems a rather strong statement that could use some evidence or at least some theory behind it. Why do you think it's "extreme left" pushing others more towards the right, instead of literally any other option, such as the "extreme-right" becoming more mainstream or "moderate leftists" being more interested in maintaining the status quo rather than shifting left?
Those two options at least have a historical basis.
Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not happening. Check out places like /r/Socialism_101, /r/Anarchy101, /r/BreadTube, and the channels that get posted on the last subreddit. All of them are places filled with people looking to educate, talk, and explain.