Understanding the left

Shit can take many forms as well, solid, chunky, liquid, varying colors, varying levels of digested material. But it usually all has one thing in common - it smells like shit. There's no need to "understand" the left because that implies we have some desire to coexist with them. We don't. We'll simply flush the toilet.

That'd imply moving them elsewhere. I'd rather have the assurance that they're properly incinerated. Preferably in the core of a large star.

The left and right are tools of dialectic. Binary opposition is the most efficient way to cause change. Defining what actually constitutes "left" and "right" is tricky because transient dogma should be discarded from their defining characteristics. Transient dogma would include all of their respective contemporary political stances and claims which would normally be cited as the definition itself. This is erroneous as the leftist of 2019 is entirely different politically from a leftist of 1919 etc. Instead, to define "left" or "right" we should appeal only to constants.

It doesnt really matter what either side wants in any given political climate, leftists are opposed to rightists.
This is reflected in modern nation states as well as ancient ones. In modern america, those who produce, and are less reliant on central organization, such as farmers, tend to be rightists. Those who rely on central coordination to live te.d to be leftists.
This is true in the united states and probably where you live as well. Large cities, st louis, kansas city, atlanta etc. have heavy concentrations of "left", they also have federal reserve banks and have new money injected into the economy by congress at a greater velocity than places without. Due to the nature of dense cities, their inhabitants are totally reliant on a smooth machine that doesnt stop.all services used for daily living are interdependent and centrally coordinated,. in the rural united states, the opposite is the case.
Until you begin to look at it this way, you will be led astray. Both conservatism and liberalism are controllled brand words which were sold to the masses but created by specific jews, namely frank meyer. Of course everyone knows saul alinsky carl marx.

The left and right date from the masonic (((French Revolution))) and the Estates General. But yes, left or right wing, it’s still a (((chicken))).

This is a great response, but the labels only partially match up with your defining characteristic. Meaning, corporate conservatives like Ben Shapiro are much more tied into the system than enviro-leftists.

We both know the labels are limiting and inaccurate, and that is why I would like to see a good breakdown of this, because relying on 'liberal' and 'conservative' or 'left' or 'right' is almost meaningless. Some people like Michael Tracey are barely leftists as that would be defined in 2019, but that's where they are categorized. They believe in the standard narrative about race, but so does most of the population.

Read "Industrial Society and its Future."
Uncle Ted gives a pretty good explanation of what drives leftists. tldr: they have low self-esteem and project it onto "oppressed" groups.
Nietzsche's "Genealogy of Morals" discusses some similar concepts with its theory of "slave morality," but he doesn't attach it to leftistism as much. He does however talk a lot of interesting things about the Jews.

Attached: ted_kaczynski_harvard_g-594372140.jpg (1200x675, 131.62K)

I think that, well many things are just fine. But there are some, mostly obvious points that could be disagreed on.

So maybe you already know everything.

But still, to really know something it must be placed under a magnifying glass.

Just going on what is on the surface can tend to float in a way.

Yeah the whole left vs right thing is pretty out dated. However the current "left" are some weird neo-liberal/social democrat hybrid. Don't mind the Larping Marxists and anarchists they'd never turn on liberals and never align with anything else. Pre 60s "leftists" in America haven't been bad just economic left think like a dixiecrat union boss. Even Marx and Bakunin weren't shy of naming the Jew back then but keep in mind from a cultural position not blood. Mind you Tito and 50s Stalin were 100x better than the average leftist/neocon.

Remember the Doctors Plot and how Stalin tried to move all jews in Russia into Gulags for "their own protection" in 1953 but then the jew Beria poisoned him?