What does the "far left" want for America?

[CrusaderFrank]

Actual far lyftyst here, setting the record straight--although I do detest situations in which I must use that horribly bigoted term.

What does the "far left" want for America?

Equality. Is that so much to ask?

.....and by equality you mean to live the Progressive Dream and murder anyone who has more money than you believe is their "Fair share" and tell people you're going to redistribute it but actually the Party Bosses just keep it all

 

[The Rabbi]

What does the far left want?
They want the economy of Greece for starters. High unemployment because there are no incentives to work. Everyone works crappy governmetn jobs and retires at 50, with full benefits
Free healthcare
Free college education
Free birth control
Free housig
Free food
Free water
Free electricity
Free internet
Free cell phones
Free computers
Free transportation

And higher higher higer taxes on anyone who dares wander off the plantation in search of a better life.
And thats for starters.

 

[Siete]

be kinda nice if idiot RW's would quit with the "far left" BS, but OCD has them by the short hairs, so

 

[R.C. Christian]

What they really need is a may day parade to replace the 4th.

 

[Billy000]

What does the far left want?
They want the economy of Greece for starters. High unemployment because there are no incentives to work. Everyone works crappy governmetn jobs and retires at 50, with full benefits
Free healthcare
Free college education
Free birth control
Free housig
Free food
Free water
Free electricity
Free internet
Free cell phones
Free computers
Free transportation

And higher higher higer taxes on anyone who dares wander off the plantation in search of a better life.
And thats for starters.

I challenge you to give me ONE example of either someone on this forum or someone in power who wants all of those things.

 

[Wry Catcher]

.

Fairly simple to answer.

As a whole (to generalize, of course, but the far Left and the far Right are fairly recognizable in their approaches), the Left wants to accomplish what Barack Obama so clearly and repeatedly promised when he ran for President: They want to "change", "fundamentally transform", and "re-make" America, all his words.

It's not unreasonable to ask why someone would want to "change", "fundamentally transform", and "re-make" something that they like, and it's therefore not unreasonable to wonder if these people like this country, let alone love it.

Marxism, socialism, communism? No, that's a mistake the far Right makes when they try to explain what they're seeing happen. A Euro-social democracy? That's more like it. This would require bringing America's dynamic nature down a few pegs, finding a more mediocre level, and we're getting there pretty quickly. I'd guess this will take another 20 years or so, depending on how often the Right continues to shoot itself in the foot.

.

Again, we are stuck in a quagmire of missing definitions. The one fundamental change I've seen is limited to the The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and the PPACA (Obamacare). Issues which have been simmering for decades, and whose time had come. Only the callous conservatives believe paying women less than men for the same work is 'fair' (fair to whom, one might ask) and that the health care system which preceded the PPACA wasn't a failure for too many American Citizens.

No effort on wage and price controls has been put forth (at least since the Nixon Administration) and for those who are selective in their history, the Ford Administration, in response to STAGFLATION, signed the CETA Program, putting people to work in state and local government jobs to lessen the impact of that recession.

Wasn't it nice when the Republican Party put our citizens and the country first?

 

[The Rabbi]

You're a low information moron. Like thats news to anyone.
Discriinating against women on equal pay has been illegal since 1963. The Lilly Ledbetter Act had nothing to do with that. It was a trial lawyers full employment act. Nothing more.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Lol. This "Far Left" rhetoric is just nonsense.

You believe that people should have the equal treatment under the law guaranteed by the 14th amendment? Far left marxist Obama-loving commie bastard!!

Feel that a social safety net for the weakest in our society to survive is a good idea? Far left commie pinko bastard!!

It's absolute nonsense.

There is "far left", there is "far right".

If you don't see that, fine. But it is not nonsense.

The nonsense comes when posters accuse anyone they disagree with as "far left" or right. Sure the two extremes exist, but not as frequently as the hardliners would have us believe.

Is there such a thing as a moderate rapist?

When a liberty loving conservative fights to preserve freedom, for instance the freedom of association which allows a baker to refuse to bake a cake for homosexuals, that SAME FREEDOM allows a homosexual baker to refuse to bake cakes for Christians.

So when conservatives fight for human rights those human rights also extend to liberals.

When liberals fight to strip people of their human rights, they cross a line, much like a rapist, in that they really can't be moderate or tolerant when they seek to impose their totalitarian vision on people against their will.

Sure, some liberals can be way over the top in their totalitarian desires while others only desire a little bit of totalitarianism but both have crossed the boundary - when you strip people of their human rights in order to impose your agenda of "niceness and kindness and forced tolerance" you're in the camp of the far left.

The reasonable left is very small in number and very confused for still identifying as being of the left. These folks would be the ones who argue that they disagree with the baker choosing to not bake the cake for the gays but they support his right to do so. These folks still support and defend human rights but they preach what they believe is a better course. No one that I know has any problem with liberals expressing their viewpoint, so these folks are fine.

It's the totalitarianism of the left that exiles them out of polite company and makes them far-left, makes them radicals.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You're a low information moron. Like thats news to anyone.
Discriinating against women on equal pay has been illegal since 1963. The Lilly Ledbetter Act had nothing to do with that. It was a trial lawyers full employment act. Nothing more.

Spin it the way you want, here's a summary:

"The antecedents of the case were posed when Lilly Ledbetter, a production supervisor at a Goodyear tire plant in Alabama, filed an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, six months before her early retirement in 1998.[2][3]

The courts gave opposite verdicts, first supporting the complainant and later opposing; in conclusion the complaint brought the case to the attention of the Supreme Court. The latter ruled in 2007 by a 5-4 majority vote that Ledbetter's complaint was time-barred because the discriminatory decisions relating to pay had been made more than 180 days prior to the date she filed her charge, as explained by Justice Samuel Alito.[4] Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion proposed an interpretation according to which the law runs from the date of any paycheck that contains an amount affected by a prior discriminatory pay decision".

It was the GOP, when under control of those who would be considered RINOs today, that the Equal Rights Amendment was opposed.

Still pretending the Republican Party is the party of the big tent, huh rabbit? Face it, no body believed it in the past, and even the GOP no longer suggests it is so. LIke you the GOP is the party of callous conservatives whose motto is, "I got mine, **** the rest of you!".

 

[The Rabbi]

You're a low information moron. Like thats news to anyone.
Discriinating against women on equal pay has been illegal since 1963. The Lilly Ledbetter Act had nothing to do with that. It was a trial lawyers full employment act. Nothing more.

Spin it the way you want, here's a summary:

"The antecedents of the case were posed when Lilly Ledbetter, a production supervisor at a Goodyear tire plant in Alabama, filed an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, six months before her early retirement in 1998.[2][3]

The courts gave opposite verdicts, first supporting the complainant and later opposing; in conclusion the complaint brought the case to the attention of the Supreme Court. The latter ruled in 2007 by a 5-4 majority vote that Ledbetter's complaint was time-barred because the discriminatory decisions relating to pay had been made more than 180 days prior to the date she filed her charge, as explained by Justice Samuel Alito.[4] Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion proposed an interpretation according to which the law runs from the date of any paycheck that contains an amount affected by a prior discriminatory pay decision".

It was the GOP, when under control of those who would be considered RINOs today, that the Equal Rights Amendment was opposed.

Still pretending the Republican Party is the party of the big tent, huh rabbit? Face it, no body believed it in the past, and even the GOP no longer suggests it is so. LIke you the GOP is the party of callous conservatives whose motto is, "I got mine, **** the rest of you!".

Yes, almost every action has a statute of limitations. If you dont file suit within a specific time, you lose your right to redress. Congress demagogued the issue to make it about "equal pay for women" which has been the law since nineteen ******* sixty three. And low information idiots like you fall for it. Every time.

 

[2aguy]

Again, we are stuck in a quagmire of missing definitions. The one fundamental change I've seen is limited to the The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and the PPACA (Obamacare). Issues which have been simmering for decades, and whose time had come. Only the callous conservatives believe paying women less than men for the same work is 'fair' (fair to whom, one might ask) and that the health care system which preceded the PPACA wasn't a failure for too many American Citizens.

You do realize that Obama isn't paying his female staffers the same as the men...don't you? Even as he is making speeches about equal pay and equal work...he is paying men more....

and you do realize that the notion that women aren't being paid the same as men, as a concept is fake right...? The reasons for any disparity in pay is a result of life choices made by men and women revolving around raising children job preferences and hours put into their jobs...

but the truth is difficult for the left...

 

[jasonnfree]

I know exactly what the Far-Left wants

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxKd5lpZwLY

How about in your own words what the far left wants, since you know exactly what it is they want. Explain maybe what you think a far lefty is while you're at it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Those who support the Republican brand seem to use the phrase "far left" and "left wingers" to describe everyone who disagrees with the dogma they hold true. Since it makes no sense to use these phrases to describe ten of millions of Americans, maybe one of them who uses these phrases would describe the beliefs those who disagree with them hold.

That the phrases are used interchangeably with "Marixts, "Communists", "Socialists" and other such words as pejoratives, and it is likely these economic theories are not understood and are not differentiated from political theories of governance by their users, I expect any of them who attempt to answer this question to default to personal attacks and or idiot-grams. But we will see, maybe one of them will actually think and respond substantively.

if you want to know ask Dean.....

 

[Two Thumbs]

damn, read the whole thread and not one leftist posted what they want, except for that wymins character and she asked for what she already has.

so what is it guys? what do you really want?

remove the 2nd
forced fairness
no rights for biz owners to say who they do biz with
mandated purchasing of another product
re-written Constitution
forced higher wages

notice there's a lot of force involved in what you want?

seriously, what do you want other than to ***** that we don't get it?

is the debt not big enough?
have we not murdered enough citizens and looked away?

What's it take for any of you to look at what you support and go; hmmm, that's not really working out
?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

damn, read the whole thread and not one leftist posted what they want, except for that wymins character and she asked for what she already has.

so what is it guys? what do you really want?

Sweden, warmer with fewer blondes.

And I posted, you missed it.

 

[oldfart]

Those who support the Republican brand seem to use the phrase "far left" and "left wingers" to describe everyone who disagrees with the dogma they hold true. Since it makes no sense to use these phrases to describe ten of millions of Americans, maybe one of them who uses these phrases would describe the beliefs those who disagree with them hold.

That the phrases are used interchangeably with "Marixts, "Communists", "Socialists" and other such words as pejoratives, and it is likely these economic theories are not understood and are not differentiated from political theories of governance by their users, I expect any of them who attempt to answer this question to default to personal attacks and or idiot-grams. But we will see, maybe one of them will actually think and respond substantively.

OK, a few observations at the start. With the notable exception of PaintmyHouse, whose pithy response has been studiously ignored, no one has represented that they are a part of the "far left". As the self-proclaimed representative of the Spartacists and the Left Opposition, I gladly assume that role.

Since the OP was directed at the "right" to explain what they thought the "far left" wanted for America, this should have been a discussion among partisans of the right and the OP. Where the whining about no lefties answering comes from I can only ascribe to difficulty in reading comprehension.

In fairness, Boss did a workmanlike job in actually answering the OP. I don't agree with the views he put forward, but they were reasonably argued. As to the "idiot-grams"; that was to be expected.

In my observation almost all significant legislation is the result of compromise and negotiation. That guarantees that purists from the right or left are likely to be disappointed. It also means that law will usually be made by those pragmatists willing to live with what can be worked out. It seems the left has learned this lesson; even an avowed Socialist like Bernie Sanders seems willing to work with anyone if the end result promises to be better than the status quo. We haven't heard many calls to man the barricades from the revolutionary left lately; that imagery has been taken up by a motley collection of right-wingers.

So I have one question for the folks on the right; "What are you doing after the Revolution?"

 

[AntiParty]

"Far Left" LOL!

Everyone in America today is painted as "Far Left" if they don't submit to everything Rupert Merdoch believes in.

If you use your brain for 1 second you can be labeled a "Leftist".

Sorry Fox News junkies. I'll keep using my own brain and deal with your ignorant labeling system.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Actual far lyftyst here, setting the record straight--although I do detest situations in which I must use that horribly bigoted term.

What does the "far left" want for America?

Equality. Is that so much to ask?

Smylycyns all around for that invigorating answer!!

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

The real answer to that question is does anyone actually give a flying turdtoaster as to what the far left wants?

 

[Rikurzhen]

In my observation almost all significant legislation is the result of compromise and negotiation. That guarantees that purists from the right or left are likely to be disappointed. It also means that law will usually be made by those pragmatists willing to live with what can be worked out. It seems the left has learned this lesson; even an avowed Socialist like Bernie Sanders seems willing to work with anyone if the end result promises to be better than the status quo. We haven't heard many calls to man the barricades from the revolutionary left lately; that imagery has been taken up by a motley collection of right-wingers.

There's a reason that the Left is more keen on negotiation than the Right. Let me illustrate the dynamic through the use of a colorful example. Two conservatives are arguing about desert. One wants a bowl of stawberries and the other wants some nice cream to go with the strawberries. They negotiate between themselves on how much strawberries and how much cream to put into the common bowl that they will share. Eventually they reach a negotiated settlement and they're both happy.

The next day the conservative who liked cream can't make the dinner but a Leftist arrives in his place. Now the conservatives wants a nice bowl of strawberries again. The Leftist though wants his desert to be a heaping bowl of dog shit mixed with strawberries. The conservative has nothing at all to gain from a negotiated desert for his desert is utterly ruined by having dog shit mixed in with his strawberries. If he is forced to compromise his principles have been utterly violated. There is no meeting in the middle, it's a direct violation of core principles. After this first negotiation there is no going back, dog-shit-strawberry desert is now the standard. At the next dinner this standard becomes the benchmark and more dog shit has to be added to the desert.

To bring this back to the real world, substitute lean government for strawberries and substitute welfare redistribution for dog shit. If a conservative believes that it is wholly immoral for government to force one person to work so that it can appropriate the gains produced by that work and send it to another person in order to enhance their welfare, then ANY COMPROMISE on that principle is intolerable. There is no meeting in the middle, for once the line is crossed the principle is completely abandoned. Think of it like a negotiation on rape. Can a rapist and a woman ever compromise on that? There is a fast and hard principled line - the woman controls her own body - that can't be crossed.

What liberals want is to impose their anti-freedom agenda on America. Look at how they continually roll-back and attack the right of free association. They have a vision for how society should function and they're willing to rape people's liberty in order to achieve that vision. Republicans like Goldwater understood that Democrats were offering to share their dog shit with his strawberries and rejected that vision. Sadly, his view didn't prevail and we saw more and more dogshit shoved into the strawberry desert with every subsequent piece of civil rights legislation. Now we have religious bakers having to violate their religious beliefs in order to make homosexuals feel like they're normal people. "Being Nice" (even under duress) takes precedence over protection of human rights and liberty.