Expirencing other Opinions

So I've been on Sup Forums for a few years now and often find myself repulsed by leftists, yet I heard It's better to listen what the opposition has to say to have a more balanced mind. I don't want to feel hate when I see people saying things that have urgency for them and I don't want to be an extremist, is there anyone with a completely opposing view to Sup Forums that would be patient enough to explain their principles to me or atleast link me somewhere were I'm not in a bubble like here?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Political_correctness
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Are you sure you live in germany?
Switch on TV, open your window, get in the streets. the anti/pol/ of opinions are all over the place.

Yes but they never explain, they just state that reality is a certain way. There is no discourse since everyone on the media agrees.

They don't explain because they can't. "conservatism" is based in dealing with reality, leftism tries to impose fantasies.

Then please, take my doubts away, prove your absolute statement.

I'm starting to doubt your good will you say
>So I've been on Sup Forums for a few years now and often find myself repulsed by leftists
and
>It's better to listen what the opposition has to say to have a more balanced mind
but then you ask that "we" of all people give you said opposite point of view.
Isn't the whole point going into the melee to see for yourself?

This is the inherent flaw of contemporary leftism. It isn't really based in logic, but feelings. How does a decision make you FEEL. You will not really find a leftist who acts on actual logic.
I have a dorm-mate here in university who is a leftist and he tries to go about it "logically", but he just winds up dodging the question. Which gets frustrating^2 because then I look unreasonable for getting pissed, pic related.

I am sorry, I guess I never really took the redpill completely, I mostly want my doubts about Sup Forums either destroyed or confirmed. Being so uncertain makes me wishy-washy on most issues

Take a trip to berlin.

Sounds like you are having redpill regrets. The key here is to stop referring to things as left and right. Think in terms of rational vs irrational. That is a lens you can view any point, left or right, through, for continuous knowledge seeking and wisdom gaining.

Just focus on your own self-improvement, and stay rational. Lift weights, read books, eat healthy. When you see people spouting irrational opinions with no facts, left or right, just point out the flaws and move on. Think stoic without meme'ing it.

What you'll find is there is circular reasoning on both sides, but more often on the left because "muh feelings". Rightists get that way, too, but not as often.

It's just the order of things.

I did that, the point I believe humans are inheritly good and have agency and maybe leftists have a reason that isn't easy for me to comprehend. Like how leftists can comprehend the Sup Forums mentality.

I suppose that being proud of your nationality. White, black etcetera. Is always a good thing.
When it's taken to an extreme to the point of killing innocents, it's bad. Aka nationality is good. White pride is good.

Defending others is fine, but don't become a doormat and become used instead. Aka cuck

There are always exceptions. There are a lot of blacks that are niggers. I can say first hand meeting over 300 black men that almost all were lazy, leaving baby mamma type deals. However, of that amount I found three genuinely great black men.
Be aware of blacks amend other races, including your own.
Most likely, the stereotype is yrue, but not always.

It's understandable, I always find peace in my macro-level beliefs in the assurance I can give you that leftism will always fail.

France, Germany, The US, etc... all have pushed very progressive agendas in the last few decades, and now the people are pushing back.

The refugee crisis is whats pushing you guys into the right, it all just takes one of their policies based in true leftism to show everyone how retarded their beliefs really are.

Weird, it means you've not witnessed enough of the ravages. I thought you had it worse than france, but obviously not. Try Paris for your next travel.

This is a nice post too.

I feel like most leftists also want to mix often because in the long past, we all gained stuff from eachother. Science match n all that.

They feel this still holds true, so a large pushing point for Muslims, future engineers from Africa and inner cities are lined for this.

Also, remember that the news is biased. Unless you see the video, don't trust the report even if 100% confirmed by 50 people, because those 50 people all could be lying together. This is very easily done and not irrational.
Think of simply the welcoming edits. More than 50 people did this and now a few comic artists are seen as nazi shit. Right?
This applies even easier to large, rich news agencies.

I literally cannot find a liberal forum/site where they are discussing actual issues intelligently. Instead its nothing but fuck drumpf xd. Is this really america for the next 4-8 years?

OP I'm a liberal sack of a shit, got any questions?

no you aren't

prove it

How would I prove that

you've just proved you are a liberal.

By not being able to prove anything you claim.

Yes! Why are leftists often denying right wingers their agency? Do leftists disregard that the opinions some right wingers hold might be born out of fear of a unpresidented change in their cultures and demographics?

So much win

Sure I am pretty left by Sup Forums standards; I voted for Hilary. What do you want to know?

Why is it only the left that wants to help those that can't help themselves?

This please:

>Why are leftists often denying right wingers their agency?
Because they believe that you are wrong, in such a way that harms the lives of others.

>Do leftists disregard that the opinions some right wingers hold might be born out of fear of a unpresidented change in their cultures and demographics?
Pretty much yeah. Think of it this way: when the Irish moved to the US en masse in the 19th century they got shit on a lot but nowadays nobody views that as a demographic shift. Same thing going on today, in the future we will not perceive the demographics to have shifted at all.

But by disregarding fears instead of educating and debating aren't you seeing that you are partly cause of the political pendulum swing? Also do you agree with the coverage the mainstream media provides on political topics generally? Do you think the state should mandate these one opinion networks and If yes, why?

I'm a full on Communist (Marxist-Leninist). Ask away and please refrain from calling me a liberal, I fucking hate liberals, Leftists aren't Liberals.

Ok. This (although another user has given a answer):

>I mostly want my doubts about Sup Forums either destroyed or confirmed.
This is something everybody wants.

>But by disregarding fears instead of educating and debating aren't you seeing that you are partly cause of the political pendulum swing?
Sure. A lot of people look at it no different then debating a flat earth conspiracy theorist, though. "Why should I have to explain to you why this thing that I think is completely ridiculous is wrong? Just google it." That sort of attitude. Personally I am not like that because I agree it is a bad attitude to have and gets us nowhere.

>Also do you agree with the coverage the mainstream media provides on political topics generally?
I think conservatives bitch about it too much. You can accuse CNN of being the Clinton News Network all you want but all the major networks gave Trump nonstop free coverage the entire election season.

>Do you think the state should mandate these one opinion networks and If yes, why?
I don't think the state should have anything to do with the opinions of news/the media.

I agree with literally everything on the left-side. Debate me if you will

>all the major networks gave Trump nonstop free coverage the entire election season
So they do le pen, but if it's just to take a shit on him it's no more than an expansion of your echo chambers and makes you even more radical about it since it supports your beliefs that you're literally fighting the literal reincarnation of Hitler.

You aren't leftist, you're garbage. I'm a leftist and hate communists.

Not the guy you're replying to, but I'll answer.

>But by disregarding fears instead of educating and debating aren't you seeing that you are partly cause of the political pendulum swing?

This is a major problem I have with liberal discourse, although from their perspective such fears seem self-evidently wrong and by dismissing people the hope is that it will become a non-issue (when the opposite happens).

>Also do you agree with the coverage the mainstream media provides on political topics generally?

This quite vague. Do I agree with the opinions they EXPRESS, or with their decisions on what to cover? In both cases, generally, no.

>Do you think the state should mandate these one opinion networks and If yes, why?

Fuck no. We have enough government mouth pieces already.

OP, here's my advice to you. Stop taking the Sup Forums and thinking in terms of block ideology. When you paint everything with the same brush and assume all "leftists" think the same way about every single issue, you necessarily blind yourself to reality.

>So they do le pen, but if it's just to take a shit on him it's no more than an expansion of your echo chambers and makes you even more radical about it since it supports your beliefs that you're literally fighting the literal reincarnation of Hitler.
All publicity is good publicity, though. Whenever Trump said some tabloid-tier bullshit, major networks should have just ignored it like when anyone else says something stupid. Let TMZ report on it for people into celebrity gossip and everyone else can get on with their lives. Instead they reported on it, granting it a certain legitimacy as if nothing was out of the ordinary or unacceptable for someone running for president to say.

The "btw trump is a nazi" from the news anchor at the end of the story is the easiest part to ignore.

Sounds like you should point out specific complaints, as there are different kinds of liberals.

Like, are we talking pink-hair omni-transgender SJW shitters, anarchy punks, fedora-lords, or marxists?

>You can accuse CNN of being the Clinton News Network all you want but all the major networks gave Trump nonstop free coverage the entire election season.
So I guess you are of the opinion that even bad coverage is good as it still reports him and gets him into the public eye?

I meant what they choose to cover and maybe the agenda that they are pushing, If they are pushing one

I'm sorry leafman, I'm more looking for someone to explain, not to debate.

Also next question: Do you agree with identity politics as we see them emerging on college campuses?

Yes, I do. I believe a lot of Right-Wingers are afraid that their cultures are at stake if, for example, we let in more immigrants. However, I do not believe things like this are going to change an entire culture, As a previous user said, the Irish were forgotten about in America, almost as if they faded out altogether I think this will happen to every wave of immigrants. Any more questions?

The more anti-pol opinions I hold are ones relating to the parts of the left I find agreeable. Gays and transgender people have opposite gender characteristics because their brain was formed during fetal development under hormonal conditions more conducive to the opposite sex and so they developed an incorrectly sexed brain.

Also anti-religious, I think the fedora tippers have it right, but I do have an open mind towards the kind of religious belief that Jordan Peterson discusses which is a rather unconventional Darwinian take on the matter.

Otherwise I'm more libertarian/right leaning and align with Sup Forums on a huge number of other things, pro Brexit, pro Trump, pro traditionalism, anti degeneracy, etc

Happy to articulate why.

>All publicity is good publicity
Empty words, like most adages.
Was the 60 years of constant anti-nazi propaganda good publicity for nazis? Looking that today's state of germany and how the name hitler alone could be used to shut down any criticism, I can "boldly" say no.

I'm sorry, I know as the OP I should guide you through my questions, but could you try picking up my questions through out my posts, as it's getting late in germany and I had a hard shift today.

Yes but partisan news outlets like Fox News and Breitbart aside, none of the coverage was favourable. The objective was to demonise him and sell papers, and still is.

Communism is pretty much dead today. But in the past i dare to state that living under communism after Stalins death ~1955-1989 was the best time in Lithuania for simple folk. But in nowadays im not sure if it would be considered good.
P.S dont confuse lefties with communists, they would be closed in mental asylum probably.

>Empty words
I guess so. It's just my opinion that the media's coverage of Trump, despite being mostly negative, had a positive impact on his campaign. Maybe if they had spent that time talking about Yeb! his numbers wouldn't have been so sad.

Isn't it running contrary to the mantra of unity that the left claims to represent tho?

You got a bigger version of that picture? Its a bit hard to read.

It was for trump.
It let him stand out in the crowd of candidates, and he built his reputation on being a crude, outspoken underdog.

Not that I agree with the other user in that they should have covered him any differently/ignored him, but the amount of 'negative' coverage that was devoted to him definitely did not have a negative effect.

When I meant the Identity politics on campuses I was also talking about the exclusion and perceived evilness of white men, would you comment on that?

I'm against all that. It's stupid and wasteful.

That's backfire because the people are fed up with liberal bullshit.
I see how you could interpret that it had a positive impact but it really is just that the media pushed their luck so far they lost credibility among the people who were still hesitating. But on the opposite side of the spectrum, you can see the leftists are more aggressive and vicious than ever, and were so even before he got elected.

Are you and others of your opinion fighting or argueing with these kinds of leftists or are you content partnering up with them to defeat right wingers?

Well since I'm a Trump supporter most of those leftists hate me so I am against them.

So since we seem to agree on alot of issues, where do think we disagree?

Plenty of people, but it's only after talking to them that you realise that all their viewpoints are reliant on not being challenged with any rigour and that all their arguments to defend their viewpoints rely on lies, deceit, manipulation, misrepresentation, cherry picking, brow beating, shame and false premises to try and prevent you from challenging a narrative they've set up.

Well I'm a socialist. I don't believe in capitalism, I'm pro-LGBT, pro-abortion, anti-religion. I know it doesn't seem like much but being against capitalism and pro-socialism is a pretty big difference.

I am also against foreign interventionism, don't believe in a strong military, and prefer diplomacy to any conflict.

>Also next question: Do you agree with identity politics as we see them emerging on college campuses?

It's fucking cancerous and very much a cause of the swing to the right in this country. On the one hand, races and genders ARE quite worthy of discussion on college campuses considering how foundational they are to how people interact with each other socially. It's self-evident to me that a black person experiences problems that a white person doesn't, as does a man vs a woman, and vice-versa.

On the other hand, it's absurd to say that simply BECAUSE you're white, straight, etc, you're completely barred from racial conversations and are always considered the "oppressor" or whatever.

"White priveldge" is an utterly retarded and counter-intuitive term, because the connotation is that simply by being white one has a good life and no problems. The intention behind the term, I think, is to say that other races experience problems that whites don't, which is true. That doesn't mean one always has an easier life than the other. And the focus should be on systematic DISadvantage, not "advantage" - no one should feel guilty for having basic rights and freedoms, all human beings deserve that much.

>the mantra of unity that the left claims to represent

Parties and people "claim to represent unity", not some vague amorphous ideology that's relative to countries and timelines.

So our main disagreement is capitalism, but even there I am open to some socialism in form of regulations and theresuch as a complete free market doesn't seem to work. Also I'm pro-LGBT if there aren't intrusive about it. Why anti-religion tho?

Can you give some examples of the ID politics on college campuses? (you mean in germany, or 'murica?)

>So our main disagreement is capitalism, but even there I am open to some socialism in form of regulations and theresuch as a complete free market doesn't seem to work
Well I see capitalism as a system where if you have more money then you consume you can invest your money. Since it's the rich who only consume a fraction of their income they invest the rest. This leads to them owning more and more of the economy because on average investments pay off. So it will lead to an economy where the rich own everything and everyone else has to rent.

>why anti-religion though
Because people make stupid costly decisions based on religion. Abortion is one of the past but today euthanasia could save Ontario around 5 billion dollars but because of religious conservatives they keep vetoing it.

I guess I am kind of a mixed-bag centrist if that label is correct. I have a mixture of left-wing and right-wing ideas.

>against racial and gender-based discrimination, but not a fan of hardcore "political correctness" SJW stuff
>for universal healthcare, but leave private healthcare in place for those who prefer it over a public option
>pro-life, against abortion except in the case where it is necessary to save the mother's life
>pro-gun rights, people have a legal right to self-defense
>get government out of marriage, reclassify all legally-recognized marriages as civil unions
>against the death penalty
>for marijuana legalization
>for a non-interventionist foreign policy
>against TPP
>for NSA privacy reform
>for a universal basic income, to prepare for the automation revolution
>classify Bitcoin as a legal currency

That's called a radical centrist.

>against the death penalty
>for marijuana legalization
>classify Bitcoin as a legal currency
You just HAD to fuck up, didn't you?

more the murica kind, like the jordan peterson debacle

Religion's a crutch and a tool. Everything going on today with islam happened in the past with the other judaic shit.
Its only use today is to stifle free thought and encourage the right's version of identity politics.

But don't you agree that it has served a great cause in the past and has cultural roots that should be preserved?

Do you have a study or some other source to your claim about capitalism? I'm not that well read on economic I'll have to shamefully admit.
Also:

I don't keep up with memes around here. Could you explain?

Shoot, forgot to say off the bat: not that user.

Anyway, not really.
In terms of society-building, even if the end result was the modern world, that shit was brutal and rife with atrocities.
In terms of culture, it had just as many shitty ideas as good ones, and it took a long, painful struggle for most people to move past their need for it.
Personally I don't see the appeal, but hey it's a free country so whatever.

My study on capitalism is what we are experiencing now. The rich own everything. Sure we get some toys that we buy from them but in a true free society each man can accumlate wealth rather than be living paycheck to paycheck

sorry I know I should make a actual post but I'm pretty tired, please read about it here
>inb4 wikipedia source
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Political_correctness

But there aren't any studies to back that up? I'm not trying to be condecending, even more so considering my ignorance on many facettes of economics. just askin'.

Yeah, it'd help me decide if this wall of text I'm about to post was appropriate.
That looks more like SJW 'gender identity' stuff, not 'identity politics' which has its own definition.

In that case, my text wall is somewhat applicable. ctrl-v:

I can't really speak for what you see in germany, but at least in the US identity politics is a cancerous offshoot of the civil rights movement.
It should have gradually wound down as younger generations grew up without their parents' prejudices & conciliation was reached.
Instead their parents, born & raised in the dark 80s/90s penumbra of the civil rights shitstorm, (where crime was rampant and blatant prejudice was still everywhere), proceeded to pass on what they'd learned. Young black children were told "don't trust whites, fight for your rights", while young white (liberal) children were told "black people (and others) were oppressed, helping them is noble".

So they grew up looking for the problems their parents had dealt with, and instead they only found their phantoms.
SJW shit & BLM are the youngest generation trying to live up to the ideals they were taught, but which should no longer have been needed.

So instead of moving past identity shit like the most-popular civil rights leaders prior to 1980 intended, (that is, reaching all the way back to the colonial abolitionists), they perpetuated it.

>true free society = wealthy poor people
A 'true free society'/pure capitalism doesn't result in that.
It results in the opposite, what you're describing as us having now.

The only way 'each man can accumulate wealth rather than live paycheck to paycheck' is to have a strong scarcity of workers or have strong restrictions & regulations on the distribution of wealth (thus not pure/free capitalism).