What are the politics of /lgbt/?
>>5664390
>that bait pic tho
I pray for the glorious reign of terror and virtue every night
I generally hold view which are opposite of the person I'm talking to because I'm a contrarian faggot. I can't help it, I think it might be a mental illness.
>>5664390
Registered as independent, mostly agree with the democrats, but think immigration should be reasonably regulated and think a minimum wage doesn't really make sense economically.
>>5664390
Center-left libertarian
I believe that both sides are fucking retarded. Shit in general needs to be overhauled. Im more leftist, and while i believe in the objective and freedom all that shit i also think we need to do whats best for society in terms of how we treat our citizens and help the needy. The problem comes from overreach, which comes when anyone gets their way and wants more. We need to cut that shit out on both sides.
>>5664444
generally i just do this with people though
>>5664457
what about the fact that minimum wage has historically helped. If workers have more money they can put more in the encomnomy which makes more places hire and more places make more stuff. The peoples ability to buy is what drives capitalism
>>5664390
Fascist
>>5664390
What the fuck is that shit.
>>5664470
Well my understanding is that in an idealized market economy, market forces set wages at the point where the total wages paid (i.e. average wage per worker x number of workers) is maximized. Raising the minimum wage above the wage set by the market would result in fewer total wages - individual workers are paid more, but fewer are employed, and the total wages being paid are lower.
>>5664390
Left.
As a Nordic 80s kid I grew up in centre left social democratic family, but lean more centre right now
>tfw centrist
>everyone just calls me a fence sitter upon hearing that
life's great I hate everyone tbqh
I am meme marxist-socialist.
I believe memes should be redistributed to all the people who are starving for a meme, not owned by a couple of corporatofascist YouTube fat cats and annoying oranges (tm).
/polgbt/ when?
>>5668303
They've always been interacting. There's even a comic personifying them as two lovers.
>>5668303
how can you even get an acurate read. he is so ungodly vauge in what he wants that his literal policies are "until we figure out whats going on"
>>5664390
I read where it said tyranny and thought for a second it said tranny
>>5668303
>donald trump and rand paul
be my bf
>>5664390
Centrist libertarian. I'm too economically left for traditional libertarians and too economically right for left-libertarians.
>>5664390
Authoritarian left
>>5667447
That's the theory, but we don't have a frictionless vacuum market economy. Even really high minimum wages haven't created unemployment in rich countries (although I think they did in China).
>>5664390
Some sort of left or center-left. I think socialists have good ideas but I feel like really committing to an ideology like socialism or libertarianism gets you into that whole "every problem is a nail" deal.
I'm a liberal / libertarian on most issues but my heavy sense of tribalism and my views on immigration make me a British nationalist.
Farther left than democrat, not fullcommie. I guess I'm closest to socialist, but I'm not involved enough in politics to give a fuck about labels.
Horseshoe theory is bullshit, by the way.
>>5664390
Democratic left
>>5664390
Feudalist
with fascist tendencies
>>5672773
fascism is a modernist jacobin belief
>>5668303
in your dreams
>>5672776
You're not wrong but still it's better than nothing
>>5664390
I usually score center on most tests.
>>5672722
My nigga
>>5664390
National Socialist.
>>5668303
>2016
>being a conservatard
>>5672827
>>5664390
>What are the politics of /lgbt/?
Freedom. Not freedom for everyone though, just what interests me. Everyone else can be oppressed.
Yeah, I'm scum.
>>5672864
>2016
>being raped by Syrians
So progressive!
>>5673593
careful with that edge
>>5673636
Not even edgy. I just can't vote for everyone's best interests without fucking up my own.
I want guns and I want to be a rug munching dyke. I'm voting Trump because he'll let me keep my guns. He might not like what I'm doing in the bedroom but that's not really his business so I don't care.
Will this win me a bf?
>>5673694
no you suck
>>5673708
That is objectively the best part of the political spectrum anom
>>5673750
Nope. Flip the image and it will be better.
Regardless a 2D plane can't really encapsulate a political opinion
I'm right wing.
Say no to immigrants. fucking pisses me off
>>5671557
>horseshoe theory is bullshit
Says the far left
wew
>>5674057
It's banal af and I hate people who say 'well the far right and far left are basically the same thing' as if it's something profound
>>5673674
Surely there's a better candidate than Trump for that, though. Shilling for the NRA is basically mandatory for them.
>>5664390
Civil Libertarian/Left(?) libertarian
>>5674104
They are though, just look at the policy the soviets and other Marxists took on lgbt people, exactly the same policies the authoritarian right took. Sending people off to re-education camps is typical of both.
Or just look at radfems and other far right religious loonies and tell me that way they both vilify anyone who's different, find scapegoats and blindly push a dogma where every other is evil, isn't the same. Hell they're both calling fags pedophile rapists who are coming for everyone's wife and kids.
Fundamentalism of either stripe can't ever coexist with anyone "different" .
>>5678295
I don't say it's not, just that it's old hat to say so
>>5678295
The horseshoe theory just assumes that far-left = corrupt, authoritarian governments. It fails to explain anarchism (and presumably any non-authoritarian far-right groups, assuming they exist).
>>5678337
>corrupt, authoritarian
That's what zealous movements who see the world through us and them tend to become. It's pretty telling how both social cons and Radfems are now on the same side of the culture war.
>>5664390
this pic is horribly done
>>5678465
But they're not on the same side of the culture war, unless you pretend the troll quoted in your image is sincere and/or that anyone shares their viewpoint.
Also, zealous/us-vs-them describes even fairly centrist libs or cons in general.
>>5678337
>presumably any non-authoritarian far-right groups, assuming they exist
>>5678597
>dr hoppe doesn't understand the arguments of his opponents
If a political party would make transgenderism illegal and forcibly remove all trannies from society and lock them away, I would support them.
>>5678295
>They are though, just look at the policy the soviets and other Marxists took on lgbt people, exactly the same policies the authoritarian right took. Sending people off to re-education camps is typical of both.
They're really only at opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to economics. Both groups you're discussing are authoritarian and rather socially conservative. And everything they have in common falls under that.
>>5678465
Yes, but there are plenty of non-authoritarian far leftists. And plenty of libertarianistic far-righters. You're really talking about two different spectrums like they're one and the same.
>>5678651
So you're voting for ISIS then?
>>5678630
he pretty clearly does if his opponents are other libertarians who claim that immigration is a form of protectionism
>>5678737
If that's what his argument is then he really doesn't. It's a form of protectionism because it restricts the flow of human capital, not that 'they don't want to trade'
>>5678597
Restricting immigration by law/force is farther toward authoritarian than free movement.
But a society of ancaps that refused to associate/do business with anybody who rented land to [insert scapegoat here] could be considered non-authoritarian far-right.
I'm a Communist when I have to interact with centrist liberal democrats
I'm a Nazi when I have to interact with Obamabots/Tumblrites/Feminists
And to top it all off, reddit neoliberal STEMlords call me insane, illogical and 'unscientific' like that means anything.
Poz me up and send me to an early grave bby. This life is constant pain.
P A L E O
L I B E R T A R I A N
N A T I O N A L I S T
I'll settle for most kinds of nationalism though t b h.
>>5664390
perfect middle, very high up
Nationalistic Libertarian.
I thought I was a moderate who had some liberal views and some conservative views but Trump has shown me that I'm a nationalist.
>>5680912
>paleo libertarian
i had to check that i hadn't just gotten too drunk and posted this myself
BE
MY
BF
>>5681089
are u a qt twink
>>5678561
>But they're not on the same side of the culture war
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/27/the-guardian-promotes-discredited-debunked-book/201327
https://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/international-baby-business_992195.html
You're in denial. Not only do they collaborate for every major cause save for abortion (despite both opposing bodily autonomy), but they even publish in each others rags. They both lobby against groups like the ACLU and Amnesty too.
And that's not even getting into how both of them have spammed places like Houston with pamphlets about how their boogie men are predators out to rape everyone's kids.
More centrist/civil liberties and individualism respecting groups might fall into the US vs them mentality but you sure don't see them pushing weirmar erra pamphlets about whatever minority they've decided to turn into their jews.
>>5664390
Haven't you left off "anarchists" and "anarchy"?
And the politics of LGBT is 'equal treatment' isn't it?
I'm a neocon. New American century, yo.
>>5681186
says the retard HOH
>>5664390
I pity you all. This kind of degenerate thinking is the result of men who listen to the spirit of a boy which lives inside of them. You cry about Rights, but what of your Duty?
You blame the State and its Laws for the present state of affairs. You've remained, by your own accord, in the State - learned in its schools, drank its milk, and benefited from its SECURITY (for without security, man can hardly secure and exercise his natural rights) - and you advocate its limitation?
Your fellow Man is the party that injures you. Not the State. Man's brutish propensity for dominance over his fellow Man is the patent reason that the State needs to exist in the first place - the absence thereof would see a return to prehistoric state of war that pits every man against every man, devoid of industry, agriculture, and cooperation.
Advocate for the State which allows a Sovereign power to weigh the Will of all its citizens and carry out that collective Will with absolute authority. Whether you agree with the actions of the Sovereign, it would be unjust to oppose it, as it carries out the collective Will of all its citizens.
"It is not Wisdom, but Authority which makes a law." Thomas Hobbes
"But as it is you leave us, if indeed you depart, having been done an injustice not by us, the laws, but by men. If you return the injustice, however, and repay the harm and flee in shame, having violated your agreement and contract with us and harmed those who least of all should be harmed, yourself, your friends, your homeland, and us, we will make life hard for you while you're alive, and then our brothers, the laws in Hades, will not receive you favorably, knowing that you also tried to destroy us as far as you were able." Socrates
communist
can't get much more specific than that rn but I lean toward anarcho-communism
>>5681134
yeah i'm alright, small and skinny
>>5681283
this argument feels wrong to me and i feel like there's a logical counterargument, but i can't think of anything
>>5681349
>Whether you agree with the actions of the Sovereign, it would be unjust to oppose it, as it carries out the collective Will of all its citizens.
is a good start
literally just because a majority is implied to agree with the sovereign he's rightfully ruling over you?
>>5681283
>it carries out the collective Will of all its citizens
replace that with the will of the best man and then we'll agree on something
>>5681291
anarcho-communism
>step one: make a state
>step two: don't call it a state
But answer me this. I suspect you're an middle class gentry kind of guy or at the very least of that cultural group. Why would you want a society in which the collective culture and ruling was up to the lowest, basest, worst part of our society? That being the lower classes.
>>5681349
This is the degeneracy I spoke of. You would argue based on feelings or emotions? Shameful.
>>5681366
The Sovereign has the right to rule absolutely because all of its citizens are willing participants in a political process that weighs the individual Wills of ALL citizens, not a majority. The Law, while it won't be agreeable to every citizen every time, is just because it is enacted in the best interest of every citizen.
If you don't like it, you have every right, upon maturing, to leave and never come back - to take your chances in the State of Nature. But you won't... You rely too heavily on the Security that the State affords you.
>>5681369
I concede that this would yield a good regime (a la Philosopher King). However, the State's moral justification lies in its consideration of the Will of all its subjects. Without that aspecr, it wouldn't be just.
>>5681397
>is just because it is enacted in the best interest of every citizen.
by who's calculation? the sovereign?
give me a break
>>5681413
Yes, the Sovereign. I've already explained it - the Sovereign is simply the vessel whereby the Will of the governed is carried out.
Would you like to talk about this or huff about like a petulant child?
>>5681376
I'm not sure what you mean by the first part, as anarcho-communism is anti state. The difference between that and marxist communism is that anarchists wouldn't use the state as a tool to establish communism.
This also means full democracy, so I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. I think you need to educate yourself about what both anarchism and communism is.
and fwiw I'm a poor mtf.
>>5681430
>I'm not sure what you mean by the first part, as anarcho-communism is anti state
I know what it is. It's an old joke but it holds water. You'd still make what to all people would simply be a state but instead you call it an "anti state" like there's a difference.
>and fwiw I'm a poor mtf.
I suspect you're culturally middle class. I don't have a penny of my own but I'm still middle class.
>>5681437
I guess I see what you mean by calling it a state but really that's just semantics.
>>5681397
>a la Philosopher King
Kill this meme. Just a king thank you
>However, the State's moral justification lies in its consideration of the Will of all its subjects
I disagree. The will of the state must be its own. It must be the will of one man. The best of all men. Otherwise you'd simply have democracy. The point of a ruler is to protect the subjects from their own will.
>Without that aspecr, it wouldn't be just
What is justice? To me justice is seeing everything within it's correct place. A criminal belongs in jail. That is justice. The husband belongs with the wife. That is justice. The farmer belongs in the field. That is justice. The king belongs at the helm of the state. That is justice. Today we have merchants at the helm of our state. That is not justice and we have suffered for it. Now the communists and anarchist want the working and underclass, respectively, to rule the state and bring the rest of us down with them.
Everything in nature looks upwards. The lower classes must also look upward towards the king to find our purpose. THAT is OUR justification for existence. The state needs no justification.
>>5681451
If anyone started the semantics game it's the communists
>>5681283
Any good system created with good intentions not only can but is invariably corrupted by men and women who are thirsty for power and control, the State is controlled by men, the said men is elected by the people, who are easily manipulated into putting those that will do anything for this position.
Furthermore what if it's the will of the majority to do something inhuman, hasn't the majority been proved to be wrong again and again?
This system is a dream, would never work, people don't know what's good for them, the majority is thoroughly ignorant in important aspects such as scientific knowledge and completely incapable of taking good decisions.
>>5681475
>you don't trust a man to be in power
>you don't trust men to be in power
>you don't trust each man to be in charge of themselves
So what exactly do you suggest?
>>5681486
That politics is bogus, 2000 years ago in rome corruption was rome's biggest problem, right now we face the exact same problem. What changed? Technology.
People have more space to be kind because they aren't struggling for survival every single minute, it's the only thing that changed, we're still the same barbaric people we were before. If technocracy had it's way, there would be no way that either religion or political waste would influence a state's decision on education, health, economics or the military. People who are ignorant about a subject should have no say on what should or shouldn't be done in that field because they simply don't know what they are talking about or what's good for them for that matter.
But then again, even that system would be corrupted with time, that's the human nature.
True democracy is nothing but the tyranny of a stupid majority.
>>5681565
robot overlords = STEM overloards
>>5681604
>STEM overloards
I'm ok with that, there's a reason why /sci/ is the best board on 4chan.
>>5681537
>>5681475
>>5681459
I think you all fail to understand the premise of this system.
The Sovereign power could be any number of things - a king, an assembly, a number of landed gentry, the wisest people of the day, or what have you. The physical nature of the Sovereign is immaterial.
Nor is this system a Democracy, as several people have been saying. It's a collection of individuals who consent to the Absolute Rule of the Sovereign. Nor is it again, like Democracy, conducive to the "Tyranny of the majority". The Sovereign is an expression of the Will of ALL its citizens, and is obligated to carry out the most ethical course of action with regards to that principle.
The other key aspect, which I stated earlier, is that if you don't like it, you have every right, upon maturing, to leave and never come back - to take your chances in the State of Nature. But you simply won't. You rely too heavily on the Security that the State affords you.
Man is brutish and barbaric without the absolute rule of an ethically superior Sovereign power, which carries out the Will of its citizens with jurisprudence.
>>5681682
This is off topic, but Science is too important to be left to scientists. We've seen what happens in the past when we allow them to run amok, without any ethical bounds.
Read this thread ( >>/sci/7838877 ) to see what I'm talking about - /sci/ couldn't reason themselves out of a cardboard box. Only a couple posts in that thread are remotely cogent.
>>5664390
>libertarians
hahahaHAHAHAHAHAHA
NO, RETARD
>>5670717
>tfw classical liberal
I'm a libertarian-leaning centrist, a dyke, and generally disaffected with everything politically these days.
/lgbt/ people still supporting immigrants from Syria, what gives? Does being LGBT turn you into a self-defeating moralfag, is it your peer group, is it because you also have a tumblr? I seriously want to know. I understand liking many of Sanders's ideas, I get it...but how can any of you throw your arms open and be like "refugees welcome"?
![odalrune4[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WII5DlZ.jpg "odalrune4[1].jpg")
Ethnic Nationalist. Pro regionalism, anti globalism. Generally pro-market, but could see myself supporting aspects of Italian corporatism/syndicalism, and maybe trade protection (especially for infant industries).
>>5684958
So, wannabe fascist tool?
>>5684970
Full blown fascism is too interventionist and authoritarian DESU. So I would say no.
Absolute theocracy of pious men, with God as our ruler. All those who have not made a compact with God are banished until they beg for His forgiveness and are baptised.
America was like this before an assembly of perverts and Jews overthrew the rightful king of the American commonwealth in 1776.
This was further cemented by the Judeo-Masonic revolution of 1789.
>>5664444
>>5664464
>>5664457
>>5664461
>>5667844
>>5667867
>>5667931
>>5668303
>>5670041
>>5670717
>>5671448
>>5672746
>>5672807
>>5672864
>>5673593
>>5673694
>>5674045
>>5678295
>>5678597
>>5680912
>>5680986
>>5681089
>>5681032
>>5681203
>>5681291
>>5683335
idiots
>>5670836
>>5672722
>>5664489
>>5672773
>>5672827
>>5680894
>>5680922
>>5681475
>>5681537
>>5684958
you're getting there, but you need to reflect on your beliefs and look to God for guidance on removing yourself from hate and discontent
>>5683216
>>5681459
>>5681369
>>5681283
good beliefs - far more than I expected on this board. Hobbes is a bit too secular for my taste, but the concept is decent
>>5685295
>Absolute theocracy of pious men, with God as our ruler. All those who have not made a compact with God are banished until they beg for His forgiveness and are baptised.
>America was like this before an assembly of perverts and Jews overthrew the rightful king of the American commonwealth in 1776.
King George was a heretic though.
cant ruze the cruz
>>5685340
Admittedly true, but the king is more of a figurehead for the true leader, which is God.
The man who wears the crown isn't important, but the power of the Crown is vested by God.
![photo[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/uQJVkdM.png "photo[1].png")
Reactionary fags are ridiculous. KEKstianity is gay, and there's no rational reason to embrace the level of tradition, hierarchy and authority required for feudalism/monarchy/whateverthefuckkindoflarpingyouenjoy
Literally a meme ideology.
>>5685511
>he doesn't have faith in God
>he calls everything he disagrees with a meme
>he makes no attempt to refute the points made
Thanks for giving me a laugh, anon. I needed it.
Christ... This thread devolved from a lively discussion about politics into a series of progressively crazier schizophrenic rants.
>>5685295
Obnoxious and idiotic. Thanks anon for demonstrating to others how not to act online
>>5685295
>Absolute theocracy of pious men, with God as our ruler
The priest class is below the noble class. They are very close but still priests shouldn't run a country.
"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's"
>>5685295
>listed in both "getting there" and "good beliefs"
lol
>>5685295
You put a lot of effort into this post for having such moronic opinions.
>>5686970
>he thinks he can have capitalism without capitalism
I'm not that guy but natsocs are delusional
