There’s far-left, left, centre-left, centre, centre-right, right, and far-right.
Far- is that which employs violence and suppresses all other opinions given the chance.
Centre is that which is always open for compromise.
The others are not always open for compromise, but discuss with each other in polite atmosphere.
By definition, the far-right necessitates excluding anything less insane than itself.
That said though, in my view the real spectrum is whether someone supports the workers. Be they American, Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Senegalese, Swiss, or whatever else.
Far- is that which employs violence and suppresses all other opinions given the chance.
the “supresses all other opinions given the chance” carries a lot of the weight here, considering that like every statist and really almost everyone agrees with or accepts the employment of violence. really only the minority which is pacifists opposes it, and even pacifists often only oppose violence against humans.
the suppression of all other opinions is then mostly just the destinction between soft and hard power, because ultimately, all who are in power either fight to remain there, or at the very least prevent those who dont share their interests from getting there. the question merely is whether they do this through violence or manipulation, and whether they do it to defend their own freedom or to maintain their domination over others.
i’m sorry if my comment appears antagonistic. my antagonism is (most likely) not directed at you.
i see the distinction between far-x and center as one which is mostly employed to moralize the degree to which people support the status quo, making it in many cases another weapon against dissent, in the arsenal of manipulation tactics. stuff makes me go on frantic rants :3
“Right wing” isn’t true, he’s far-right. And not a political activist, but a terrorist.
Isn’t “far-right” part of the right wing?
There’s far-left, left, centre-left, centre, centre-right, right, and far-right.
Far- is that which employs violence and suppresses all other opinions given the chance.
Centre is that which is always open for compromise.
The others are not always open for compromise, but discuss with each other in polite atmosphere.
By definition, the far-right necessitates excluding anything less insane than itself.
That said though, in my view the real spectrum is whether someone supports the workers. Be they American, Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Senegalese, Swiss, or whatever else.
the “supresses all other opinions given the chance” carries a lot of the weight here, considering that like every statist and really almost everyone agrees with or accepts the employment of violence. really only the minority which is pacifists opposes it, and even pacifists often only oppose violence against humans.
the suppression of all other opinions is then mostly just the destinction between soft and hard power, because ultimately, all who are in power either fight to remain there, or at the very least prevent those who dont share their interests from getting there. the question merely is whether they do this through violence or manipulation, and whether they do it to defend their own freedom or to maintain their domination over others.
i’m sorry if my comment appears antagonistic. my antagonism is (most likely) not directed at you.
i see the distinction between far-x and center as one which is mostly employed to moralize the degree to which people support the status quo, making it in many cases another weapon against dissent, in the arsenal of manipulation tactics. stuff makes me go on frantic rants :3
Understood.
Eh, terrorist is a bit of a stretch, that word has a certain definition, definitely a fucking fascist though.
Stochastic terrorist, then
stochastic terrorism is still terrorism
He was a terrorist by definition.