Basically the title.
I'm seeing people praising this Luigi dude. However, I cannot think of a time in history when it became popular to advocate murdering people in the streets that wasn't followed by leftists committing mass atrocities.
All I have seen is an increase in advocacy for murdering white men, right wing ceos, our future president, and anyone seen as wealthy.
I am struggling to see how anyone is reconciling being right wing with the complete disorder and moral failing that murdering random people in the street would involve.
This isn't some issue that is bridging the gap with the left. They want you dead too. They will celebrate your death as well.
This is an example why I think we will never ultimately win because the right is so quick to adopt the ideas of the left.
So please give me an example in history where this hasn't led to bad examples.
To further illustrate my point. Look at the difference in media coverage. We know more about Luigi than the Nashville shooter or Crookes and one murdered a bunch of children and the other shot the president.
Yet we know Luigis social media, his goals and motivation, his childhood and every single picture meant to make him look cool.
Leftist may not have been a recognized term but the definition-based left-right axis does still function as a tool to look at older governments.
The modern "it means whatever I want it to mean, x team good y team bad" left right bastardizations certainly don't fit, but those are marxist propaganda efforts.
TBH unless you're trimming the definition down to a single issue like big gov Vs small gov, I'm not sure it is a unified axis without the definitions to coalesce around. For lots of things on the left-right axis there's no intrinsic reason for them to be linked other than historic "that's the left's position, and that's the right's". Example, I don't think there's an intrinsic link between wanting the government to coddle layabouts and ignoring the obvious differing average abilities between the sexes, or idolising faggotry and sexual deviance. I don't think it's inherent human nature to link those together, I think it's a learned behavior.
Without that historic baggage I think you would have so many more people with mixed political ideals that the whole axis breaks apart.
I said the definition based left right axis because there is a clear definitional axis. What you're identifying is something like the reddit political compass, which is self contradicting propaganda. Horseshoe theory is propaganda.
An axis is defined by it's extreme endpoints. The left end is authoritarian or statist / collectivist, the right end is anarchist / individualist. It is also sometimes identified as a vertical scale where they explain the natural tendency of government to grow and become corrupt as gravity, but that is honestly just an attempt at reframing it as "good / bad" by libertarian types. I agree with it morally, but the purist measuring tool is just left right.
The reason this works and the retarded reddit political compass (horseshoe theory) doesn't is this is an objective and clear axis. Every ideology can be placed on it related to other ideologies. And it doesn't have any retarded contradictions like "right wing socialists" or "left libertarians" because you aren't trying to tack arbitrary relative cultural elements onto what is supposed to be an objective measuring scale.
Honestly I always thought the entire point of the using a vague, abstract nomenclature like left-right is so you can lump a bunch of goals that aren't easily described quickly together. E.g. Whole post revolution political dockets.
Using left-right as a simple stand-in for "big gov-no gov" does make left-right a properly opposed and philosophically cohesive axis. But I just don't see the point of the nomenclature existing at all that point, when you can just as succinctly describe the single axis with its actual foundational premise. It's just inviting the confusion when there's an already hijacked homonym out there.
It's just a measuring axis. It is a tool for sorting ideologies and relating them to eachother. It is useful for teaching and explaining concepts like how different political ideologies relate and share core operational philosophies.
It helps that leftist ideologies always fail and cause massive chaos, and historically leftism can be seen to produce far more destruction and failed states. You can also use it to measure ideological drift over time (the point of the vertical version is that governments always grow larger and more corrupt over time). Looking at patterns is useful for showing people that their communist bullshit, or their socialist bullshit, or whatver flavor of retarded authoritarian bullshit isn't special. Like the "my socialism is THIRD POSITION it's not like the other ideologies" retards.
That also explains why this axis is perverted and obfuscated primarily by leftists. Because when you recognize patterns they lose. The axis itself doesn't show you that leftism is evil, but it can be used to demonstrate patterns of human and government behavior over time, which can be used to show that leftism is objectively bad for systems of government.