If you are screaming about how critical race theory is anti-white,
All leftism is racist, including it's descendants, Marxism, National Socialism, and CRT.
Isn't that fun? Let's dissect it briefly. It's in fact a fairly common argument among old-school liberals and conservatives, that opposing CRT or as I'd call it radical liberalism, in ways that is heretical to old-school liberalism
The original lefties, the Jacobins, were guillotine nutters that invented "universal human rights" merely as a PR scam.
The Girondins (US: /(d)ʒɪˈrɒndɪnz/ ji-RON-dinz, zhi-,[3] French: [ʒiʁɔ̃dɛ̃] (listen)), or Girondists, were members of a loosely knit political faction during the French Revolution.
From 1791 to 1793, the Girondins were active in the Legislative Assembly and the National Convention. Together with the Montagnards, they initially were part of the Jacobin movement. They campaigned for the end of the monarchy, but then resisted the spiraling momentum of the Revolution, which caused a conflict with the more radical Montagnards. They dominated the movement until their fall in the insurrection of 31 May – 2 June 1793, which resulted in the domination of the Montagnards and the purge and mass execution of the Girondins. This event is considered to mark the beginning of the Reign of Terror.
The Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen of 1793 (French: Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen de 1793) is a French political document that preceded that country's first republican constitution. The Declaration and Constitution were ratified by popular vote in July 1793, and officially adopted on 10 August; however, they never went into effect, and the constitution was officially suspended on 10 October. It is unclear whether this suspension was thought to affect the Declaration as well.
Equality is the most important aspect of the Declaration of 1793. In its second article, equality is the first right mentioned (followed by liberty, security, and property). In Article 3 states "All men are equal by nature and before the law". As such, for the authors of this declaration equality is not only before the law but it is also a natural right, that is to say, a fact of nature.
Article 7 states "The necessity of enunciating these rights supposes either the presence or the fresh recollection of despotism." Article 9: "The law ought to protect public and personal liberty against the oppression of those who govern." Article 33 states that resisting tyranny is a logical consequence of the rights of man: "Resistance to oppression is the consequence of the other rights of man". Article 34 states that if one is oppressed, everyone is. Article 27 states "Let any person who may usurp the sovereignty be instantly put to death by free men." Though the usurpation of sovereignty is not detailed, sovereignty is explained in article 25 as residing "in the people". There is no doubt that this way of thinking deeply influenced the revolutionary government during the Terror.
Finally, article 35 states "When the government violates the rights of the people, insurrection is for the people and for each portion of the people the most sacred of rights and the most indispensable of duties."
"Human" rights doesn't exist, and neither does "liberals", nor "radical liberals".
They're about as real and binding as Santa Claus and the US Constitution. Toliet paper is more real.
Yeah, I'm aware about most of it, though I'd disagree with your conclusion that human rights don't exist. They do, they just serve to justify imperialism.
As for human rights, they were critiqued by Marx:
Yes, Marx, in his "On the Jewish question" tells us rights only exists in a community-society-democracy-collective. And other things too. All things only exist in socialism, aka "human" rights don't exist, leftist rights do.
Marx, like all leftists, is deluded and lives in a pesudo-reality.
In the end, those ensnared lose the ability to distinguish reality and pseudo-reality almost entirely and become functionally psychopathic, and if they gain enough social, cultural, economic, and political power, they can hold hostage entire societies that are, in effect, on the march to totalitarianism and, eventually, total catastrophic collapse.
Don't believe in stupid things like "human" rights, Santa Claus or the mystic powers of "the US Constitution", a piece of paper.
As for liberals, it does exist insofar that it's a term referring to certain set of beliefs, ideals, and values, all of which are utilized to justify their application in real life, which ends up necessarily different. Certainly, in its ideal form it can exist only in fantasy or fiction, especially due to the notion of individuals, but that's also the case with "free market" and other various ideologies/systems. as a fucking 200 year old lie.
There are no human rights, but there are God given rights. The trick they used to corrupt people is to turn them away from God to focus on man. (selfishness, ego) Thus, human rights were born.
Yes, human rights are meaningless in a secular worldview. Because it always boils down to "my right to speech/life/etc is intrinsic", because they can't say sacred. But what if I don't agree with your assessment of what's intrinsic to human "dignity". And what happens when I have the power to take away your so-called rights? Why shouldn't I? Because you said I'd be evil? Because you deep-down believe they're sacred? Solely because you asserted that I can't? LMAO watch me
If however, you believe their is a higher power, then your appeal to intrinsic rights is logically sound. Because then the violator of your rights will get his in the end. And their punishment will be far worse than anything they could ever deal to you on earth
You're confusing the point being made, which is that within society it does exist and has immense power behind it, which if left at "x doesn't exist" ignores that.
All leftism is racist, including it's descendants, Marxism, National Socialism, and CRT.
The original lefties, the Jacobins, were guillotine nutters that invented "universal human rights" merely as a PR scam.
https://archive.ph/XpY2R https:// en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Girondins
https://archive.ph/TUc3U https:// en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_the_Man_and_of_the_Citizen_of_1793
"Human" rights doesn't exist, and neither does "liberals", nor "radical liberals".
They're about as real and binding as Santa Claus and the US Constitution. Toliet paper is more real.
Yes, Marx, in his "On the Jewish question" tells us rights only exists in a community-society-democracy-collective. And other things too. All things only exist in socialism, aka "human" rights don't exist, leftist rights do.
Marx, like all leftists, is deluded and lives in a pesudo-reality.
https://archive.vn/smjeB https://newdiscourses.com/2021/01/nature-pseudo-reality/
Don't believe in stupid things like "human" rights, Santa Claus or the mystic powers of "the US Constitution", a piece of paper.
There are no human rights, but there are God given rights. The trick they used to corrupt people is to turn them away from God to focus on man. (selfishness, ego) Thus, human rights were born.
Yes, human rights are meaningless in a secular worldview. Because it always boils down to "my right to speech/life/etc is intrinsic", because they can't say sacred. But what if I don't agree with your assessment of what's intrinsic to human "dignity". And what happens when I have the power to take away your so-called rights? Why shouldn't I? Because you said I'd be evil? Because you deep-down believe they're sacred? Solely because you asserted that I can't? LMAO watch me
If however, you believe their is a higher power, then your appeal to intrinsic rights is logically sound. Because then the violator of your rights will get his in the end. And their punishment will be far worse than anything they could ever deal to you on earth
She’s not wrong.
Leftism is totalitarianism.
Santa Claus man.