Questions for the alt-left

Does what's left or right on the political compass depend on the political mean, medain, and mod of the region the test was created?

Attached: Spectrum.jpg (775x509 2.12 MB, 79.89K)

Other urls found in this thread:

No, lurk moar.

Do you know how long I've been here?

Attached: Screenshot_20190314-173859_DuckDuckGo.jpg (1080x2220, 553.53K)

Unlike the "alternative right", which represented something new in its (schizophrenic and opportunistic) rejection of censorship and warmongering, leftism has always been defined by its consistent championing of free expression and pacifism. Indeed, the very thing the aut-right most rails against, "political correctness", was (much like "SJW") coined by genuine leftists as a slur against ruthless careerism within communism in the early 1900s.

The SJWs are the "alt-left". We are merely leftists, as the left has been from its enlightenment origins.

Someone can be "to the left" or "to the right" of someone else, sure. The spectrum extends from the far-right of its foundation under feudalism, past today's struggles to achieve socialism.

Attached: political-spectrum-lecture-8-728.jpg (728x546, 225.14K)

I believe the question is correct.

I also think the majority people of America who are left of the mean, median, and mod aren't communists/socialists. And I define alt-left as alternive left wing ideology with vast differences from the mainstream left wing ideology.

Basically I think communists/socialists in America are alt-left. At least until the mainstream left wing ideology dies.

There is no mainstream leftism in the US today. Even the furthest left factions with any mainstream support in the Democratic Party are far to the right of mainstream right-wing parties in the rest of the 1st-world.

Hopefully that can be changed with a revitalization of the powerful organized labor that formed the engine of robust American socialism from the late 1800s, but until then there is no mainstream left in the country.

Mate, the fact socialism/communism isn't mainstream in America makes me call it alternative, and because most of time socialism/communism are left wing, I call it left wing.

So alt-left.

Since no one seems to answer your question, I'll give you mine:

Left/right was mainly used during the french revolution to encompass the supporters of the monarchy (right wing) and the revolutionaries who wanted to abolish the monarchy (left wing). The so called "libertarian + left/right" is also misleading, given that "Libertarian" was first used by Joseph Dejaque (an ancom himself) circa the mid 19th century to define his ideology and was later bastardized by Murray Cuckbard to give his shitty ideology an edgier name.

What's the problem with the political compass? It tries to use the term "libertarian" as it's own spectrum, when in reality libertarian is a fancier term for anarcho-communist (the french government back then labeled anarchist as "terrorist"). Right "libertarianism" is an oxymoron, since it's just merely virtue signalled capitalism. The proper term for right "libertarianism" is liberalism.

Left/right on economics merely defines who is in control of the economy/means of production (either capitalism or socialism; there's no third position, as much as nazifags and nazbolfags want you to believe). Stalin is considered left wing because of anti-communist propaganda by the anglo-sphere, yet there was never a worker's control of the economy and worker's autonomy/state.

Long-story-short: The political compass and the one dimensional political spectrum is very anglo-centric; basically capitalism = good, socialism = bad. Tankies/nazbols/strasserites are just national capitalists; spooked/idpolled capitalism.

SJW's are a cancer definitely, but I wouldn't consider them to be the "Alt-left". The "Alt-Right" is usually defined as Far Right groups with White Identify/Supremacy being at the core of their beliefs. The left wing equivalent of that would be the Nazbols.

Judging from your terminology, approximately zero hours.

Well, even granting you the benefit of doubt and assuming you genuinely were not aware of the origins of the term in liberal media ("socialists are all reactionary racists/sexists similar to the alt-right") and its subsequent adoption by conservative media ("socialists are all violent smashies similar to neo-nazis") and far-right ("you guys are actually like us, let's fight joos together")…

…if you really wished to have a meaningful conversation, you should drop it about two posts ago. And you really should have just lurked more before starting it.

If the alt-right is the identitarian right, then the alt-left would be the identitarian left (i.e. SJWs). They don't need to cover the same identity.

They are very much alt-left, given that the old left was strongly class-centered and largely ignored identity politics, unless it was class related (think segregation/apartheid, abolition of slavery, etc). Abolishing identity politics is the goal of the actual left, since it's a distraction by the bourgeoisie to divide the workers.

The right started idpol, the alt-left (new left, if you must) pushed it to it's absurd and logical conclusion. Both are pretty much anti-working class; the alt-right is just far more reactionary.

non-factual argument, forgetting nazbol here.

Nazbol is literally a meme though. This board is where all five unironic nazbols shitpost.


I actually agree to that, not all of you guys are violent idiots.

Actual left, do I have to play the scotsman with you.

No, identy politics has existed ever since more than one tribe of humans has existed.

Mate, can you stop using that fucking word? It's so Annoying and stupid. It's only real meaning to you idiots is
"People in politics who annoy me". When in actuality the definition should be something like "a person reacts in an extremely negative way to political stimuli".

Ok. Explain what communists and liberals have in common.
You absolute fucking retard.

They're on the left side of the compass, meaning they are in favor of give less economic freedom to society as a whole. Other than that nothing else really. Unions and stuff.

Months ago I asked a question asking if the people in countries that used to be communists who want it to return to the previous status quo co. And guess what they told me. They wagged their finger and not uh.

Attached: 7830be3c-a6b1-42b1-8db7-3b9a6ba5ecdb_popkey-veronica_.gif (500x334, 362.04K)

Whether those people are reactionaries.

Attached: strangle.jpg (1500x846, 102.33K)


Attached: bothaxes.gif (400x400, 10.32K)

Yes we obviously know about the political compas, and if you bothered to read any threads other than your own (but you won't because you're a massive narcissist), you'd know we dismiss this shit as entirely confined to the logic of capitalism. There are no communist answers in this questionnaire.

Attached: Tankie.png (480x400, 17.17K)

Well do you have something more accurate?

Also what are these?

Attached: Screenshot_20190314-231158_Chrome.jpg (2220x1080 208.57 KB, 183.85K)

Well, yes, but nothing beats an actual fucking book.

Political compasses/spectrums are overly reductive and simplistic ways of portraying politics to cater to uninformed idiots and American media pundits. Learn to have nuanced political positions based on moral and philosophical principles and stop trying to map everything to a fucking 2D plane.

Political compasses may have value for modelling some phenomenon where some fairly measurable aspect of politics may be shown to have a connection with something else. Retards just confuse the model with the actual subject to be studied. It's like how blood pressure can be shown to be connected to health outcomes but blood pressure isn't health per se.


Actually, wait, which word was that? Nazis? Alt-right? Reactionary? Anti-working class?


Thank you.

I'd like to think I do base my principles on morals and philosophy.


I'm not really a Zig Forumstard mate.

Clearly you are mistaken.

Usually when leftist say that word they mean someone who want to "go back" to a previous state of affairs (monarchists for example). It doesn't mean "people who annoy me".


Attached: Screenshot_20190315-123413_Chrome.jpg (1080x2220 458.57 KB, 481.98K)

Well there you go, now you know you're a fascist and have no reason to stick around here anymore.
>>>Zig Forums

Bruh we've known that for about a year now, the real issue is getting the 5 autistic reverse-beefsteaks to leave.



Sees you're a capitalist, nationalist, essencialist, punitive piece of fascist garbage and tells you to fuck off*

I'll tell you what, ill give you permission to call me a gay nazi.


'Right' and 'conservative' are two separate things

People like to use the term "conservative" for imperialist activities. That's wrong. I talk to actual conservatives and they are the most humble down-to-earth folks. When the media and man-on-the-street talk about "conservatives", they are actually talking of the further-from-centre right.

Those right-wing talk radio guys are NOT conservative. They're anti-liberal. They advocate for executing male youths who "lack machismo" or are gay, want to ban female-oriented books and movies because "they encourage weakness", or mandate religious doctrine in schools "because it discplines and enlightens youths."

Frogposters ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE. They're further-right edgelords with "liberal" tendencies.

George Bush Sr and Jr are not conservatives. At least not in policy.

Donald Trump is NOT conservative, despite conservatives falling for his micro-hands. He's a (supposedly) right-winger who's a senile manchild. He flipped between Democrat and Republican numerous times during the 90s and 2000s. He's suggested universal healthcare and keeping illegal immigrant top students. He may not even be Christian either, as he endorsed Hillary Clinton several times before he ran, cheated on his first wife with a model amd bragged about it, and says he never needed to ask God for forgiveness.

Televangelists are NOT CONSERVATIVE. They seem to forget that our Founding Fathers were agnostics and skeptical of allowing church and politics mixing. Plus, televangelists are always shilling for political allies or asking churchgoers for money.

The difference between a conservative and a right-winger is conservatives just want to be left alone, be good neigbors and everyone keep their ideas to themselves. They also are skeptical of church though they may practice their faitg.

Right-wingers want to harrass people into following cultural codes that predate said nation's history and is incompatible with actual history.

Attached: Tgc5Uh2_d.jpg (2070x1398 57.02 KB, 630.27K)

Conservatism is a fucking meaningless term anyway.