Israel-Hamas War 2023

[crazy canuck]

It's a continuum.  The choices are not be a libertarian or be an authoritarian.

You continue to think so very little of me.

Of course it's a fucking continuum.

But it's like a continuum between "good" and "evil" in this context.

Why must you turn every criticism of claims you make into a comment about you as a person?  It like the reverse of an ad hom logical fallacy.

In this particular case your criticism was misplaced precisely because it is a continuum and so does not prefer one side of the axis over the other as you claimed.

[Josquius]

Absolutely true that the political compass isn't a good faith attempt to map political views and rather its a libertarian recruitment tool.

As I said its important to remember the world and people are complicated. One can believe in LGBT rights, state health care, free education, etc.... but....at the same time be a flag waving psycho who thinks Spanish should be outlawed and anyone who doesn't pass a paper bag test gassed.

Generally you don't pick a "Team" and support everything that team believes in (though some people absolutely do fall into this for various reasons).
Rather often you have a collection of views, you can be left wing on some things, centrist on others, and a frothing nazi loon on others.

This doesn't mean however you can point to my theoretical death to brown people but social justice for the whites and say "He represents the left/right".
Actually judging where he sits is hard.
Especially considering even views on individual issues don't fit into neat categories where you can say one thing is leftier than another.
You could do it based on self identity- but then if you're running around shouting you're a conservative whilst believing everything on the social democratic platform...then wut?
A way I'd tend to do it would be more based on defining characteristics. Like yeah, you favour letting gay people live their lives... but you don't really talk about it. What you're really all about is 'death to muslims'. Even your gay support is probably just an outgrowth of that, giving you a stick to wack your chosen enemy with (very common with the far right in the UK).

[Threviel]

Gay and trans issues are a perfect example. That discussion does not fit at all on a left/right scale. You can make a pro-/anti-argument based on socialism, liberalism and conservatism. There's absolutely nothing intrinsic in that discussion that should make a pro-gay rights activist either left or right.

[Josquius]

Gay and trans issues are a perfect example. That discussion does not fit at all on a left/right scale. You can make a pro-/anti-argument based on socialism, liberalism and conservatism. There's absolutely nothing intrinsic in that discussion that should make a pro-gay rights activist either left or right.

I wouldn't agree there.
Anti-LGBT = traditional values, family, sex is between a husband and wife, etc.... all very traditionally conservative.
Pro-LGBT = egalitarianism, minority rights, anti-traditionalism. Very traditionally left wing.

There's certainly ways to twist the conservative view into being pro-lgbt: better they get married and settle down quietly than run around doing twisted orgies in the streets and harassing children.
But at the core there's perfectly consistent reasons things have tended to land into the left/right pattern they have.
And that we've such a long history of the battle lines being the way they are no matter what original arguments there might have been to spin the core beliefs, makes it so.
Could things have ended up differently had history gone differently with say the right being a lot more liberal and less paternalistic when this became an issue? Sure. But in our reality it is what it is.

But then we come onto the fact that times change. Today, in sensible countries at least, being in favour of gay people being allowed to exist is a pretty traditional view, its been the case for decades. Being against gay folk goes beyond conservative and into ultra reactionary nonsense.

[Threviel]

Conservatism is difficult to nail down.

Wiki:

Conservatism has varied considerably as it has adapted itself to existing traditions and national cultures.[10] Thus, conservatives from different parts of the world, each upholding their respective traditions, may disagree on a wide range of issues.[11] One of the three major ideologies along with liberalism and socialism,[12] conservatism is the dominant ideology in many nations across the world, including Hungary, Iran, Israel, Japan, Poland, Russia, and South Korea. Historically associated with right-wing politics, the term has been used to describe a wide range of views. Conservatism may be either libertarian or authoritarian,[13] populist or elitist,[14] progressive or reactionary,[15] moderate or extreme.[16]

I view myself as a conservative and in my society acceptance and toleration of others is a big part which makes acceptance and toleration values that conservative Swedes should strive after which in turn makes conservative Swedes progressive on LGBT-rights.

There's nothing inherent in conservatism itself that causes conservatives to be anti-LGBT or whatever really.

[OttoVonBismarck]

You continue to think so very little of me.

CC thinks little of anyone who isn't a communist hater of Jews and champion of Hamas.

[DGuller]

You would be even more correct if you stopped after "anyone".

[crazy canuck]

You continue to think so very little of me.

CC thinks little of anyone who isn't a communist hater of Jews and champion of Hamas.

A mind reader you are not

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

Gay and trans issues are a perfect example. That discussion does not fit at all on a left/right scale. You can make a pro-/anti-argument based on socialism, liberalism and conservatism. There's absolutely nothing intrinsic in that discussion that should make a pro-gay rights activist either left or right.

I wouldn't agree there.
Anti-LGBT = traditional values, family, sex is between a husband and wife, etc.... all very traditionally conservative.
Pro-LGBT = egalitarianism, minority rights, anti-traditionalism. Very traditionally left wing.

Where do TERFs fit into your model?  They are very strongly pro-LGB and just as strongly anti-T.

I think the issue that most people here are taking with your characterizations is that, on one hand, you say reality is complex and people tend to have a mix of views across the spectrum, while on the other hand saying things like, "There's certainly ways to twist the conservative view into being pro-lgbt" and "Like yeah, you favour letting gay people live their lives... but you don't really talk about it.".  The latter statements make it seem like your view is that people who simultaneously claim to hold liberal/progressive and illiberal/regressive positions do not sincerely hold the liberal/progressive ones because it's not consistent with your view that "at the core there's perfectly consistent reasons things have tended to land into the left/right pattern they have".  TERFs, to me, very clearly break that consistency.

Which then comes back to the subject of this thread.  There has long been an antisemitic undercurrent in certain leftist movements.  Like TERFs, they are not the majority, but neither are they fringe loonies.  Like TERFs wrap their hate in the language of women's rights, these groups wrap their hate in the language of the struggle for freedom and class warfare.  None of these groups are "faux leftists"; they have created a leftist ideology where their particular hates are consistent with the leftist positions they hold.  In other words, they have made their hate the tool to advance egalitarianism, minority rights, and anti-traditionalism rather than something that opposes it.  You and many others don't agree with that consistency, but then again many of them would find your views inconsistent since you don't.

I agree that some of the other posters are being overly simplistic in their responses to you, but I also think you are showing a tendency (which seems common in the left-leaning circles I have personal contact with) to write off these groups with some regressive views as not being true leftists and as comprising an ignorable fringe that is irrelevant to the greater cause.  That, I think, is the core of this subthread.  It's a dangerous tendency that a lot of groups who are opposed to what Israel is doing in the Palestinian Territories are exhibiting because (understandably) their primary concern is holding to account a seemingly unaccountable government and protecting Palestinian civilians from death, injury, and displacement.

If I'm off about anything please correct or clarify.  I'm not trying to score points here, just advance a constructive discussion.

[Barrister]

Gay and trans issues are a perfect example. That discussion does not fit at all on a left/right scale. You can make a pro-/anti-argument based on socialism, liberalism and conservatism. There's absolutely nothing intrinsic in that discussion that should make a pro-gay rights activist either left or right.

I wouldn't agree there.
Anti-LGBT = traditional values, family, sex is between a husband and wife, etc.... all very traditionally conservative.
Pro-LGBT = egalitarianism, minority rights, anti-traditionalism. Very traditionally left wing.

There's certainly ways to twist the conservative view into being pro-lgbt: better they get married and settle down quietly than run around doing twisted orgies in the streets and harassing children.
But at the core there's perfectly consistent reasons things have tended to land into the left/right pattern they have.
And that we've such a long history of the battle lines being the way they are no matter what original arguments there might have been to spin the core beliefs, makes it so.
Could things have ended up differently had history gone differently with say the right being a lot more liberal and less paternalistic when this became an issue? Sure. But in our reality it is what it is.

But then we come onto the fact that times change. Today, in sensible countries at least, being in favour of gay people being allowed to exist is a pretty traditional view, its been the case for decades. Being against gay folk goes beyond conservative and into ultra reactionary nonsense.

Time and again you slip into the "left=good, right=bad" reasoning.

Let's indeed take LGBT issues.

I think the success of gay marriage a decade ago is that it spun gay marriage in very "right wing" terms - that gays wanted the same traditional family structure that everyone else had.  They wanted to get married, have kids (adopted or sperm donor), get their house in the suburbs...

Or take trans issues.  Trans people can be surprisingly conservative when it comes to gendered roles (i.e. a boy who plays with dolls?  can't be - they must be trans).  Highly conservative Iran is somewhat supportive of trans people - as it means that after surgery they can live normal heterosexual lives.

BvS mentioned TERFs.  That's not so much a right vs left issues, but a left-on-left issue.  TERFs attack trans rights as being an attack on women's rights.

[Josquius]

Where do TERFs fit into your model?  They are very strongly pro-LGB and just as strongly anti-T.

Again people hold conflicting views in different areas. But terfs though often born out of the left are right wing in their views of trans people.
Very into traditional categories and hierarchical.
 You have your  god /'our inaccurate idea about science that might as well be god' appointed role and you better stay there or you're obviously up to no good and upsetting the natural order.

I think the issue that most people here are taking with your characterizations is that, on one hand, you say reality is complex and people tend to have a mix of views across the spectrum, while on the other hand saying things like, "There's certainly ways to twist the conservative view into being pro-lgbt" and "Like yeah, you favour letting gay people live their lives... but you don't really talk about it.".  The latter statements make it seem like your view is that people who simultaneously claim to hold liberal/progressive and illiberal/regressive positions do not sincerely hold the liberal/progressive ones because it's not consistent with your view that "at the core there's perfectly consistent reasons things have tended to land into the left/right pattern they have". 

In that quote you've taken out of context I was talking very specifically about the uncontroversially defined far right.
They outwardly put forward that they're gay friendly as this advances their core crusade of hating Muslims - it does not take much to find their foot soldiers regularly throwing aroumd homophobic slurs and mocking gay folk (or worse).

Which then comes back to the subject of this thread.  There has long been an antisemitic undercurrent in certain leftist movements.  Like TERFs, they are not the majority, but neither are they fringe loonies.  Like TERFs wrap their hate in the language of women's rights, these groups wrap their hate in the language of the struggle for freedom and class warfare.  None of these groups are "faux leftists"; they have created a leftist ideology where their particular hates are consistent with the leftist positions they hold.  In other words, they have made their hate the tool to advance egalitarianism, minority rights, and anti-traditionalism rather than something that opposes it.  You and many others don't agree with that consistency, but then again many of them would find your views inconsistent since you don't.

I agree that some of the other posters are being overly simplistic in their responses to you, but I also think you are showing a tendency (which seems common in the left-leaning circles I have personal contact with) to write off these groups with some regressive views as not being true leftists and as comprising an ignorable fringe that is irrelevant to the greater cause.  That, I think, is the core of this subthread.  It's a dangerous tendency that a lot of groups who are opposed to what Israel is doing in the Palestinian Territories are exhibiting because (understandably) their primary concern is holding to account a seemingly unaccountable government and protecting Palestinian civilians from death, injury, and displacement.

If I'm off about anything please correct or clarify.  I'm not trying to score points here, just advance a constructive discussion.

What I find disagreeable is the way some are putting the cart before the horse on this. It's just so very stupid.
Are some on the left, especially amongst those that care about Palestine, anti semitic? Hell yes.
However what is being put forward is that they hate Israel BECAUSE they're anti semitic.
The truth is far more the opposite. They've allowed their distaste for Israeli actions to become a general purpose hate of Israel to become a catch all anti semitism.

Completely ignore any ethnic and religious issues for a second. Assume all humans are athiest blobs. That the left would criticise Israels actions - this makes perfect sense. It fits in a left wing world view.

Hating a particular ethnic group and then that being the reason you detest a certain country however... That's not a leftist way of viewing the world.
The world is a diverse place. There's undoubtedly some who have come in from that route. Jews are horrible and they're evil capitalists thus socialism is the answer.  But to suggest this is even a significant minority of left of centre people...

[OttoVonBismarck]

Josq, right wing has a meaning other than just "things I don't like", you seem to struggle understanding that. You're literally a meme, calling anything you disagree with right wing. In your fictional world the entire left is obviously in complete agreement on every issue--since holding any divergent view means they aren't left wing views. Right?

[Josquius]

Gay and trans issues are a perfect example. That discussion does not fit at all on a left/right scale. You can make a pro-/anti-argument based on socialism, liberalism and conservatism. There's absolutely nothing intrinsic in that discussion that should make a pro-gay rights activist either left or right.

I wouldn't agree there.
Anti-LGBT = traditional values, family, sex is between a husband and wife, etc.... all very traditionally conservative.
Pro-LGBT = egalitarianism, minority rights, anti-traditionalism. Very traditionally left wing.

There's certainly ways to twist the conservative view into being pro-lgbt: better they get married and settle down quietly than run around doing twisted orgies in the streets and harassing children.
But at the core there's perfectly consistent reasons things have tended to land into the left/right pattern they have.
And that we've such a long history of the battle lines being the way they are no matter what original arguments there might have been to spin the core beliefs, makes it so.
Could things have ended up differently had history gone differently with say the right being a lot more liberal and less paternalistic when this became an issue? Sure. But in our reality it is what it is.

But then we come onto the fact that times change. Today, in sensible countries at least, being in favour of gay people being allowed to exist is a pretty traditional view, its been the case for decades. Being against gay folk goes beyond conservative and into ultra reactionary nonsense.

Time and again you slip into the "left=good, right=bad" reasoning.

Let's indeed take LGBT issues.

I think the success of gay marriage a decade ago is that it spun gay marriage in very "right wing" terms - that gays wanted the same traditional family structure that everyone else had.  They wanted to get married, have kids (adopted or sperm donor), get their house in the suburbs...

Or take trans issues.  Trans people can be surprisingly conservative when it comes to gendered roles (i.e. a boy who plays with dolls?  can't be - they must be trans).  Highly conservative Iran is somewhat supportive of trans people - as it means that after surgery they can live normal heterosexual lives.

BvS mentioned TERFs.  That's not so much a right vs left issues, but a left-on-left issue.  TERFs attack trans rights as being an attack on women's rights.

Again you're the only one ascribing "good" to left wing beliefs and "bad" to right wing beliefs.

A lot of what you say here is just repeating what I already said in that post.
Times change. Things moved leftwards with regards to lgbt rights even as they moved rightwards overall elsewhere.
The right came to pivot in their stance on gay people so they could fit into the established order,as that's what they were after decades of being free.
You cannot debate however that traditionally the push for gay rights did come from the left with opposition from the right.

You want to keep saying left good right bad because expanded rights are much nicer than traditional values?
That's on you.
But it does raise curious questions about how you're a conservative.

[Barrister]

Where do TERFs fit into your model?  They are very strongly pro-LGB and just as strongly anti-T.

Again people hold conflicting views in different areas. But terfs though often born out of the left are right wing in their views of trans people.
Very into traditional categories and hierarchical.

"No true Scotsmen..."

[Josquius]

Where do TERFs fit into your model?  They are very strongly pro-LGB and just as strongly anti-T.

Again people hold conflicting views in different areas. But terfs though often born out of the left are right wing in their views of trans people.
Very into traditional categories and hierarchical.

"No true Scotsmen..."

Is a completely irrelevant expression.
As said it's complicated. There's no neat answer to are terfs right or left wing. On that particular issue here absent of all else their views are more aligned with a traditionalist viewpoint.

Josq, right wing has a meaning other than just "things I don't like", you seem to struggle understanding that. You're literally a meme, calling anything you disagree with right wing. In your fictional world the entire left is obviously in complete agreement on every issue--since holding any divergent view means they aren't left wing views. Right?

I seem to struggle to understand  what I've just explained?

Again people hold varied views. Some of my views are no doubt far more aligned with the right than the left.
But that doesn't change the fact that there are certain core values of the left and right and it's daft to pretend otherwise when someone's views in one area are more typical of the "other side".
See for instance the red-browns. Fascist scum... With a bit of socialist economic policy on the side. If they have a sensible policy on say more money for the NHS does this now become "bad" because a right winger supports it? 
Just because you don't like something it doesn't become left/right wing.

Going back to the core tangent, considering general core beliefs of left wingers, does it really make more logical sense that some left wingers hate Israeli foreign policy because they hate Jews or that they hate Jews because they hate Israeli foreign policy?