There is no radical left in the United States, period.

Started by Old Man Whirly!2 pages

Supporting radical ideas does not require radical action it requires strong belief. Jeremy Corbyn was a radical leftist but also a pacifist. For instance I:

Keep the faith (in my fellow man) 🙂

Stay Whirly (I stay true to me and my beliefs where I can) 🤘

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Not forgetting the late 50s, 60's,70's,00's in the UK and to a lesser degree the US, the anti Vietnam war and CND for example.
’50s to 70s were mostly over black and women rights, but I get your point. “The Reagan revolution “ as it’s referred to, did its best to end unions and spread propaganda against any country that wouldn’t give its resources to the US. In many ways, they succeeded, until a bunch of radicals flew planes into the world trade centre.

Originally posted by Blakemore
’50s to 70s were mostly over black and women rights, but I get your point. “The Reagan revolution “ as it’s referred to, did its best to end unions and spread propaganda against any country that wouldn’t give its resources to the US. In many ways, they succeeded, until a bunch of radicals flew planes into the world trade centre.
Vietnam loomed large.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Supporting radical ideas does not require radical action it requires strong belief. Jeremy Corbyn was a radical leftist but also a pacifist. For instance I:

Keep the faith (in my fellow man) 🙂

Stay Whirly (I stay true to me and my beliefs where I can) 🤘

I'd say pacifism can be a radical action, in the context of a violent world. But yeah, I agree, generally

Originally posted by Scribble
I'd say pacifism can be a radical action, in the context of a violent world. But yeah, I agree, generally
I also agree sometimes pacifism is radical.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Supporting radical ideas does not require radical action it requires strong belief. Jeremy Corbyn was a radical leftist but also a pacifist. For instance I:

Keep the faith (in my fellow man) 🙂

Stay Whirly (I stay true to me and my beliefs where I can) 🤘

A belief against an evil that makes no effect to remove that evil is about as relevent to politic as a gentle breeze on a wind farm.

It's the happy tyrant who rules a nation of unyielding pacifists.

Originally posted by cdtm
A belief against an evil that makes no effect to remove that evil is about as relevent to politic as a gentle breeze on a wind farm.

It's the happy tyrant who rules a nation of unyielding pacifists.

’radica’ refers to ideology, not power or action.

Originally posted by Blakemore
’radica’ refers to ideology, not power or action.

I don't disagree.

I see belief as a plan to action. A belief that leads to no action, is more like a philosophy. It's good and well to have beliefs, but of what use is a passive belief?

Would it matter if such beliefs exist, or do not exist?

Originally posted by cdtm
I don't disagree.

I see belief as a plan to action. A belief that leads to no action, is more like a philosophy. It's good and well to have beliefs, but of what use is a passive belief?

Would it matter if such beliefs exist, or do not exist?

Id say a better word would be‘consequence’ instead of ‘action’

The pen is mightier than the sword. The word is the way. Radical action can simply be words creating a shared mindset. This is sometimes displayed physically outside the framework of society like the deviant behavior of Jan 6. But it can also be displayed in the ballot box, e.g. Trump's radicalism failing to quiet moderation.

Ted Kaczynski knew: the pen is mightier than the sword, but the pipe bomb is the most powerful of all.

Or plutonium.

Originally posted by Scribble
Ted Kaczynski knew: the pen is mightier than the sword, but the pipe bomb is the most powerful of all.
As did the IRA...
Originally posted by Blakemore
Or plutonium.
or an open laboratory door!

Re: Re: There is no radical left in the United States, period.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Nina Turner was a big hope for them, but thats gone the wrong way, mostly due to corporate money. The left want an end to corporate money entering political campaigns.

Nina Turner had corporate and PAC money too. In fact, she outraised her opponent 2 to 1. It is almost like the influence of money in campaigns is over-stated.

Nina Turner lost, because of Nina Turner. She is a shitty candidate, who runs her stupid mouth, and gets herself in trouble.

Her loss should be a giant wake-up call to the left, that shitting on Democrats is not a winning strategy for them.

Democratic voters like the Democratic Party and Democratic politicians. That is why they are Democrats. What a shocker, I know.

Re: Re: Re: There is no radical left in the United States, period.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is almost like the influence of money in campaigns is over-stated.

Yup.