I'm a leftist getting suspicious of other leftists and feel like they're foreign users trying to sow discord

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not on this site. But on Twitter, Reddit, even Livejournal which I still frequent (embarrassing, I know).

Their criticisms of the U.S. frequently align with mine, but it's like in recent months I've felt a sense of cynicism of them toward America and the Democratic party that makes me feel uncomfortable. I think it's because we're seeing the Trump administration at peak power, deporting innocent immigrants and using their might to chill free speech. These criticisms toward centrist Dems, that they're no better than Republicans, feel so quaint.

That they can still treat both parties with the same type of ire at this moment in time feels delusional and offensive. One party is obviously worse than the other, and recent events should've crystallized that for them. Maybe they're just callous people, but I'm actually beginning to think many of them aren't even Americans.

Do you agree? Should this have been an obvious realization years ago?

I am MAGA, and I agree with you, as far as foreign interference and intentional efforts to divide and weaken America by supporting extremists at both ends of the political spectrum.

Let me see if I can find a worthwhile explanation to post; stand by

The irony of saying this as a MAGA — whose leader has called Dems scum and wants to jail Obama for nothing.

+1
Nobody sows more discord and vilifies "others" (democrats, immigrants, dumb teenagers now I guess, and his own loyalists) more than the orange stain. He doesn't even need foreign help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing is, these foreign propaganda attacks have been so successful that they have persuaded actual Americans to behave the same way, even when the foreign powers aren't paying Americans to make those comments (which Russia and Israel have been caught doing several times.)

Yup

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: starting your post with "I'm a ______ but..." is a clear sign that you are not actually that thing.

Right. No liberal has ever described themselves as a leftist.

[Anonymous]

I still say Osama bin Laden won because this is exactly the kind of discord he hoped to sow and instigate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: starting your post with "I'm a ______ but..." is a clear sign that you are not actually that thing.

Right. No liberal has ever described themselves as a leftist.

They don’t. Leftist is a stupid and derogatory term that’s used by MAGA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. I'm MAGA and notice the same on the right. I think our adversaries benefit from pushing people away from the center and into extremes. I'm suspicious of basically any message that attacks the middle, because the middle is normie, mainstream America that almost no actual American finds offensive.

Our adversaries aren't the only ones who benefit from furthering the political divide in American people. Extreme political division stokes hate and fear of the other side. A regular American citizen who identifies as a member of one of the two sides is much more likely to do two very important and noteworthy things when driven to the level of hate and fear and those are to remain fiercely loyal to a fault to their side and to donate money to support the fight against the evil other side.

Most Americans acknowledge the efforts of foreign adversaries to derail our path forward as a superpower and agree that these agendas are a threat that should be monitored closely and quelled when possible. Only some Americans are ready to acknowledge the possibility of efforts to divide the American people politically originating from within our political system. Two private entities are in complete control of our Federal Government. Loyalty from those who affiliate with these two entities and of course fundraising are two very obvious motivating factors for division to be stoked by players within our borders.

The regular everyday American people would benefit from a return politically to something that looks like the 1992 POTUS election when two very fit and qualified major party candidates were joined by a viable 3rd party candidate with enough support and fresh ideas to bring the very best out of the two major party candidates. There was a general sentiment among Americans that it wouldn't be the end of the world if the other side's candidate won that election. We had little reason to remain loyal to a fault or to donate feverishly to support the fight against the other side. What the American people benefit from and what two corrupt entities seeking to preserve their power benefit from are two very different things.

Great points! Americans have been so used to a political landscape dominated by two major parties. I think most don’t truly get that these parties are private special interests groups — NOT some sort of inherent feature of our government. They’re just the ones who have the policies and the cash to appeal to huge numbers of people, while dominating any competition.

[Anonymous]

If the poster(s) calling people MAGA human garbage for commenting on efficient vs "do something nice regardless" ways to help feed struggling people in Arlington and the posters saying they are Feds who won't come in to work on time because they want more notice or are traveling ARE NOT trying to sow discord, well they succeeded despite themselves.
My bleeding heart sentiments have moved toward the center.

[Anonymous]

I dunno. I'm one of those people who would very much like to see the two so-called parties go the way of the dodo and be replaced with something else. First, MAGA needs to be defeated, then the Democratic Party needs to be split, because there is a deep chasm between the progressive and moderate ends of the party. They think they are speaking the same language, but they are not. May as well split after MAGA is gone. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. I'm MAGA and notice the same on the right. I think our adversaries benefit from pushing people away from the center and into extremes. I'm suspicious of basically any message that attacks the middle, because the middle is normie, mainstream America that almost no actual American finds offensive.

Our adversaries aren't the only ones who benefit from furthering the political divide in American people. Extreme political division stokes hate and fear of the other side. A regular American citizen who identifies as a member of one of the two sides is much more likely to do two very important and noteworthy things when driven to the level of hate and fear and those are to remain fiercely loyal to a fault to their side and to donate money to support the fight against the evil other side.

Most Americans acknowledge the efforts of foreign adversaries to derail our path forward as a superpower and agree that these agendas are a threat that should be monitored closely and quelled when possible. Only some Americans are ready to acknowledge the possibility of efforts to divide the American people politically originating from within our political system. Two private entities are in complete control of our Federal Government. Loyalty from those who affiliate with these two entities and of course fundraising are two very obvious motivating factors for division to be stoked by players within our borders.

The regular everyday American people would benefit from a return politically to something that looks like the 1992 POTUS election when two very fit and qualified major party candidates were joined by a viable 3rd party candidate with enough support and fresh ideas to bring the very best out of the two major party candidates. There was a general sentiment among Americans that it wouldn't be the end of the world if the other side's candidate won that election. We had little reason to remain loyal to a fault or to donate feverishly to support the fight against the other side. What the American people benefit from and what two corrupt entities seeking to preserve their power benefit from are two very different things.

Great points! Americans have been so used to a political landscape dominated by two major parties. I think most don’t truly get that these parties are private special interests groups — NOT some sort of inherent feature of our government. They’re just the ones who have the policies and the cash to appeal to huge numbers of people, while dominating any competition.

It's possible for a two party political system to produce executives and legislators who work together in a properly functioning government that prioritizes the needs of the people. Nothing has ever been squeaky clean perfect in our political landscape but this country has had many more successes than failures and we've had many great leaders to be proud of.

Money creating undue influence in politics has always been a thing but that influence has gotten out of control to the extent that our political system and government are no longer functioning adequately. Two private entities controlling everything while being very heavily funded by a small network of ultra-wealthy entities seeking influence over our Federal Government is a recipe for disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one calls themself a leftist. That’s a right wing bot word.

It isn't. It is used ubiquitously on tiktok, bluesky, and threads to describe oneself.

What does it actually mean today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: starting your post with "I'm a ______ but..." is a clear sign that you are not actually that thing.

Right. No liberal has ever described themselves as a leftist.

It does have a quaint old-world sound to it, you like the old world, don't you? With those monarchies you have to tear down, like oligarchs. And those guillotines.

There are more relevant terms in American politics. Jacksonians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I dunno. I'm one of those people who would very much like to see the two so-called parties go the way of the dodo and be replaced with something else. First, MAGA needs to be defeated, then the Democratic Party needs to be split, because there is a deep chasm between the progressive and moderate ends of the party. They think they are speaking the same language, but they are not. May as well split after MAGA is gone. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

You are right that there is a gulf, but this is always the case with a big tent party. I don''t think we need to split. Voters have shown that if you put the right deocrat in for the specific district, Democrats win even though the party has lost its shine. So someone like Mamdani wins NYC, but a former CIA officer wins Virginia. Even though Dem approval ratings are at a an all time low...

The right Democrat for the right place, offer more, not less, bring more people in, not fewer. That is the strategy, IMO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one calls themself a leftist. That’s a right wing bot word.

yeah seems like a troll post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one calls themself a leftist. That’s a right wing bot word.

I don’t even understand how to identify a so called leftist or what a leftist means. MAGAs are garishly dressed with silly hats. Is their an opposite group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one calls themself a leftist. That’s a right wing bot word.

+1 Yup. Try harder troll.