Find me one, I dare you. Leftism as an ideology requires the participant to either be too stupid to realize that their ideas have killed a hundred million people, or too evil to care.
Correct. There are no reasonable leftists but there are low IQ ones. You can only be a leftist if you're brainwashed which means you aren't reasonable.
You can find "reasonable liberals" who're mostly just classical liberals that haven't realized their movement led to leftism yet.
But then again, imo it's pretty easy to see how things would play out if the left of today came into power and just on that alone I don't see how anyone could still call themselves a leftist. The stakes are way too high for that.
Reasonable leftists is like a seal loving penguin. They all get snuffed out early. You can probably find a number of people like that dispersed around the high school crowd, individuals who want to be good and kind to others and haven't yet experienced the hot poker of being accused of wrongthink yet.
Democrats from the 1950s were reasonable, but those kind of people have all been ran out of the Democrat party.
Joe Lieberman was the last prominent member of that Democrat party, and he got primaried in the 2006 Democrat primary for Connecticut Senator, and had to run as a 3rd party. He won, but that was his last term, he didn't run again.
Pew research has a long running poll series that documents the sentiments of Democrats and Republicans, and they have tracked the far left shift of the Democrat party over the years. 30 years ago there was not much divide between the average D and R, with the means of the chart being center left and center right, but over the years that mean has shifted far to the left for the average D, and barely budged to the right at all for the average R.
We all like to say that to the average woke lefty, anyone to the right of Pol Pot is a "right wing extremist," and to a large extent this is true, because the woke left now has more in common ideologically with Pol Pot than not.
That's the problem with accepting emotional rationale for your ethics--somebody can always claim a greater emotional cause. It generates a moral arms race that shifts the ideology further and further to the fringe. Most left thinkers don't have a concrete set of moral stances--just "Suffering is bad, and we should prevent suffering wherever we can". Well, suffering is unfortunately not objective and thus the goalposts move themselves.
I'm not going to downvote you for your answer being basically "Joe Lieberman", but the Democrat party of the 50s was fully in bed with the USSR, an outright foreign enemy of the nation. Hell they were in the 20s too, if it wasn't for Roosevelt and his cabal of socialists the United States would be a very different, and much better, place than it is right now.
At the elite level, yes, Democrats were loaded with commies, but not at the street level. The elites went to a lot of trouble to hide their allegiances, too, which is why they went nuts over the House Un-American Committee, and Senator McCarthy. They had to, because the average Democrat voter would have dropped them like six month old milk.
Even though the elite level of the Democrat party was riddled with commies, you still had politicians like JFK and Truman who were not commies.
Find me one, I dare you. Leftism as an ideology requires the participant to either be too stupid to realize that their ideas have killed a hundred million people, or too evil to care.
Correct. There are no reasonable leftists but there are low IQ ones. You can only be a leftist if you're brainwashed which means you aren't reasonable.
You can find "reasonable liberals" who're mostly just classical liberals that haven't realized their movement led to leftism yet.
Glenn Greenwald seems pretty sensible.
But then again, imo it's pretty easy to see how things would play out if the left of today came into power and just on that alone I don't see how anyone could still call themselves a leftist. The stakes are way too high for that.
Reasonable leftists is like a seal loving penguin. They all get snuffed out early. You can probably find a number of people like that dispersed around the high school crowd, individuals who want to be good and kind to others and haven't yet experienced the hot poker of being accused of wrongthink yet.
Democrats from the 1950s were reasonable, but those kind of people have all been ran out of the Democrat party.
Joe Lieberman was the last prominent member of that Democrat party, and he got primaried in the 2006 Democrat primary for Connecticut Senator, and had to run as a 3rd party. He won, but that was his last term, he didn't run again.
Pew research has a long running poll series that documents the sentiments of Democrats and Republicans, and they have tracked the far left shift of the Democrat party over the years. 30 years ago there was not much divide between the average D and R, with the means of the chart being center left and center right, but over the years that mean has shifted far to the left for the average D, and barely budged to the right at all for the average R.
We all like to say that to the average woke lefty, anyone to the right of Pol Pot is a "right wing extremist," and to a large extent this is true, because the woke left now has more in common ideologically with Pol Pot than not.
That's the problem with accepting emotional rationale for your ethics--somebody can always claim a greater emotional cause. It generates a moral arms race that shifts the ideology further and further to the fringe. Most left thinkers don't have a concrete set of moral stances--just "Suffering is bad, and we should prevent suffering wherever we can". Well, suffering is unfortunately not objective and thus the goalposts move themselves.
I'm not going to downvote you for your answer being basically "Joe Lieberman", but the Democrat party of the 50s was fully in bed with the USSR, an outright foreign enemy of the nation. Hell they were in the 20s too, if it wasn't for Roosevelt and his cabal of socialists the United States would be a very different, and much better, place than it is right now.
At the elite level, yes, Democrats were loaded with commies, but not at the street level. The elites went to a lot of trouble to hide their allegiances, too, which is why they went nuts over the House Un-American Committee, and Senator McCarthy. They had to, because the average Democrat voter would have dropped them like six month old milk.
Even though the elite level of the Democrat party was riddled with commies, you still had politicians like JFK and Truman who were not commies.
I do not care. You are what you vote for.