Only a deluded mind sees our political landscape in terms of left and right. They've been moving towards the same goal for decades. Bush used 9/11 to push the most aggressive internal spying program this country has ever seen. Obama built on it making it the machine it is today. Bush had a republican majority in both house and Senate. Obama had a democratic majority for a bit in both House and Senate. Yet we see them both moving in the same direction.

Open your eyes. Your right/left paradigm doesn't exist and you are just a puppet of the "right" to push this false paradigm.

Only a deluded mind sees our political landscape in terms of republicans or democrats. But, there are major differences between the 'left' and 'right'. But, what the right actually believes in is far different from what popular culture and 'the news' and what the left wants you to believe it is.

All that 'party of the rich, legislating what goes on in peoples bedrooms, hypocritical religious posturing, anti-drug' propaganda that the left claims that the right is all about, is actually more descriptive of the Republican party, which does not truly represent the right in any capacity.

The difference between 'right' and 'left' is as simple as the difference between individualism, and collectivism. That's it.

If you think about that long enough, you begin to see why both major political parties have nothing in common with 'the right', and why they both seem to be dead set against it ever being a part of the political process, and why there is such heavily entrenched propaganda in place to demonize it. I shouldn't need to explain why 'the powers that be' would rather you espouse collectivist beliefs, than individualism.

Another small yet significant difference I found between 'the right' and 'the left' is their approach to names, or being labeled. The right is...the right. The label of conservatism tries hard to cover all the bases, but most times it is just an albatross around the neck of the concept of true right wing beliefs. The Republicans like to pretend that they are 'right wing', but they have no intention of actually following through with any of that messy 'individual liberties and sovereignity' business.

But the left, they sure love their names. Every time the public gets sick of them and seems about to rise up against them, they disappear and gather under a new moniker, some of them seemingly designed to advertise how harmless they are, and how beneficial it would be if you would vote for them. 'Liberals'....who doesn't love someone who is liberal with their things, or with money? 'Progressives'...because if you make your name a signifier that you are moving into the future, it automatically smears your opponent as 'regressive'! Whatever think tank thought that one up, it's a good one, I gotta say.

And then there is this difference between the right and the left, a difference that is impossible to ignore: If the right suddenly ran the world, they would leave the left alone to think, believe, and even convert others to whatever radical nonsense they desire. But if the left ran things, they would just kill all the right wingers, either immediately or eventually. History bears this out.

So, that is just my two cents on 'left' and 'right' wingers and the differences thereof.

Interesting insight, thank you for taking the time to type it all out! Definitely food for thought.

so let me get this straight: the left is totally evil and the right is all totally good. right. youre not deluded at all are ya?

sorry if it hurts your feelings, but that's just the way it is.

sorry if it hurts your feelings

hurts my feelings!?!? hell no it doesnt! this is all laughter fuel for me!

Actions speak louder than words. I gave you actions, you gave me political speeches. Obama gave good speeches too. Speeches that talked about reversing Bush policies, being more transparent than Bush, and having less executive orders than Bush. How'd that work out? He built on each one of the Bush crimes.

Stop building your foundation on political speeches. They are bullshit and we should all realize that by now.

There are no "radical right" and "radical left" politicians. Only the appearance of so to keep fools pining for the other side so as to make it appear like we have a choice. There is nothing but mainstream politics.

I am not talking about mainstream politics.

you do realize they both ran for president. right? how can you possibly be more main stream than running for president?!

We have been under a Hegelian system since Wilson. It has always been the same coin, just different sides. His visit to Deer Island and his immediate policies show we are in no way in control

I get that. Its human nature to label everything black or white. thats why no matter the historic context or location, there is always a dichotomy. Dont you understand that you effing clown?

wrong on all accounts. The end game is the same. you are sitting here focusing on the road while we all are heading to smash into a wall. Thats why you're a plebian, because you cant see the forest for the trees.

i have picked a side, but its arbitrary until you remove the whole system. thats what i am working on. you are looking to pick a side to continue the same bullshit process? which "side" has ever offered significant and lasting change? please provide support and evidence to your point of view.

The process is part of the political thought. its the construct through which all things politics are perceived. I am speaking of the oligarchical system that prohibits more viable candidates from running for office due to lack of financial support and that they must identify with one side or the other to stand a specific chance. Both sides are radical, thats why the represent sides of a spectrum. My argument is that radical is negative either way (left or right). Political identity frames many other contexts, social, familial and work lives, so political identity is crucial to the entire spectrum. Also, the red herring means i am arguing something completely off topic, fine job offering nothing but your opinion and no evidence,

you can create whatever concepts help you sleep at night. How will we achieve your end game?

hmm.

The sad part is a lot of people see just left and right. I do not want label myself as centrist because even that is too simple. It is sad we limit political positions as centrist, left and right, on a dimensional line. My political position would not be on a plane whether 2d or 3d, because I pick and choose the different things I like and wouldn't fit with what people consider libertarian or socialist, or centrist.

Funny... the least corrupt nations on earth are socialist.

Downvoted in just seconds.

Someone is trying to silence you.

They don't want your message to be heard.

/r/conspiracy doesn't have any boarders.

Yes, we have strong views on piracy.

Shiver me timbers! That be censorship, ye lowly bilge rat!

I am censoring the letter 'a' like a revenue man, you're just going to have to walk the plank.

Yes, we have strong views on piracy.

i have picked a side, but its arbitrary until you remove the whole system. thats what i am working on. you are looking to pick a side to continue the same bullshit process? which "side" has ever offered significant and lasting change? please provide support and evidence to your point of view.