The murder of Charlie Kirk

The similarity is that both Islam and far leftism replace rationality (which they view as Western propaganda) with a struggle against the oppressor

nazis were fairly pro capitalism, fascists far far far far far less, that divide is not well known by basically anyone except perhaps some italians and germans, as for external people, nazi-fascism was the same thing even if it was wildly different in reality.

To be clear fascism was indeed a variant of socialism , which isn't strange given mussolini was himself a fully fledged socialist. Not a normal random one: he was the main manager of the most important socialist newspaper for years (the Avanti!) in Italy.

mussolini broke up with socialists *uniquely* because ww1 intervention (he was very pro, socialists weren't). He never quarreled with them on the economics.

there are other topics as well. but for radical muslims it's capitalism. Keep in mind radical muslims to this day are fully against ANY LOAN WITH INTEREST, that's a capital crime for them, you can't ask interests with a loan (like for the church centuries ago)

Ok let me try a different approach. If your nonstandard definition can be used for left/right, why can’t I make my own liberalism maximizing left/right spectrum where only people that uphold liberal views, including free expression, rational discourse, respect for democratic processes, pluralism, and racial equality (including no racism against whites) are left wing. Then by definition all political violence is now right-wing violence.

If your move to make all people who support anti-capitalism by definition left-wing is valid, why can’t my move to say everyone that hates liberalism is right-wing valid? Then I can just say “oh no, the communists aren’t the left, they actually radically agree with the right because they hate liberalism”. Which we know for a historical fact that they do align with the far right at times.

You can do that actually. It would be more intelligent to call non-liberalism extremism, but in that case, you woul dbe right that all political violence is non-liberal extremism. Centrist liberals like yourself are the best allies against political violence, tell me where to sign.

Now you could deny the monstrous differences between someone killing members of a race because they hate that, and killing CEOs because they hate capitalism. But would it be smart to do so? they are not the same enemy.

Keep in mind i am NOT calling you leftist basically ever when i discuss these topics. You are a centrist where i live. You are like my dad. You are thoughtful centrist with nuanced opinions who in this very moment in the USA can identify with centrist democrats and THERE IS NOTHING BAD ABOUT THAT (from where i sit).

In the USA from 1 to 100 you are probably 35-45 depending on the topic, in europe depending on the country you are 40-60 (0 ultra leftist 100 ultra right), but you have nothing to do with extremism or leftism as defined by me when i talk badly about it and so on.

So back in the real world, someone killing people because they are homosexuals having fun in a gay club is a clear rightwing political violence episode ok? they hate culture allows that and so on.

And someone killing a ton of people because american capitalism is "satan" is a clear leftist political violence episode.

But if you want you can simplify and call them all extremism

The fundamental flaw in your argument is that Islamist terrorists don't hate America because of capitalism, they hate it because of social liberalism. Their anti-capitalist stance is a result of the liberalism inherent in free-market capitalism, not a direct motivator in itself.

That's a debatable point but there are plenty of videos and writings of islamists adjacent to al qaeda criticising capitalism ferociously.

They do hate the "profit motivation" for actions at scale as much as any run of the mill western leftist does.

That's particularly true of palestine btw (9/11 can be slightly different). Arafat was an abject socialist for example. The leaders of european communist parties all rushed to have photos with him (like Lula today). He was a ****ing marxist.

What Islamist terrorists are you even talking about? The head of Al Qaeda in Syria just met with the gov in the USA. Al Qaeda and ISIS are allies of the USA (and Israel).

I found the memorial to be tacky and theatrical (I've only seen clips) and of course Goebbels-at-home plagiarized a Goebbels speech

“AM I ANTISEMITIC?! — 25 Gen Z Students + Charlie Kirk Discuss Israel, Netanyahu, Gaza, AIPAC“

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=88Gx_Nyyv1...

Of course Charlie Kirk was a supporter of Israel. Had nothing against the country. That’s even what Tucker Carlson says about his own views on Israel. Tucker visited Israel has nothing against the people of Israel.

What Kirk was recently doing was questioning the people who support Netanyahu no matter what. And he was also calling out people who lie about others being anti-Semitic , for example people who criticize AIPAC being smeared as Jew haters. Obviously that is ridiculous.

Generally, far left-wing and far right wing politics are both similar in that they are extreme and replace rational behavior. Now there is no doubt whatsoever though that if you talk about Al-Qaeda or for that matter the KKK ….these are far right wing very conservative ideological groups.

Far lefties have generally included radical atheists. People who hate religion. So to toss in something like Al-Qaeda into that makes no logical sense.

I don’t know that I’d go so far as comparing charlie kirk to martin luther king. Charlie Kirk fought for change WITHOUT resorting to crime.

Kind of makes you wonder why social liberal Western nations continue to think it is a good idea to import millions of extremely conservative Muslims and allow them to organize politically to the point they self radicalize further within Western nations.

The ones in the US seem to be fine for the most part, it’s the ones that immigrated to Europe that don’t seem to want to integrate.

Overthrowing Qaddafi and Saddam was a mistake many people say. Leading to a growth of radicalism and a refugee crisis.

Things have cooled down a bit since then. And in the past few years, there’s been a very noticeable growth and interest among young conservative, masculine leaning western men into Islamic culture. Specifically the GCC countries. Not the rural super conservative parts of Afghanistan or Pakistan. But that’s the people like Andrew Tate, or fresh and fit…. Say whatever you want about them, but they clearly have millions of followers and part of their thing is noticing the safety and security of a place like Dubai… their traditional values compared to the sort of radical left we have in America…. The unsafe cities people being afraid to wear a Rolex walking down the street in Chicago or Baltimore. Yeah that doesn’t exist in Saudi Arabia or Dubai.

Charlie Kirk noticed that too … and he understood a lot of western Christian masculine men being upset with Christian majority governments. For the whole men going into women’s bathroom, men playing on women’s sports type of things. He was a big-time critic of Islam but he understood the issues.

So if Mohammed banned usury he would be a leftist? I think the anti-capitalism might also be based in antisemitism and less on an actual principled stance. Islamic terrorism just doesn’t stand out as being particularly leftist, since they should intrinsically hate marxism/socialism and often do have brutal fights with them in their own countries.

I tend to see the left-right spectrum as being more relevant within a country rather than when we try to group all the ideologies in the world into one or the other category.

lmao I suppose you prefer forced gender conversions for homosexuals (like in Iran) or forced pederasty with a side of crossdressing like in Afghanistan

Freedom usually always win in the end .
Saddam and Qaddafi was just a plaster that would fade eventually over radical Islam .

Ending dictatorship is rarely a mistake .

Masculinity is under attack in the west! Also I am very afraid to walk down the street if there are black people around. I have no idea why women don't want to procreate with me.

Yes fundamentalist Islam is completely incompatible with Marxism or communism. Just look at the example of Afghanistan… you had the Soviets and their Afghan communist allies deeply despised by the Muhajedeen and later Taliban.

Huh lols

Qaddafi was a bit more pro western. Qaddafis son was married to an Israeli Jewish supermodel. He also believed in a one state solution and said Palestine and Israel should come together to form “Isratin”

Although obviously Iraq under Saddam was allied to the United States during their war against Iran. Interestingly enough, Israel supported Iran in the 1980s. They helped them blow up an Iraqi nuclear reactor. Israel also targeted Canadian and French personnel they felt were assisting Iraq.

Most Iraqis I have spoken with said the country was way better off under Hussein. Iraq has made some improvements today obviously it went through a hell on earth period Under the Islamic state.

Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian territories were all home to Arab nationalism and huge populations of Christians that supported the cause of Arab nationalism. In some cases that still exists. It has historically competed with or sometimes teamed up with conservative Islam.

And for many years prior to the creation of Israel Arab Jews were very much a part of that Arab nationalist culture.

Of course to your point on paper absolutely democracy is preferable. But you have to take into account many different things. Like countries in the Middle East have challenges that other ones simply do not have. And so someone like Saddam Hussein was a bulwork against super conservative Islam.

Nice responding to an argument that doesn’t exist.

Yes dictator always find some part of the population loving them .
Those that profit being on the same side of the tide will always appreciate a dictator or say he did a good job .
Why wouldn’t they shrug