Submitted by Missing_Trillions t3_11cflhy in Documentaries
Reply to comment by rayrayww3 in Shadows of Liberty (2012) - How media manipulation and censorship work. 90% plus of the media in the USA are controlled by five big for-profit-conglomerats, creating a media monopoly that manipulates our political, economical, and social world. [01:28:52] by Missing_Trillions
Well none, if you get to define what left is.
I think you’re confusing agenda items of the American left with left-wing politics. Abortion, for example, is not a left-right issue. Or more accurately, the parties in the United States are misaligned on the abortion issue. Conservatives should be opposed to government interference in medical decisions.
So really the issue is one of perspective. What you really mean is that you perceive the US to be left-leaning based on the policies you prioritize. That’s simply not the same thing as statistics. If you have any data you’d like to present, I’m glad to read it, but these are just feelings you have.
It's ridiculous to think that politics can be defined by statistics or data. What the fuck are you even talking about? What stats are you looking at? What "data" have you presented? Just emotional opinions like "that is an absurd and completely made up statement."
And yes, many within the U.S. political split takes on stances that don't align with their claimed ideology. The left should be pro-freedom and anti-influence of pharmaceutical companies. Yet what side did they take on "vaccination" mandates? The left should be anti-war, yet they are cheering on sending billions of dollars to weapons manufactures under cover of the Ukraine proxy-war.
I was responding to your made-up statistic. 90%? There are 195 countries in the world, what even is 10% of that? There are 19.5 countries more lefty than the US?
My point was that you are biased. You are drawing conclusions based on your opinion and then presenting it in numerical form. That's the data I'm talking about.
The Left should be anti-war? Why? Why should the right be pro-war? Who told you that these political opinions are aligned this way? There's no historical basis for that. The left and right were both mixed in favor of WW1 and 2, Korea, Vietnam, and MiddleEastHappyFunTime 1 and 2. The notion that Left means anti-war is your own color because of the eventual political alignment at the end of the Vietnam conflict. That's exactly one instance where being left meant anti-war and being right meant pro-whateverthefuckvietnamwas.
Realistically, the Right should be anti-war. It's a wasteful expenditure and an overreach of government. You seem to have conflated the individual politics of the GOP with "Right" and politics of some of the Donkeys with "Left". That's unmoored in global politics, historical politics, or really anything else. It is literally the narrative you have been programmed from the corporate media you consume.
The GOP are a center-right party with nationalist tendencies, globally speaking. The Dems are also a center-right party, this time with some historical flag-burning tendencies. But those times are decades ago, you don't see Nancy Pelosi out there without a bra on. There is no left-wing party in the US, just as there is no left-wing media. Maybe Democracy Now! or other crap like that, but neither you nor I consider that to be mainstream, and with up to 200k viewers an ep, it really isn't.
And Ukraine is not a proxy war. Principals aren't participants in a proxy war. I suppose you could claim that it is half-proxy, but that's a pretty novel formulation and inaccurate. The US is doing literally the barest minimum to aid that country. I am not pro-war myself, but I am confident that the US military could completely flatten the Russian army in a heads-up conflict. If the US were directly involved in Ukraine, it would already be over.
So, name 19 countries further left than the U.S.
>the US military could completely flatten the Russian army
Huh? The U.S. couldn't even defeat primativists fighting with Mosin-Nagants in Afghanistan after two decades.
You're confusing ability with intent. The US didn't intend to flatten Afghanistan. Let's be honest, no one really knows what they intended, but leveling the country was not in the remit. The US military was not built to fight insurgents in their own mountains.
What the US military is good for is fighting another large military in open warfare. And in that capacity, The only force on the planet that could contend with any one branch of the US military is another branch of the US military. The Navy has 11 aircraft carriers with 60 planes each. China has one. Russia had one.
The Russians are struggling to defeat Ukraine. A country with a third the population and a hundredth the landmass. If the US decided to act militarily in Russia (and nukes didn't exist), the war would be over in a month. We have a standing peacetime military that is larger than their wartime active military.
Also the US lost about 2,400 people in Afghanistan. The Afghanis lost at least 240,000. That may not be winning, but it doesn't look like losing.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments