...

[Carlton Banks]

...

 

[CHL]

@JahFocus CS @No_bammer_weed @Liu Kang @Brown_Pride @tmonster @NZA @Broletariat

I'm sure one of these brehs would give a helpful, succinct, non explanation of the various differences and issues that polarise liberals/progressives and conservatards.

I would but it's 3:40am here.

 

[JahFocus CS]

So for the longest time I've always seen these words being thrown around in politics, political news, and by a lot of older white folks. So I finally take the time to learn what all this stuff means..

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Conservative_vs_Liberal
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Anti-Federalist_vs_Federalist
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Fascism
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican


I've always had a good idea about Democrats & Republicans but if the entire country is a Republic than what is a Democracy really? Trying to understand this shyt just left me more confused than I was in the beginning. For example, apparently conservatives support the right to bear arms and liberals are against it. But if what if I'm a conservative but also against the right to bear arms? What am I then? How are these view points narrowed down to these two labels as if the human mind and emotion isn't a complex thing? I really don't wanna be ignorant about this shyt since it's usually the natural thing to do when you don't understand something. But I'm just doing all this independent research asking myself "so this what all these old white guys be on CNN arguing about?"

So I try to create analogies to try and make myself understand better. This gon sound stupid, but that's why I'm making this thread. Let's say Conservatives are Bloods, and Liberals are Crips... If you a liberal crip you gotta stand by ya blue flag and everything it represents... but what if my favorite color is red? Am I still allowed to be a Crip? Will the Liberals still claim me? Will the Bloods claim me? That's how I'm narrowing down all these political labels.. Is their something I'm missing? Is this supposed to mean something to me? Am I stupid for not knowing this shyt as thoroughly as the old white guys on CNN that argue about this stuff? Cuz truth be told I feel it's all stupid and just something white folks argue about the same way we argue about music and sports.

To start, that site Diffen is pretty terrible. I honestly think you'd do better reading a Wiki on each of those schools of thought and doing your own comparison.

The names of the "Democratic Party" and the "Republican Party" have little to do, in today's world, with the concepts of democracy and republic. You can read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)#Name_and_symbols and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)#Name_and_symbols to compare.

Party affiliation/political leaning doesn't always neatly align with positions on certain issues, and oftentimes, not agreeing on one issue doesn't mean you aren't "conservative"/"liberal"/whatever. Take gun rights, for instance. There is a whole history of U.S. settler colonialism and racism behind the American emphasis on gun rights (and the politics of who it is extended to). American conservatives tend to favor more gun rights and "liberals" tend to favor fewer. Yet, historically, leftists have upheld the working class' right to bear arms.

When thinking about politics, I urge you to not limit your understanding to the U.S. Why? Because the U.S. is an anomaly in the world with its political terminology, long history of a two-party system, and the ideological and practical closeness of the two dominant parties. Not to mention, the lack of substance in electoral politics. Other countries have lively political debates and processes, with a range of contending political parties. So "conservative" and "liberal" is a false dichotomy that is a product of the basically empty political life in the U.S., regardless of how their hardcore ideologues try to act like their slight differences make them polar opposites.

Federalist/Anti-Federalist, in those terms, had more relevance in the early years of the U.S. Federalists basically favored a strong federal government and anti-Federalists opposed it. It really isn't used in the present-day, but obviously the spirit of that debate lives on.

Communism and fascism are completely different, and it is only through misinformation and smears that the two can even be used in the same breath without talking about how diametrically opposed they are. First, communism describes a stateless, classless society, predicated upon conditions of material abundance (summed up in, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"). Socialism, a system under which workers operate and control the means of production and goods are produced for people, not profit, would eventually evolve into communism once the productive forces of society allowed. This is the actual left when it comes to politics. Fascism is a right-wing ideology that basically fuses business and the state. A core principle is class collaboration, which holds that the nation-state is the foremost identity and institution in society, and people - regardless of whether one is a member of the bourgeoisie or the working class - all have their role to play in society and shouldn't question their positions. Fascism typically comes on the heels of a failed working class revolution, and represents the purest form of capitalism, when the capitalists/bourgeoisie are compelled to resort to the naked force of the state to maintain their rule.

On a side note, CNN and mainstream media is garbage breh. I can recommend some news sources if you're interested. We talk about politics often on here so I could also link you to some threads that may help you get a better understanding of some of these things.

 

[Carlton Banks]

To start, that site Diffen is pretty terrible. I honestly think you'd do better reading a Wiki on each of those schools of thought and doing your own comparison.

The names of the "Democratic Party" and the "Republican Party" have little to do, in today's world, with the concepts of democracy and republic. You can read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)#Name_and_symbols and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)#Name_and_symbols to compare.

Party affiliation/political leaning doesn't always neatly align with positions on certain issues, and oftentimes, not agreeing on one issue doesn't mean you aren't "conservative"/"liberal"/whatever. Take gun rights, for instance. There is a whole history of U.S. settler colonialism and racism behind the American emphasis on gun rights (and the politics of who it is extended to). American conservatives tend to favor more gun rights and "liberals" tend to favor fewer. Yet, historically, leftists have upheld the working class' right to bear arms.

When thinking about politics, I urge you to not limit your understanding to the U.S. Why? Because the U.S. is an anomaly in the world with its political terminology, long history of a two-party system, and the ideological and practical closeness of the two dominant parties. Not to mention, the lack of substance in electoral politics. Other countries have lively political debates and processes, with a range of contending political parties. So "conservative" and "liberal" is a false dichotomy that is a product of the basically empty political life in the U.S., regardless of how their hardcore ideologues try to act like their slight differences make them polar opposites.

Federalist/Anti-Federalist, in those terms, had more relevance in the early years of the U.S. Federalists basically favored a strong federal government and anti-Federalists opposed it. It really isn't used in the present-day, but obviously the spirit of that debate lives on.

Communism and fascism are completely different, and it is only through misinformation and smears that the two can even be used in the same breath without talking about how diametrically opposed they are. First, communism describes a stateless, classless society, predicated upon conditions of material abundance (summed up in, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"). Socialism, a system under which workers operate and control the means of production and goods are produced for people, not profit, would eventually evolve into communism once the productive forces of society allowed. This is the actual left when it comes to politics. Fascism is a right-wing ideology that basically fuses business and the state. A core principle is class collaboration, which holds that the nation-state is the foremost identity and institution in society, and people - regardless of whether one is a member of the bourgeoisie or the working class - all have their role to play in society and shouldn't question their positions. Fascism typically comes on the heels of a failed working class revolution, and represents the purest form of capitalism, when the capitalists/bourgeoisie are compelled to resort to the naked force of the state to maintain their rule.

On a side note, CNN and mainstream media is garbage breh. I can recommend some news sources if you're interested. We talk about politics often on here so I could also link you to some threads that may help you get a better understanding of some of these things.

Absolutely. Thanks for taking the time to reply back thoroughly like that. I've just been doing a lot of independent research lately on world history, in particular US, Canada, Africa and South America. It's like I'm getting addicted to learning new shyt. This is on the heels of an injury that's keep me out of work, recent events going on with law enforcement and just overall feeling like a deer in headlights when I hear all this stuff on the news or being discussed and not knowing what any of it means. I used to be so dismissive but that's cuz I didn't know anything. Now I'm starting to see things I never realized about society in general.