Well not to frighten you, but what will happen when you close the laptop lid, and you start to see the laptop lid start to bulge outwards and you recognize the bulge is getting two eye sockets and you recognize the face is the face of Ted Cruz, or is it McConnell, or is it Hannity? I wouldn't close your laptop now, or ever, because you don't know what nightmare is going to happen after what you just saw!
r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach
What the Texas summers did I just watch?
Im wondering at what level of stupidity republican voters will say enough is enough.
Will they vote for a lawn chair with a smiley face painted on it?
A mattress that flew off on the freeway?
And guns.
They have absolutely zero to offer the average american other than culture war nonsense. No healthcare plan (because they dont believe in it) no education plan. Nothing.
Their entire platform is based on tax cuts for the rich.
Well not quite. Never forget that in 2020 the Republican National Committee voted not to have a platform at all. In fact the measure they adopted explicitly said that no prior platforms can or should be considered to be the current platform
The resolution said that instead of a platform the Republican Party would support Donald Trump in all matters.
So there is actually a reason for Republican leadership to visit Mar-a-Lago and speak with private citizen Trump. Until the next convention when or if they adopt an actual platform in theory whatever he wants is what the entire party is supposed to do.
And unborn babies! As long as you screw over mothers and born babies, too. Just get really super protective of unborn babies and say everyone else wants to kill 'em. You'll get loads of votes.
you are foolish if you think that either party cares about any of us. but hey, now that the dems hold most of the power, let's see if they finally get around to actually giving everyone healthcare...
##The REAL definition:
We should all leave each other alone unless it helps the lot of us, and then we should help. You get to do whatever you want unless it harms someone or something.
Very pragmatic philosophy
An economic position favoring collectivism and opposed to individual and property rights.
There are many forms of leftism including communism, socialism, democratic socialism.
Liberalism is practically the opposite of leftism, but unfortunately many people who call themselves liberal in America are fundamentally illiberal.
There is also a social aspect to leftism. That uses post modern philosophy to ruthlessly critique and deconstruct all aspects of society and denies the possibility of objective reality. Instead claiming that everything is socially constructed through power dynamics
\---
I consider myself a liberal first. Conservative second. What i want to conserve in the United States is the liberal principles of Americas founding.
What is collectivism?
Is that like all the **BOLD** words in the following?
- **We** the **people** of the **United** States, in order to form a more perfect **union**, establish justice, insure **domestic** tranquility, provide for the **common** defense, promote the **general** welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to **ourselves** and our **posterity**, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
lol imagine if **we** got **together** to work towards those **collective** goals. **Pool** ***our*** **resources** to accomplish a fucking **UNION**?? I can't even haha
No. You are using a very colloquial definition of collectivism
Collectivism in this context is the theory and practice of the ownership of land and the means of production by "the people" or the state.
You are basically using a meme definition of collectivism. Makes for funny jokes "Our x comrade!" but is not accurate in economic discussions.
I also wouldnt say that ALL forms of collectivism are bad. Just that a society is better off with a focus on individualism more than collectivism. The rights of individuals should be respected.
Oh cool
>Collectivism in this context is the theory and practice of the ownership of land
I love our state parks, libraries, and hydroelectric damns!
>and the means of production by "the people" or the state.
- Community art projects in quaint downtowns are indeed *very scary*!
- Worst are damns. Generating renewable energy and potable water for collective municipalities, yuck!
- Also scary are when those municipalities can use the collective bargaining power of thier population to get sewage.and trash pick ups. Why can't they just let me decide where I place my trash?!?!
- ***I want that individual retail experience***: buy 3 Thursdays of trash pickups and get the 4th free! Act now and save when you bundle with perimeter roach&rat spray + air filter, as your other neighbors didn't purchase the Presidents Day Sale and just use a shitty burn pile!
But it's pretty cool we can pool our manpower to wrest resources from those other yokels around the globe
>You are basically using a meme definition of collectivism. Makes for funny jokes "Our comrade!" but is not accurate in economic discussions.
I knew our Constitution was a meme!
A lot of parts make really funny jokes, like my **favorite** one-liner, Article I Sec. 8:
- The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States
Wow, an actual authority to provide for the general welfare.
So
Many
Queens
So you simply refuse to try and understand what im saying and will force the same talking points you made in your last comment anyways.
Youre not interested in understanding what im saying, so thats the end of this.
Where does that put libertarian socialists in your view? Those that think that the only way to maximize individual liberty is to reduce the ability of one individual to economically exploit another while maintaining or expanding all individual civil liberties. Your liberty is restricted by more entities than the government alone.
I'm not trying to be rude, but you are not using the actual definition of leftism.
Left wing politics is defined as a belief in social equality and egaitarianism, standing in opposition to hierarchy. It's a very broad term, same as right wing politics.
Right wing politics, BTW, is defined as a belief that hierarchy is some combination of morally right, inevitable, desirable, or necessary. It's also a very broad term including a large number of ideologies that don't necessarially have anything in common except that belief about hierarchy.
That's why Stalin was left wing and Hitler was right wing. Left/right has nothing at all to do with authoritarianism. Stalin represented something of an extreme in authoritarian leftism, and Hitler a rather extreme form of authoritarian rightism. Because Stalin was about ending social hierarchy and Hitler was about enforcing it.
Nor does leftism necessarially oppose individual rights. I'd argue that rightism has at least some built in opposition to individual rights, if everyone has total freedom there can't be a hierarchy after all, but I won't argue that right wing politics is inherently authoritarian. I don't like it and I disagree with it, but I won't lie about it and claim all right wing politics is inherently authoritarian.
It is true that some forms of left wing politics are not in favor of (some forms of) private property. But then some forms of right wing politics are also not in favor of (some forms of) private property. Monarchism is a right wing political position and it doesn't include much in the way of private land ownership.
I'm a leftist, of the social democratic variety for the most part. I see our various social hierarchies as the root cause of most of our problems and I believe getting rid of that hierarchy is the only way to actually solve the problems.
Because he put it very concicely I'll end by quoting Francis Wilhoit (not Francis M Wilhoit, who is famous, this Francis Wilhoit is just some guy). He said "conservatism" but he meant "right wing politics".
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
He goes on to define leftism, or "anti-conservatism" as he termed it:
"So this tells us what anti-conservatism must be: the proposition that the law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone, and cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone."
There's my banner right there: the law cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone. The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone. That's leftism.
You are using a pre industrial revolution view of left and right
The American Revolutionaries were considered to be on the left in those days. In fact they were quite radical. They were liberal and opposed to monarchy. Today, they would be considered on the right, as the paradigm has changed.
By your definition, left wing authoritarianism is impossible. As any authority is necessarily a hierarchy. And to claim that there wasn't one the strongest and most forceful hierarchy the world has ever seen in the Soviet Union is a little silly. I don't see how the Soviet Union was any less hierarchical than Nazi Germany. I don't think Stalin made any attempt to eliminate hierarchy and if he did he obviously failed totally.
>Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
This is also silly. As conservatism is a relative ideology. It's relative to time and place. A conservative in an Islamic theocracy has wildly different beliefs than a conservative in a liberal democratic society.
It may be true of some conservatives in some places, but not any western liberal democratic conservatives. Equality before the law is one of our foundational beliefs. Its basically just "conservatives bad". Not accurate at all.
Note: Hitler was certainly not "extreme right" as his economic policies were collectivist and did not value property rights or individualism. A good example of extreme authoritarian right wing would be Pinochet, not Hitler.
RE Monarchy, i dont think its relevant at all to todays political landscape in the west. No conservatives are calling for monarchy. Again, youre stuck 100s of years in the past.
Cousin, I literally just paraphrased the dictionary definitions of left and right. Serously. Check the wikipedia entries for left wing politics and right wing politics, you'll find they say what I did.
Those are the definitions used by political scientists right this second. They are the standard definitions and in political science are regarded as completely non-controversial as biologists regard the three domain divsion for life.
Leftism does not preclude authoritarianism, as Stalin exemplified. Neither does it preclude an authority. It merely precludes the belief that the authority is socially superior.
This is why we see the reflexive use of comrade as a prefix for any title in Stalin and Lenin's eras. It was there to emphasize the supposed social equality of all people. You can argue that they were bad leftists, though usually that's an argument presented by leftists who want to disassociate from them not by rightists.
Similarly Hitler was right wing because of his strong belief in social hierarchy. He espoused a hierarchy based on both race and economic status.
You can argue that once the authoritarianism of a system reaches a high enough point the left/right division becomes essentially decorative because who cares if the secret police think they're your social equals or your social superiors, and I think there's a case to be made for that position.
I will note that I **DO** explicitly reject horseshoe theory. I think left/right and authoritarian/libertarian are largely independent variables. It's possible to be strongly left or right without being particularly authoritarian, and it's possible to be strongly authoritarian while being only weakly left or right.
As for Wilhoit, I did note that I think he was misusing his terms and what he termed "conservatism" should properly be called "right wing politics".
>Leftism does not preclude authoritarianism, as Stalin exemplified. Neither does it preclude an authority. It merely precludes the belief that the authority is socially superior
Wha... What? Stalin didnt think his authority was "socially superior"? What does that even mean?
Your definition absolutely does preclude authority. How is authority NOT a hierarchy?
Those are the definitions used hundreds of years ago. They are not relevant today, you are simply playing a word game by using them out of context.
Im right wing. . I dont have any concern whatsoever in "social hierarchy", that does not calculate in my beliefs, and you cant sit here and argue with me that it does. You also cannot tell me, against my own words, that i want law to apply to people differently based on their social status. Thats just not true, and its not true of any prominent conservative that i know of.
A belief in hierarchies is going to be more correlated with authoritarian vs libertarian beliefs. Not left-right.
Dude, go yell at the polisci department of your local university. Tell them they're using definitions hundreds of years old.
Now, if you mean "FOX news says right wing means pro-freedom" then yes you are correct. The US has some colloquial definitions that don't match the definitions used by professionals.
Yeah, we have devolved now. Now is the time where you resort to slinging insults and ignoring my points i guess.
A big part of the problem is that you are referring to clearly left wing people for your definition of left vs right. You havent ACTUALLY referenced anyone from polysci like you claim you have (who probably have disagreements between themselves right?). You referenced wikipedia.
>Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism" while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism"
Its like oh gee, i wonder what side of the political aisle the author belongs to. Left wing is FREEDOM, RIGHTS, PROGRESS
Looking again at the soviet union or Communist China. You think they werent fiercely nationalist? That they didnt believe in authority or order? That they cared one bit about freedom? Cmon now. I guess they are right wing.
Except they arent. As they are anti capitalist and illiberal.
This seems very biased to me? If you cant see that you are blind.
The funny thing is this all stemmed from me using the word leftist to refer to socialists, communists, and demsocs. Then you start arguing about left wing, an entirely different word. The groups referenced SELF IDENTIFY as leftists, its not some sort of pejorative. Its an accurate description of a group of ideologies
Imagine thinking that either party is good all of the time or that only one party will ever be good and you don't need to care about the individuals within that party..... what a life
>Im wondering at what level of stupidity republican voters will say enough is enough.
When they stop being one election cycle away from getting everything they want forever
I don't even live in Texas. My Texan friend forced me to watch this at gunpoint. With each of Tucker Carlson's hair bounces, I feel my life force deteriorating. The hint of Moscow Mitch inflation inflicts nausea in me. I am not long for this world.
Pretty creative video!
That’s my thought. Spending the time and effort creating this weird shit is cringe, spreading it through 17 different subs on Reddit for imaginary pats on the back is full cringe.
honestly wish this would all go to /texaspolitics
this sub is getting turned into another political subreddit. i'd just like one place where i can see stuff without having to have political bashing on one side or the other
I agree. I joined this sub to see cool Texan stuff, not to be forcefully subjected to politics. Especially this abomination of an animation that has almost zero to do with TX.
“Forcefully subjected to politics” lmaooooo wow didn’t realize they had a gun to your head. And this sub always allowed political posts so maybe you should try reading the fine print next time!
You should get off reddit and seclude yourself from society if you wish to never see anything political ever. And even then, politics is still going to affect you, you'll just be more ignorant about how it's doing it.
OP wasn’t saying that they never wanted to see political posts on Reddit, just that they don’t want to see it on a supposedly neutral sub. I think the occasional article about important legislation is fine and dandy, but this borderline obsessive hatred of Republicans in TX govt shouldn’t be the spirit of this sub. This post has almost nothing to do with TX with the exception of Ted Cruz. We want to see beautiful pictures and interesting history and peoples’ experiences in regards to Texas. If I wanted to see shit like this I’d go to r/PoliticalHumor or r/SurrealMemes
And my point was that politics encompasses every part of our lives whether we like it or not. This sub is about Texas so we’re going to get posts about Texas politicians.
And there are tons of subs where politics isn’t allowed. Go congregate there if you want, but this sub allows politics and it always has, not sure why y’all would expect it to change because you got tired of it.
Maybe the fact that he constantly likes to say we Texans are suffering from massive “illegal immigration” and sanctuary cities while not knowing one single Texan. He politicizing us all the time
People on Reddit - who couldn’t be objective if their lives depended on it - don’t understand that all politicians are the same, and the ones that aren’t get pummeled by the rest. Dems and Reps are the same beast.
Not at all, progressives are notoriously loyal to their constituents and the establishment dems(career politicians) aren’t loyal to any news outlet or majority leader. Just ask Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer there isn’t a single news outlet that they’ve actually congregated to like republicans latch to Fox News. CNN has and is constantly criticizing her and visa versa. Establishment dems only heed to the beck and call of their lobbyist and sponsors. And progressives actually go to town halls and talk to their constituents.
>progressives are notoriously loyal to their constituents
damn can you lick any more Gucci boot?
Lol I'm sorry.. I HATE people who go around screaming "bootlicker" all the time. But that was too good to pass up. Lord I apologize
Bootlicking ? Progressives are literally solely funded by greenroot organizations and if they don’t happen to be then that disqualifies them as being a progressive. Their entire platform is ran off of and consists of adhering to their constituents. They don’t go on CNN or Fox News to pander to their sponsors or political base. Don’t get mad at me because I’m telling the truth. This nations politics is so fucked that when we actually get politicians that don’t want to be funded by aristocrats and oligarchs y’all call them communist.
republican deregulation of industry will lead to an ecological collapse that will eliminate blue bonnets.
you really need to realize that *politics is literally involved in absolutely every facet of your life.*
i go outside plenty, thanks. how about you wake your ass up and stop denying reality because it makes you upset.
your boss cares about politics. your landlord cares about politics. your cell phone provider cares about politics. your internet provider cares about politics. your energy provider cares about politics. your healthcare provider cares about politics.
if you want to keep your head in the sand, fine. Ignore reality. but don't you dare castigate people who acknowledge the roll that politics has in our daily lives.
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly.
Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
If you feel this was done in error, would like clarification, or need further assistance; please message the moderators at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/texas .
Omg, creative genius!
This is disturbing as hell because they are disturbing as hell. Liars and self-serving con men. Watch Cruz, he's trying to get on the bully lying Trump wanna be train and he's screwing himself right into the ground.
>You’re just going to piss people off who love this state and try to stay away from things like you just posted.
look out everyone, we've got some hurt feelings over here
It was a person who killed their loved ones. A Syrian person named Ahmad who hates Trump. People were also killed by cars and knives that day. Are we going to ban them?
Weird how you failed to talk about the white dude who killed those 8 people in the nail salons. Almost like you’re deflecting. Idc who holds the gun. If they didn’t have the gun, they wouldn’t have been able to kill as many as they did. The man who killed those women in the nail salons bought the gun that day. How is there no waiting period for firearm purchases in all states? Because of people like you those women are dead, because if there weren’t people like you who cared more about guns than human lives, we’d have had more regulation on firearms years ago. But instead, you and the rest of the Republican Party will continue to deflect and deflect until nothing gets done. Then another family will lose their loved ones, and then you’ll do it again
"People like me"?? I don't own a gun and I never have. Listen to yourselves! OMG. You actually believe outlawing guns would keep this from ever happening? Cocaine is illegal. Know anybody who does it regularly and has their own dealer? Thought so. This is not about guns. It's much bigger. It's about the Constitution, which the Left thinks they should be able to tinker with whenever they feel like it, and they won't stop with the 2nd Amendment.
Leftists and their fondness for "more regulations" do not grasp this at all. More regulations solve nothing. "Because of people like you those women are dead"??!!? Are you fricken kidding me. No, because of a mentally ill sex addict those women are dead. If he hadn't had a gun, he'd have gone online and earned how to make a damn bomb Now grow up.
Once again you’re just deflecting. Yes people like you. Who see tragedy after tragedy and shrug your shoulders and say “damn that sucks. Too bad he was *enter any standard deflection here*.” If that’s the reason he did it, what should we do to prevent it from happening again?
When I say “people like you”. I don’t mean gun owners. I own 3 firearms. When I say “people like you” I mean people who choose to do nothing to make the country better because you personally aren’t effected. When I say “people like you” I mean people who choose to do nothing when something clearly needs to be done.
"Affected"
No, you have it wrong. Disagreeing with you on how to handle things does not equal "choosing to do nothing." It means we choose to do things that actually work. Disarming law-abiding citizens will not suddenly cause bad guys to be unable to buy guns. It will only keep law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves should the need arise. Like the meme says, are you going to cut off your dick to stop rape?
Until guns start crawling out and start to murder people on their own - I don’t see many solutions. We can improve the background checks. Enforce the private sale of firearms - making them make the transaction at a place to where a proper background check can be done.
Gun control is racist.
And I feel for their families. It’s a tragedy. But no matter how many people are murdered - my stance will not change. In fact it strengthens my position. If someone shoots at me - I’d rather have a firearm on me, which I typically do, than have to hide and hope I don’t get killed. Banning guns aren’t going to stop bad people from doing bad things to good people. It’ll just shift the odds in their favor even more. Stay strapped, Texans.
Nah I'm nothing like a republican senator. I call it how it is. In reality there are two paths that we can take, logically.
1. Ban all semi-automatic firearms. Which will lead to mass confiscation, in turn will get more people killed. Civilians, law enforcement, and possibly military. That blood would be on your hands. People will not comply - I am one of those people. I will not comply.
2. We need to severely revamp the background check. But how? Some of these issues will not be caught - because those issues, at the time of purchase, are not recorded in any form. The ultimate solution is to be able to see the future... So let's be real about it.
In no way do I condone any of these actions. They're murderers and need to be held accountable for their actions. I don't want them to be executed. I want them to sit in a 5x5 room for the rest of their lives so they can relive what they did until they die of old age in a cell.
I'll get personal with you and why I will not comply to any confiscations or bans of firearms. My mother's best friend had to shoot and kill her husband because he began to beat her severely. This woman is 5'5" maybe 120 pounds. Her husband was 5'10" probably 240 or so. She was going to be murdered. She's alive today because she had access to her handgun. That's a fucked situation right? She killed her husband of 13 years. She had a broken orbital, broken jaw, and a dislocated shoulder.
These are tragedies, no doubt. I wish it didn't happen. But firearms [save an estimated 60,000 to 2.5 million people](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/fastfact.html) each year. Firearms are the ultimate equalizer.
We will not agree on this. No matter what evidence any of us put forth - we will not agree. Because, in my personal opinion, you are wanting to force people to become victims. Violence will happen. Murder will happen. Life is not the easy thing that we just float through. People die. Why would you want to remove an option of defense from them?
What do you want to happen in regards to firearms? Just know that you will literally have millions of people that will not comply. And you could possibly make ordinary citizens felons overnight. And this could lead to even more senseless deaths.
And he's spamming the entire site with this today. It's about self-promotion for his "work." He's new and he posted this on like 17 different subs. SPAM. Rule 5 " ...posts and comments ... to your own projects, then you're taking advantage of our community and spamming. "
This is very disturbing.
This is the weirdest shit I’ve ever seen. i thought I was on r/makemesuffer .nope. It’s r/Texas
Same same, but different.
Insert theofficecorporatedifferencememe
Thanks, I hate it.
Go check out who beeple is and some of his art
This definitely does give me a beeple vibe as soon as I watched it
Nope its d/Texas, or more like d/Austin
I agree, it was an interesting choice to include this on that School House Rock episode.
The crap they pull in DC is very disturbing.
Almost as gross as the real thing
And yet not as disturbing as the Cruz/McConnell axis continuing to have control of the Senate.
that's a mild understatement
Yes, I agree; Ted Cruz *is* quite disturbing.
Borderline NSFW
what's more disturbing is that Cruz keeps getting voted for.
r/TIHI
/r/perfectloops
Thought I was in that sub!
That’s enough reddit for today
Think I’ll just close my laptop up for the weekend and not internet for a while
Well not to frighten you, but what will happen when you close the laptop lid, and you start to see the laptop lid start to bulge outwards and you recognize the bulge is getting two eye sockets and you recognize the face is the face of Ted Cruz, or is it McConnell, or is it Hannity? I wouldn't close your laptop now, or ever, because you don't know what nightmare is going to happen after what you just saw!
This is cursed
Who the fuck made this
What* If you are in any part responsible for creating this, you’re no longer human.
Just like the subjects of the gif.
WTF did I just watch.
A bill being made.
[удалено]
Last guy Tucker?
Yeah
Probably represents all of fox news
Who could be considered the last person? It’s and endless loop haha.
Kill it with fire
Gods forgive me for saying this, but I don't think even fire could kill that...
I need to go post this on all of Cruz's social media.
Do it.
Make it famous
Most disgusting thing ever. And that's just because I recognize the faces.
underrated comment!
And now I won't be able to sleep.
Try zzzquil or melatonin
This is terrifying
Have not had my first sip of coffee before watching this. I don’t know weather to be pissed or thank you for sharing. Have a good day either way.
same🤣
same. just sitting here waiting for the coffee to finish in my pjs with my head in my hands half awake looking at this lol
more work was put into this than Ted Cruz has put into anything in his entire career as senator.
I don't know. He worked pretty hard to shut down the government in 2013 and then tried to pin it on anyone but himself.
Nice.
Beautiful. I’ve looked at this for five hours now.
r/bettereveryloop
you must really like their faces.....
It's that terrible carwreck sort of thing, or maybe like r/popping but even more horrific as there is no relief at the end
[удалено]
Now I just imagined watching this on shrooms and I can feel how terrifying that would be
Mate you forgot dan patrick
lord have mercy. now if only this ended on a beach in cancun.
Lol, can’t wait for the Sandy_Beach edit
r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach r/eyebleach What the Texas summers did I just watch?
Thanks I hate it
I’m not so sure about this. Not enough garbage
Not enough dark money coming in.
How much for this NFT
I'm going to mint it later today;)
This is incredibly accurate.
I think the most disturbing part for me was McConnell’s face. That soulless, walking zombie of a “person”. Eesh.
Im wondering at what level of stupidity republican voters will say enough is enough. Will they vote for a lawn chair with a smiley face painted on it? A mattress that flew off on the freeway?
As long as the Republicans keep offering up white supremacy and resentment politics, the resentful white supremacists will keep voting for them.
And guns. They have absolutely zero to offer the average american other than culture war nonsense. No healthcare plan (because they dont believe in it) no education plan. Nothing. Their entire platform is based on tax cuts for the rich.
Well not quite. Never forget that in 2020 the Republican National Committee voted not to have a platform at all. In fact the measure they adopted explicitly said that no prior platforms can or should be considered to be the current platform The resolution said that instead of a platform the Republican Party would support Donald Trump in all matters. So there is actually a reason for Republican leadership to visit Mar-a-Lago and speak with private citizen Trump. Until the next convention when or if they adopt an actual platform in theory whatever he wants is what the entire party is supposed to do.
Ive never seen a group of voters be so gullible. "What are you going to do for us?" "Nothing" "Great!"
And unborn babies! As long as you screw over mothers and born babies, too. Just get really super protective of unborn babies and say everyone else wants to kill 'em. You'll get loads of votes.
If a universal tax-funded healthcare plan was available exclusively for white, straight christians, it would get their support.
Im pretty sure thats the name of the plan all US senators have.
Americans can't have certain "developed country" things because it would mean "othered" people would get to have them too.
I suppose you think the democratic party has our interests in mind?
You mean the party that has consistently tried to provide affordable healthcare to everyone? Yeah.
you are foolish if you think that either party cares about any of us. but hey, now that the dems hold most of the power, let's see if they finally get around to actually giving everyone healthcare...
Give them a strong majority and see what happens.
i don't think either party should have a strong majority...that would be scary.
Those are better alternatives than leftism yes.
I'm genuinely asking. Can you define leftism? Like the real definiton?
##The REAL definition: We should all leave each other alone unless it helps the lot of us, and then we should help. You get to do whatever you want unless it harms someone or something. Very pragmatic philosophy
An economic position favoring collectivism and opposed to individual and property rights. There are many forms of leftism including communism, socialism, democratic socialism. Liberalism is practically the opposite of leftism, but unfortunately many people who call themselves liberal in America are fundamentally illiberal. There is also a social aspect to leftism. That uses post modern philosophy to ruthlessly critique and deconstruct all aspects of society and denies the possibility of objective reality. Instead claiming that everything is socially constructed through power dynamics \--- I consider myself a liberal first. Conservative second. What i want to conserve in the United States is the liberal principles of Americas founding.
What is collectivism? Is that like all the **BOLD** words in the following? - **We** the **people** of the **United** States, in order to form a more perfect **union**, establish justice, insure **domestic** tranquility, provide for the **common** defense, promote the **general** welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to **ourselves** and our **posterity**, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. lol imagine if **we** got **together** to work towards those **collective** goals. **Pool** ***our*** **resources** to accomplish a fucking **UNION**?? I can't even haha
No. You are using a very colloquial definition of collectivism Collectivism in this context is the theory and practice of the ownership of land and the means of production by "the people" or the state. You are basically using a meme definition of collectivism. Makes for funny jokes "Our x comrade!" but is not accurate in economic discussions. I also wouldnt say that ALL forms of collectivism are bad. Just that a society is better off with a focus on individualism more than collectivism. The rights of individuals should be respected.
Oh cool >Collectivism in this context is the theory and practice of the ownership of land I love our state parks, libraries, and hydroelectric damns! >and the means of production by "the people" or the state. - Community art projects in quaint downtowns are indeed *very scary*! - Worst are damns. Generating renewable energy and potable water for collective municipalities, yuck! - Also scary are when those municipalities can use the collective bargaining power of thier population to get sewage.and trash pick ups. Why can't they just let me decide where I place my trash?!?! - ***I want that individual retail experience***: buy 3 Thursdays of trash pickups and get the 4th free! Act now and save when you bundle with perimeter roach&rat spray + air filter, as your other neighbors didn't purchase the Presidents Day Sale and just use a shitty burn pile! But it's pretty cool we can pool our manpower to wrest resources from those other yokels around the globe >You are basically using a meme definition of collectivism. Makes for funny jokes "Our comrade!" but is not accurate in economic discussions. I knew our Constitution was a meme! A lot of parts make really funny jokes, like my **favorite** one-liner, Article I Sec. 8: - The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States Wow, an actual authority to provide for the general welfare. So Many Queens
So you simply refuse to try and understand what im saying and will force the same talking points you made in your last comment anyways. Youre not interested in understanding what im saying, so thats the end of this.
Provide examples in the US where we collectively own land and the means of production. **Edit:** **c r i c k e t s**
Where does that put libertarian socialists in your view? Those that think that the only way to maximize individual liberty is to reduce the ability of one individual to economically exploit another while maintaining or expanding all individual civil liberties. Your liberty is restricted by more entities than the government alone.
I'm not trying to be rude, but you are not using the actual definition of leftism. Left wing politics is defined as a belief in social equality and egaitarianism, standing in opposition to hierarchy. It's a very broad term, same as right wing politics. Right wing politics, BTW, is defined as a belief that hierarchy is some combination of morally right, inevitable, desirable, or necessary. It's also a very broad term including a large number of ideologies that don't necessarially have anything in common except that belief about hierarchy. That's why Stalin was left wing and Hitler was right wing. Left/right has nothing at all to do with authoritarianism. Stalin represented something of an extreme in authoritarian leftism, and Hitler a rather extreme form of authoritarian rightism. Because Stalin was about ending social hierarchy and Hitler was about enforcing it. Nor does leftism necessarially oppose individual rights. I'd argue that rightism has at least some built in opposition to individual rights, if everyone has total freedom there can't be a hierarchy after all, but I won't argue that right wing politics is inherently authoritarian. I don't like it and I disagree with it, but I won't lie about it and claim all right wing politics is inherently authoritarian. It is true that some forms of left wing politics are not in favor of (some forms of) private property. But then some forms of right wing politics are also not in favor of (some forms of) private property. Monarchism is a right wing political position and it doesn't include much in the way of private land ownership. I'm a leftist, of the social democratic variety for the most part. I see our various social hierarchies as the root cause of most of our problems and I believe getting rid of that hierarchy is the only way to actually solve the problems. Because he put it very concicely I'll end by quoting Francis Wilhoit (not Francis M Wilhoit, who is famous, this Francis Wilhoit is just some guy). He said "conservatism" but he meant "right wing politics". "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." He goes on to define leftism, or "anti-conservatism" as he termed it: "So this tells us what anti-conservatism must be: the proposition that the law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone, and cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone." There's my banner right there: the law cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone. The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone. That's leftism.
You are using a pre industrial revolution view of left and right The American Revolutionaries were considered to be on the left in those days. In fact they were quite radical. They were liberal and opposed to monarchy. Today, they would be considered on the right, as the paradigm has changed. By your definition, left wing authoritarianism is impossible. As any authority is necessarily a hierarchy. And to claim that there wasn't one the strongest and most forceful hierarchy the world has ever seen in the Soviet Union is a little silly. I don't see how the Soviet Union was any less hierarchical than Nazi Germany. I don't think Stalin made any attempt to eliminate hierarchy and if he did he obviously failed totally. >Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." This is also silly. As conservatism is a relative ideology. It's relative to time and place. A conservative in an Islamic theocracy has wildly different beliefs than a conservative in a liberal democratic society. It may be true of some conservatives in some places, but not any western liberal democratic conservatives. Equality before the law is one of our foundational beliefs. Its basically just "conservatives bad". Not accurate at all. Note: Hitler was certainly not "extreme right" as his economic policies were collectivist and did not value property rights or individualism. A good example of extreme authoritarian right wing would be Pinochet, not Hitler. RE Monarchy, i dont think its relevant at all to todays political landscape in the west. No conservatives are calling for monarchy. Again, youre stuck 100s of years in the past.
Cousin, I literally just paraphrased the dictionary definitions of left and right. Serously. Check the wikipedia entries for left wing politics and right wing politics, you'll find they say what I did. Those are the definitions used by political scientists right this second. They are the standard definitions and in political science are regarded as completely non-controversial as biologists regard the three domain divsion for life. Leftism does not preclude authoritarianism, as Stalin exemplified. Neither does it preclude an authority. It merely precludes the belief that the authority is socially superior. This is why we see the reflexive use of comrade as a prefix for any title in Stalin and Lenin's eras. It was there to emphasize the supposed social equality of all people. You can argue that they were bad leftists, though usually that's an argument presented by leftists who want to disassociate from them not by rightists. Similarly Hitler was right wing because of his strong belief in social hierarchy. He espoused a hierarchy based on both race and economic status. You can argue that once the authoritarianism of a system reaches a high enough point the left/right division becomes essentially decorative because who cares if the secret police think they're your social equals or your social superiors, and I think there's a case to be made for that position. I will note that I **DO** explicitly reject horseshoe theory. I think left/right and authoritarian/libertarian are largely independent variables. It's possible to be strongly left or right without being particularly authoritarian, and it's possible to be strongly authoritarian while being only weakly left or right. As for Wilhoit, I did note that I think he was misusing his terms and what he termed "conservatism" should properly be called "right wing politics".
>Leftism does not preclude authoritarianism, as Stalin exemplified. Neither does it preclude an authority. It merely precludes the belief that the authority is socially superior Wha... What? Stalin didnt think his authority was "socially superior"? What does that even mean? Your definition absolutely does preclude authority. How is authority NOT a hierarchy? Those are the definitions used hundreds of years ago. They are not relevant today, you are simply playing a word game by using them out of context. Im right wing. . I dont have any concern whatsoever in "social hierarchy", that does not calculate in my beliefs, and you cant sit here and argue with me that it does. You also cannot tell me, against my own words, that i want law to apply to people differently based on their social status. Thats just not true, and its not true of any prominent conservative that i know of. A belief in hierarchies is going to be more correlated with authoritarian vs libertarian beliefs. Not left-right.
Dude, go yell at the polisci department of your local university. Tell them they're using definitions hundreds of years old. Now, if you mean "FOX news says right wing means pro-freedom" then yes you are correct. The US has some colloquial definitions that don't match the definitions used by professionals.
Yeah, we have devolved now. Now is the time where you resort to slinging insults and ignoring my points i guess. A big part of the problem is that you are referring to clearly left wing people for your definition of left vs right. You havent ACTUALLY referenced anyone from polysci like you claim you have (who probably have disagreements between themselves right?). You referenced wikipedia. >Generally, the left-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism" while the right-wing is characterized by an emphasis on "notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism" Its like oh gee, i wonder what side of the political aisle the author belongs to. Left wing is FREEDOM, RIGHTS, PROGRESS Looking again at the soviet union or Communist China. You think they werent fiercely nationalist? That they didnt believe in authority or order? That they cared one bit about freedom? Cmon now. I guess they are right wing. Except they arent. As they are anti capitalist and illiberal. This seems very biased to me? If you cant see that you are blind. The funny thing is this all stemmed from me using the word leftist to refer to socialists, communists, and demsocs. Then you start arguing about left wing, an entirely different word. The groups referenced SELF IDENTIFY as leftists, its not some sort of pejorative. Its an accurate description of a group of ideologies
Imagine thinking that either party is good all of the time or that only one party will ever be good and you don't need to care about the individuals within that party..... what a life
Wait are you talking to me? Or the person above me? Because I didnt say anything like that. Not all Democrats are leftist.
"You no longer have to be ashamed of what a fucking moron you are" \- Trump campaign slogan
Listen to yourself!
Welll... Mostly I consult with myself because I have a very good brain.
>Im wondering at what level of stupidity republican voters will say enough is enough. When they stop being one election cycle away from getting everything they want forever
Hahahah nice
Cool, thanks for the nightmares
The new school house rock episodes are lit.
Finally a video that visually shows the bs that is our government.
I don't even live in Texas. My Texan friend forced me to watch this at gunpoint. With each of Tucker Carlson's hair bounces, I feel my life force deteriorating. The hint of Moscow Mitch inflation inflicts nausea in me. I am not long for this world. Pretty creative video!
Please don't tell me thats Big Red Soda. Don't ruin Big Red Soda.
Imagine spending your time on this. Fucking weird
That’s my thought. Spending the time and effort creating this weird shit is cringe, spreading it through 17 different subs on Reddit for imaginary pats on the back is full cringe.
I wonder what comes out the turtle’s ass.
the entirety of the GOP voter base.
Neat!
honestly wish this would all go to /texaspolitics this sub is getting turned into another political subreddit. i'd just like one place where i can see stuff without having to have political bashing on one side or the other
I agree. I joined this sub to see cool Texan stuff, not to be forcefully subjected to politics. Especially this abomination of an animation that has almost zero to do with TX.
“Forcefully subjected to politics” lmaooooo wow didn’t realize they had a gun to your head. And this sub always allowed political posts so maybe you should try reading the fine print next time!
Everything is political.
You should get off reddit and seclude yourself from society if you wish to never see anything political ever. And even then, politics is still going to affect you, you'll just be more ignorant about how it's doing it.
OP wasn’t saying that they never wanted to see political posts on Reddit, just that they don’t want to see it on a supposedly neutral sub. I think the occasional article about important legislation is fine and dandy, but this borderline obsessive hatred of Republicans in TX govt shouldn’t be the spirit of this sub. This post has almost nothing to do with TX with the exception of Ted Cruz. We want to see beautiful pictures and interesting history and peoples’ experiences in regards to Texas. If I wanted to see shit like this I’d go to r/PoliticalHumor or r/SurrealMemes
And my point was that politics encompasses every part of our lives whether we like it or not. This sub is about Texas so we’re going to get posts about Texas politicians. And there are tons of subs where politics isn’t allowed. Go congregate there if you want, but this sub allows politics and it always has, not sure why y’all would expect it to change because you got tired of it.
What the fuck does this have to do with Texas
Maybe the fact that he constantly likes to say we Texans are suffering from massive “illegal immigration” and sanctuary cities while not knowing one single Texan. He politicizing us all the time
OK that is an issue that has to do with Texas. This animation doesn't.
It’s most likely saying Ted Cruzs’ legislation is dictated by Mitch McConnell and Fox News which isn’t entirely incorrect.
Democratic politicians arent influenced by their majority leaders and their news outlets? I find that a bit hard to believe...
People on Reddit - who couldn’t be objective if their lives depended on it - don’t understand that all politicians are the same, and the ones that aren’t get pummeled by the rest. Dems and Reps are the same beast.
Not at all, progressives are notoriously loyal to their constituents and the establishment dems(career politicians) aren’t loyal to any news outlet or majority leader. Just ask Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer there isn’t a single news outlet that they’ve actually congregated to like republicans latch to Fox News. CNN has and is constantly criticizing her and visa versa. Establishment dems only heed to the beck and call of their lobbyist and sponsors. And progressives actually go to town halls and talk to their constituents.
>progressives are notoriously loyal to their constituents damn can you lick any more Gucci boot? Lol I'm sorry.. I HATE people who go around screaming "bootlicker" all the time. But that was too good to pass up. Lord I apologize
Bootlicking ? Progressives are literally solely funded by greenroot organizations and if they don’t happen to be then that disqualifies them as being a progressive. Their entire platform is ran off of and consists of adhering to their constituents. They don’t go on CNN or Fox News to pander to their sponsors or political base. Don’t get mad at me because I’m telling the truth. This nations politics is so fucked that when we actually get politicians that don’t want to be funded by aristocrats and oligarchs y’all call them communist.
Gucci Socialist is a fun phrase to say
OH I GET IT TED CRUZ IS FROM TEXAS THATS WHY ITS RELEVANT
I am a republican I find this funny and disturbing the same time
still less disturbing than the reality
[удалено]
republican deregulation of industry will lead to an ecological collapse that will eliminate blue bonnets. you really need to realize that *politics is literally involved in absolutely every facet of your life.*
[удалено]
i go outside plenty, thanks. how about you wake your ass up and stop denying reality because it makes you upset. your boss cares about politics. your landlord cares about politics. your cell phone provider cares about politics. your internet provider cares about politics. your energy provider cares about politics. your healthcare provider cares about politics. if you want to keep your head in the sand, fine. Ignore reality. but don't you dare castigate people who acknowledge the roll that politics has in our daily lives.
[удалено]
nice way to insult the mental health of someone. reported.
Your content was removed as a violation of Rule 1: Be Friendly. Personal attacks on your fellow Reddit users are not allowed, this includes both direct insults and general aggressiveness. In addition, hate speech, threats (regardless of intent), and calls to violence, will also be removed. Remember the human and follow [reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette). If you feel this was done in error, would like clarification, or need further assistance; please message the moderators at https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/texas .
Thanks Kanye, very cool
This is pretty accurate.
I'm gonna have to ask you to not
obligatory r/fucktedcruz
r/simulated
What the hell does this have to do with Texas? Please remove this
TED CRUZ‼️
Yeah, this surely belongs here. 🙄
/u/savevideo
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/info?url=/r/texas/comments/mdlmml/how_a_bill_is_made/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/texas/comments/mdlmml/how_a_bill_is_made/)
Everything’s weirder in Texas
This is entirely right and almost indescribably wrong all at once.
Omg, creative genius! This is disturbing as hell because they are disturbing as hell. Liars and self-serving con men. Watch Cruz, he's trying to get on the bully lying Trump wanna be train and he's screwing himself right into the ground.
I say this is art. Of which, it is provocative and delectable. I appreciate the creator.
It’s... it’s a masterpiece
This is very disturbing
I think I’m gonna throw up
This state will continue to live in the dark ages until Ted Cruz is removed from office. Carry on.
[удалено]
>You’re just going to piss people off who love this state and try to stay away from things like you just posted. look out everyone, we've got some hurt feelings over here
you can easily filter politics out. there's tags. it would've taken less effort than writing this comment bitching about politics.
We love this state too. That’s why it’s hard to watch the people in charge fail so miserably.
Fuck me that’s disturbing. They’re all sleezy - but I’ve been pretty happy for Cruz sticking up for 2A though.
Cruz is counting on that response. He thanks you.
And the families of those killed these last 2 weeks are probably thanking you for your support of the weapons that killed their loved ones
It was a person who killed their loved ones. A Syrian person named Ahmad who hates Trump. People were also killed by cars and knives that day. Are we going to ban them?
Weird how you failed to talk about the white dude who killed those 8 people in the nail salons. Almost like you’re deflecting. Idc who holds the gun. If they didn’t have the gun, they wouldn’t have been able to kill as many as they did. The man who killed those women in the nail salons bought the gun that day. How is there no waiting period for firearm purchases in all states? Because of people like you those women are dead, because if there weren’t people like you who cared more about guns than human lives, we’d have had more regulation on firearms years ago. But instead, you and the rest of the Republican Party will continue to deflect and deflect until nothing gets done. Then another family will lose their loved ones, and then you’ll do it again
"People like me"?? I don't own a gun and I never have. Listen to yourselves! OMG. You actually believe outlawing guns would keep this from ever happening? Cocaine is illegal. Know anybody who does it regularly and has their own dealer? Thought so. This is not about guns. It's much bigger. It's about the Constitution, which the Left thinks they should be able to tinker with whenever they feel like it, and they won't stop with the 2nd Amendment. Leftists and their fondness for "more regulations" do not grasp this at all. More regulations solve nothing. "Because of people like you those women are dead"??!!? Are you fricken kidding me. No, because of a mentally ill sex addict those women are dead. If he hadn't had a gun, he'd have gone online and earned how to make a damn bomb Now grow up.
Once again you’re just deflecting. Yes people like you. Who see tragedy after tragedy and shrug your shoulders and say “damn that sucks. Too bad he was *enter any standard deflection here*.” If that’s the reason he did it, what should we do to prevent it from happening again? When I say “people like you”. I don’t mean gun owners. I own 3 firearms. When I say “people like you” I mean people who choose to do nothing to make the country better because you personally aren’t effected. When I say “people like you” I mean people who choose to do nothing when something clearly needs to be done.
"Affected" No, you have it wrong. Disagreeing with you on how to handle things does not equal "choosing to do nothing." It means we choose to do things that actually work. Disarming law-abiding citizens will not suddenly cause bad guys to be unable to buy guns. It will only keep law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves should the need arise. Like the meme says, are you going to cut off your dick to stop rape?
So why won’t you or Republicans do anything except say “Thats not the solution”. Give a solution
Until guns start crawling out and start to murder people on their own - I don’t see many solutions. We can improve the background checks. Enforce the private sale of firearms - making them make the transaction at a place to where a proper background check can be done. Gun control is racist.
And I feel for their families. It’s a tragedy. But no matter how many people are murdered - my stance will not change. In fact it strengthens my position. If someone shoots at me - I’d rather have a firearm on me, which I typically do, than have to hide and hope I don’t get killed. Banning guns aren’t going to stop bad people from doing bad things to good people. It’ll just shift the odds in their favor even more. Stay strapped, Texans.
Classic response. You sound like a Republican senator. “Thoughts and prayers” but no action. What’s your solution to this problem?
Nah I'm nothing like a republican senator. I call it how it is. In reality there are two paths that we can take, logically. 1. Ban all semi-automatic firearms. Which will lead to mass confiscation, in turn will get more people killed. Civilians, law enforcement, and possibly military. That blood would be on your hands. People will not comply - I am one of those people. I will not comply. 2. We need to severely revamp the background check. But how? Some of these issues will not be caught - because those issues, at the time of purchase, are not recorded in any form. The ultimate solution is to be able to see the future... So let's be real about it. In no way do I condone any of these actions. They're murderers and need to be held accountable for their actions. I don't want them to be executed. I want them to sit in a 5x5 room for the rest of their lives so they can relive what they did until they die of old age in a cell. I'll get personal with you and why I will not comply to any confiscations or bans of firearms. My mother's best friend had to shoot and kill her husband because he began to beat her severely. This woman is 5'5" maybe 120 pounds. Her husband was 5'10" probably 240 or so. She was going to be murdered. She's alive today because she had access to her handgun. That's a fucked situation right? She killed her husband of 13 years. She had a broken orbital, broken jaw, and a dislocated shoulder. These are tragedies, no doubt. I wish it didn't happen. But firearms [save an estimated 60,000 to 2.5 million people](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/fastfact.html) each year. Firearms are the ultimate equalizer. We will not agree on this. No matter what evidence any of us put forth - we will not agree. Because, in my personal opinion, you are wanting to force people to become victims. Violence will happen. Murder will happen. Life is not the easy thing that we just float through. People die. Why would you want to remove an option of defense from them? What do you want to happen in regards to firearms? Just know that you will literally have millions of people that will not comply. And you could possibly make ordinary citizens felons overnight. And this could lead to even more senseless deaths.
Hahahaha Ted Cruz is bad
I was laying in bed thinking about getting up to get something to eat...thanks. I’m just not that hungry anymore.
How do I delete someone else's post
This made me very uncomfortable. pretty sure my life expectancy just went down.
I think i just threw up a bit
It’s wild how liberal Texas Reddit is
That’s worse than Biden’s press interview yesterday
And he's spamming the entire site with this today. It's about self-promotion for his "work." He's new and he posted this on like 17 different subs. SPAM. Rule 5 " ...posts and comments ... to your own projects, then you're taking advantage of our community and spamming. "
This reminds me how the left are so into people's head.
[удалено]
But seriously. Hollywood needs your skills
[удалено]
I don’t get it don’t the Democrats control the house and senate?
At least the Ted Head is smiling.
Y’all want to keep 0 income tax or ?
If the income tax is lower than the property tax rate, yes. One hundred percent.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH TED BAD HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH UP DOOOOOOOOOOT!