Question about the Right Wing

[ZiprHead]

It is very predictable on this board. Something like "anarchist fascists who want to be hermits and rob everyone".

I think Libertarians are more like idealistic 16 year olds who haven't really thought things through.

 

[Toni]

Do they even exist?

No. Happy to help. Whether or not you have a red baseball cap is what educated people call superfluous.

So according to you all right is far right. There is no center right or moderate right.

Yep. That's called the left nowadays.

Also, who the fuck do you think you are kidding? It's pretty obvious you think centre is "everyone who agrees with Jason". At least I have a pair of balls and am willing to say I lean left. Grow a pair son.

I don't consider myself center though.

I'm in one of the corners of that chart, just not a right corner or left corner.

Having a spectrum implies points along the spectrum exist. Your position is that the area between center and far right is empty. So tell me, what would make someone center-right or moderate-right.

To me, you seem to be or to believe yourself to be a fiscal libertarian. But on social issues you seem to be definitely right of center. I tend to see you fairly far right of center but maybe others do not.

Fascinating. So when I want to legalize drugs and prostitution, that makes me right of center? When I want to shut down the DEA and try all its employees under Nuremberg-style trials, that make me right of center? When I congratulated the military on switching from don't-ask-don't-tell to allowing gays to serve, that makes me right of center?

I know, I know. It is when I saw Antifa burning down buildings and said "that is bad" because only far right wingers think building down buildings is bad.

You would not like my opinion of ‘libertarians,’ from a political POV.

It is very predictable on this board. Something like "anarchist fascists who want to be hermits and rob everyone".

Really? You think every employee of the DEA deserves to be tried a la Nuremberg trials? That makes you…not rational.

Many years ago I was at dinner with my husband and one of his new colleagues and his wife and when they asked me what I thought of the local schools, I said I thought they were poorly funded. This was followed by icy silence and stilted perfunctorily polite conversation. On the way home my husband ( mildly) lambasted me, saying Didn’t I know they were libertarians??? I asked What’s a libertarian?? He briefly explained libertarianism to me in very neutral terms. I replied something on the lines of: “ So, emotionally stunted selfish self centered crybabies?” I don’t remember what he replied although I believe he thought I was a bit harsh and certainly not academically rigorous with my words.

I pretty much feel the same way—nothing personal.

I believe in public safety and consumer protection laws. I’d rather that we not need to subsidize so many basic human needs/services but as it was written long long ago: ‘The poor we have with us always.’ And corporations act only for the purposes of increasing profits for a handful of people ( btw, most of my retirement savings is in stocks and bonds) and not for the good of their customers, corporate partners or society in general. I’d rather that people decide all by their lonesome that they do not need to accumulate massive wealth or to control other people or to hold power over other people, but they don’t and we need laws to keep a handful of people from accumulating all of the marbles.. I really dislike guns but am willing to tolerate them for the purposes of hunting game for the table and protecting livestock from predators who are not otherwise dissuaded. I think the marketplace is a poor place to address product safety. In principle, I am a pacifist but I recognize that bullies must be stopped and placating them is not effective for long. I believe that government is the best way of providing many essential services but then, I believe in democracy for the people and by the people. I believe we all ( every race, gender, religious or cultural affiliation, sexuality, country of origin) must stand equal before the law and that justice is not always easy to see or to achieve but always must be accompanied by mercy.

 

[Toni]

It is very predictable on this board. Something like "anarchist fascists who want to be hermits and rob everyone".

I think Libertarians are more like idealistic 16 year olds who haven't really thought things through.

I think you’re optimistic. I think they are more like 14 year old boys who just discovered the internet and haven’t yet figured out how to get around parental controls.

 

[TSwizzle]

On this board I see the phrases "far right" and "extreme right" used an awful lot to describe political opponents. It made me wonder.
What does it mean to be just plain right, neither extreme nor moderate?
What does it mean to be moderate right or center right?

Do they even exist? Or is all of the right either far or extreme?

On this board, extreme right, Qanon nazi etc is applicable to anyone who has the slightest disagreement with the prevailing views. I’m sure you know this.

This caricatured view of rational centrist and leftist thought is a good example of why right-wingers seem increasingly extreme.

lol, you are the worst offender in this regard.

Oh, I admit it: {snip}

It’s not as if you could deny it.

 

[laughing dog]

As in any ideology, there is a spectrum within its confines because relatively few humans completely agree on everything. That means there is an extreme right, a moderate right snd a center right. IMO, Christian Nazis/white nationalists are extreme right in the US, the Cheneys of the world are hard right, Dubya Bush is moderate right and the Joe Manchin is centet right. But that is just my view.

 

[Toni]

As in any ideology, there is a spectrum within its confines because relatively few humans completely agree on everything. That means there is an extreme right, a moderate right snd a center right. IMO, Christian Nazis/white nationalists are extreme right in the US, the Cheneys of the world are hard right, Dubya Bush is moderate right and the Joe Manchin is centet right. But that is just my view.

I think that’s true if Dick Cheney but I think Liz is less far right than her dad. Certainly more principled.

 

[Swammerdami]

Do they even exist?

No. Happy to help. Whether or not you have a red baseball cap is what educated people call superfluous.

So according to you all right is far right. There is no center right or moderate right.

Yep. That's called the left nowadays.

Also, who the fuck do you think you are kidding? It's pretty obvious you think centre is "everyone who agrees with Jason". At least I have a pair of balls and am willing to say I lean left. Grow a pair son.

I don't consider myself center though.

I'm in one of the corners of that chart, just not a right corner or left corner.

Having a spectrum implies points along the spectrum exist. Your position is that the area between center and far right is empty. So tell me, what would make someone center-right or moderate-right.

Let me help. To a very crude approximation there are four classes of political issue:
1. Taxes. Liberals and "statists" recognize that taxes are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians oppose taxes.
2. Regulations. E.g. Should drug companies be permitted to sell defective drugs? Should government mandate number of toilet stalls for employees? All viewpoints along the spectrum favor good regulations and oppose bad regulations. Fiscal conservatives and libertarians think regulators, even when enforcing good rules, must make do with a cheap skeleton staff since reducing taxes is of highest priority.
3. Bigotry. Almost everyone agrees, or pretends to agree, that blacks, gays, women, etc. should enjoy equal rights.
4. Liberty, the very eponym of "Libertarian." This is where controversy enters and needs its own paragraph.

Liberty and Rights. Gays have the liberty to buy a gay wedding cake; but do bakers have the liberty not to sell them a cake? Jason?
People have the liberty to visit a beach in California; but does a landowner have the liberty to post a No Trespassing sign on the privately-owned access to the beach? Jason?
The people of Ukraine should have the liberty to stay alive and enjoy their country. But that liberty will fail without outside help.
Employers have the liberty to reduce raises and worker safety. Should workers have the liberty to unionize and picket, or to expect a government mandated minimum wage? Jason?

Although they like to focus attention on ideas like "people have the right to do as they wish in their bedroom, and the right to smoke marijuana" in fact the major issue that sets 21st-century Libertarians apart from other thinkers is the emphasis on Property Rights. That's why I've directed questions at Jason. We should be sincerely grateful to have him here, a refreshing change from the chorus of liberals or chorus of fascism enablers.

- - - - - - - - - - -

A majority of Americans are still centrists I think, though you wouldn't know it from political discussions on message boards!
Some people here come under attack for being too leftist; some come under attack for being too rightist; Jason for being too libertarianist. But I think of myself as a centrist with "Goldilocks" views! Not too left, and not too right.

Proof that I AM a centrist showed up yesterday, when I came under attack simultaneously, BOTH for being too progressive AND for being a FauxNews-watching right-winger !!!

On this board, extreme right, Qanon nazi etc is applicable to anyone who has the slightest disagreement with the prevailing views. I’m sure you know this.

This caricatured view of rational centrist and leftist thought is a good example of why right-wingers seem increasingly extreme.

lol, you are the worst offender in this regard.

Oh, I admit it [sarcasm]: {snip}

It’s not as if you could deny it.

The thread title was about Progressives (i.e. Democrats) going wild.

No it wasn't.
If you think "progressives" is a codeword for Democrats, that proves my point that you watch too much FauxNews/Republican propaganda.
That would make republicans 'regressives'.

 

[unapologetic]

I'm an old fart.
This chart didn't make sense to me.
The order was off:

Left, middle, and right explained.

reading down,
1920s
1990s
1970s

 

[ZiprHead]

reading down,
1920s
1990s
1970s

2020s
1990s
1970s.

Pesky centuries.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It is very predictable on this board. Something like "anarchist fascists who want to be hermits and rob everyone".

I think Libertarians are more like idealistic 16 year olds who haven't really thought things through.

Individual liberty is such an immature belief. Once people mature they realize that all people belong to the collective, be it the proletariat, the state, the nation, the race, or in some older traditions, the crown or the church.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Let me help. To a very crude approximation there are four classes of political issue:
1. Taxes. Liberals and "statists" recognize that taxes are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians oppose taxes.

Government assistance to businesses. Conservatives and Progressives support it.

2. Regulations. E.g. Should drug companies be permitted to sell defective drugs? Should government mandate number of toilet stalls for employees? All viewpoints along the spectrum favor good regulations and oppose bad regulations. Fiscal conservatives and libertarians think regulators, even when enforcing good rules, must make do with a cheap skeleton staff since reducing taxes is of highest priority.

You've bought the hype and not the reality. It is said that conservatives campaign like libertarians and govern like progressives. Conservatives, like progressives, support regulations that help their side.

3. Bigotry. Almost everyone agrees, or pretends to agree, that blacks, gays, women, etc. should enjoy equal rights.
4. Liberty, the very eponym of "Libertarian." This is where controversy enters and needs its own paragraph.

Liberty and Rights. Gays have the liberty to buy a gay wedding cake; but do bakers have the liberty not to sell them a cake? Jason?

Two things can be true at once, and in this case two things are true at once.
Conservatives - anti-gay-marriage, anti-forced-baking
Progressives - pro-gay-marriage, pro-forced-baking
Libertarians - pro-gay-marriage, anti-forced-baking

Is there really only one bakery in the country? Wouldn't you rather know who the bigots are instead of accidentally funding them?

People have the liberty to visit a beach in California; but does a landowner have the liberty to post a No Trespassing sign on the privately-owned access to the beach? Jason?

Again, two things can be true at once. Is the only way to access the beach to trample on private property?

The people of Ukraine should have the liberty to stay alive and enjoy their country. But that liberty will fail without outside help.

The people of Ukraine should have a government that attempts to protect said liberties as well. Their current kleptocracy is far from that. Instead we have a situation where the fight is over whether Ukraine is to be a US Satrap or a Russian Satrap. That you paint the former as liberty is confusing.

Employers have the liberty to reduce raises and worker safety. Should workers have the liberty to unionize and picket, or to expect a government mandated minimum wage? Jason?

Of course workers have the right to unionize and picket. Unionization is nothing more than free association, a fundamental right. Going on strike is nothing more than denying the sale of labor, and refusing to do business is another fundamental right. What kind of screwed up perception of libertarianism do you have where you think we are against freedom of association and freedom to refuse to conduct business?

Although they like to focus attention on ideas like "people have the right to do as they wish in their bedroom, and the right to smoke marijuana" in fact the major issue that sets 21st-century Libertarians apart from other thinkers is the emphasis on Property Rights. That's why I've directed questions at Jason. We should be sincerely grateful to have him here, a refreshing change from the chorus of liberals or chorus of fascism enablers.

Educating you on the collective bargaining issue alone is what makes my presence here a refreshing change.

I've answered your questions, so maybe now you answer mine.

Tell me about center-right. Tell me about moderate right. Preferably with examples even.

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

With regard to this:
Two things can be true at once, and in this case two things are true at once.
Conservatives - anti-gay-marriage, anti-forced-baking
Progressives - pro-gay-marriage, pro-forced-baking
Libertarians - pro-gay-marriage, anti-forced-baking

You are assuming that all Libertarians have the same beliefs that you do, but actually Libertarianism is notorious for its main branch being very right-wing conservatives.

 

[Swammerdami]

1. Taxes. Liberals and "statists" recognize that taxes are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians oppose taxes.

Government assistance to businesses. Conservatives and Progressives support it.

Hmmm. Where does government get the money to assist businesses? I thought libertatians don't think government should pick winners and losers. And a blanket "Government assistance to businesses" leads to cronyism, no? I think Trump's government is likely to assist Musk's businesses and other favorites.

2. Regulations. E.g. Should drug companies be permitted to sell defective drugs? Should government mandate number of toilet stalls for employees? All viewpoints along the spectrum favor good regulations and oppose bad regulations. Fiscal conservatives and libertarians think regulators, even when enforcing good rules, must make do with a cheap skeleton staff since reducing taxes is of highest priority.

You've bought the hype and not the reality. It is said that conservatives campaign like libertarians and govern like progressives. Conservatives, like progressives, support regulations that help their side.

Everyone supports regulations they think are good. Will you pay for it? FDA budget is $7 billion. Too little?
FDIC had $128 billion in its insurance fund, and raised the mandatory premiums paid by private banks to increase the fund further. It spends about $3 billion annually even when there are zero bank failures. Regulations cost money.

4. Liberty, the very eponym of "Libertarian." This is where controversy enters and needs its own paragraph.

Liberty and Rights. Gays have the liberty to buy a gay wedding cake; but do bakers have the liberty not to sell them a cake? Jason?

Is there really only one bakery in the country? Wouldn't you rather know who the bigots are instead of accidentally funding them?

"In the country"? People busy planning a wedding should drive for half an hour hoping a baker a friend of a friend told them of will help?

People have the liberty to visit a beach in California; but does a landowner have the liberty to post a No Trespassing sign on the privately-owned access to the beach? Jason?

Again, two things can be true at once. Is the only way to access the beach to trample on private property?

This was not a hypothetical.

Get off my beach! How the wealthy are laying claim to California's coast

Complaints have been streaming in about security guards, hired by wealthy homeowners, removing people from public beaches

www.theguardian.com

Employers have the liberty to reduce raises and worker safety. Should workers have the liberty to unionize and picket, or to expect a government mandated minimum wage? Jason?

Of course workers have the right to unionize and picket. Unionization is nothing more than free association, a fundamental right. Going on strike is nothing more than denying the sale of labor, and refusing to do business is another fundamental right. What kind of screwed up perception of libertarianism do you have where you think we are against freedom of association and freedom to refuse to conduct business?

Are you really a libertarian? Most Ls are fans of "right to work" laws.

There Is No Moral Right to Strike | Mises Institute

American law protects what is called the "right to strike." However, Leonard Read found no moral code that permits such action.

mises.org

I've answered your questions, so maybe now you answer mine.

Tell me about center-right. Tell me about moderate right. Preferably with examples even.

I call myself a centrist because I do NOT have clear answers. Often I appreciate both sides of an issue and am grateful I am NOT a legislator with the need to take a stand. For example -- and now the progressives here may call ME a right-winger and/or homophobe -- I am NOT happy about coercing bakers. Many experts think teacher's unions are an obstacle to improving public schools. I do not know if they are right.

Ask me specific questions if you wish, but I'm likely to say "I don't know." Even if I have a strong position on an issue, I do not speak for all "centrists."

Just as you do not speak for all libertarians. Most SUPPORT right-to-work laws. I didn't want to waste more than one click on Gary Johnson but Google came up with "He's no friend of organized labor (he supports so-called “right to work” laws) and favors relaxing child labor laws. He calls for abolishing the IRS ..."

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

With regard to this:
Two things can be true at once, and in this case two things are true at once.
Conservatives - anti-gay-marriage, anti-forced-baking
Progressives - pro-gay-marriage, pro-forced-baking
Libertarians - pro-gay-marriage, anti-forced-baking

You are assuming that all Libertarians have the same beliefs that you do, but actually Libertarianism is notorious for its main branch being very right-wing conservatives.

I'm glad that your conversing with me brings the total number of libertarians you are acquainted with to one.

 

[Swammerdami]

Are you really a libertarian? Most Ls are fans of "right to work" laws.

There Is No Moral Right to Strike | Mises Institute

American law protects what is called the "right to strike." However, Leonard Read found no moral code that permits such action.

mises.org

I've answered your questions, so maybe now you answer mine.

Tell me about center-right. Tell me about moderate right. Preferably with examples even.

I call myself a centrist because I do NOT have clear answers. Often I appreciate both sides of an issue and am grateful I am NOT a legislator with the need to take a stand.
... Even if I have a strong position on an issue, I do not speak for all "centrists."

Just as you do not speak for all libertarians. Most SUPPORT right-to-work laws. I didn't want to waste more than one click on Gary Johnson but Google came up with "He's no friend of organized labor (he supports so-called “right to work” laws) and favors relaxing child labor laws. He calls for abolishing the IRS ..."

The big difference between centrists on the one hand, and libertarians and other extremists on the other hand, is that centrists look for practical real-world solutions, while extremists adhere to an ideology whether applicable to a country's real-world circumstances or not.

For example, I expect our Libertarians to reply that they support the LIBERTY of a worker to pay voluntary dues to a union but also support the LIBERTY of an employer to hire non-union "scab" workers.

But in practice unions do not thrive in the presence of "right-to-work" laws.

Are such laws "good" or "bad"? I see BOTH sides of this issue; but low-wage workers in today's America get an inadequate share of "the pie." Some work two jobs and are still homeless. I would advocate some sort of Universal Basic Income to alleviate America's growing income inequality, but UBI isn't coming to America any time soon. So meanwhile, allowing Walmart workers and Amazon workers to form successful unions is the best way to work within the system to address the problem.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

1. Taxes. Liberals and "statists" recognize that taxes are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians oppose taxes.

Government assistance to businesses. Conservatives and Progressives support it.

Hmmm. Where does government get the money to assist businesses? I thought libertatians don't think government should pick winners and losers. And a blanket "Government assistance to businesses" leads to cronyism, no? I think Trump's government is likely to assist Musk's businesses and other favorites.

Deliberately misunderstanding me? Libertarians oppose government assisting businesses. I was comparing your comparison of tax policy to the policy of government picking winners and losers.

2. Regulations. E.g. Should drug companies be permitted to sell defective drugs? Should government mandate number of toilet stalls for employees? All viewpoints along the spectrum favor good regulations and oppose bad regulations. Fiscal conservatives and libertarians think regulators, even when enforcing good rules, must make do with a cheap skeleton staff since reducing taxes is of highest priority.

You've bought the hype and not the reality. It is said that conservatives campaign like libertarians and govern like progressives. Conservatives, like progressives, support regulations that help their side.

Everyone supports regulations they think are good. Will you pay for it? FDA budget is $7 billion. Too little?
FDIC had $128 billion in its insurance fund, and raised the mandatory premiums paid by private banks to increase the fund further. It spends about $3 billion annually even when there are zero bank failures. Regulations cost money.

The point, which you missed, is that conservatives don't oppose regulations. They like them just as much as progressives do, they just support different regulations. Your position on this one reminds me of a Christian I once met who insisted that Muslims were Atheists because Muslims denied the divinity of Jesus.

4. Liberty, the very eponym of "Libertarian." This is where controversy enters and needs its own paragraph.

Liberty and Rights. Gays have the liberty to buy a gay wedding cake; but do bakers have the liberty not to sell them a cake? Jason?

Is there really only one bakery in the country? Wouldn't you rather know who the bigots are instead of accidentally funding them?

"In the country"? People busy planning a wedding should drive for half an hour hoping a baker a friend of a friend told them of will help?

You still make it sound like there is a severe dearth of bakeries in the US. One per town at most? Try searching for bakeries on Google Maps.

Then go to one owned by Muslims and ask for a "gay wedding cake" as it is called.

People have the liberty to visit a beach in California; but does a landowner have the liberty to post a No Trespassing sign on the privately-owned access to the beach? Jason?

Again, two things can be true at once. Is the only way to access the beach to trample on private property?

This was not a hypothetical.

Get off my beach! How the wealthy are laying claim to California's coast

Complaints have been streaming in about security guards, hired by wealthy homeowners, removing people from public beaches

www.theguardian.com

Okay, you found one example. Good for you I guess. There are still plenty of beaches open to the public. I guess you're not free until you can access every beach, even the ones that other people own.

Employers have the liberty to reduce raises and worker safety. Should workers have the liberty to unionize and picket, or to expect a government mandated minimum wage? Jason?

Of course workers have the right to unionize and picket. Unionization is nothing more than free association, a fundamental right. Going on strike is nothing more than denying the sale of labor, and refusing to do business is another fundamental right. What kind of screwed up perception of libertarianism do you have where you think we are against freedom of association and freedom to refuse to conduct business?

Are you really a libertarian? Most Ls are fans of "right to work" laws.

There Is No Moral Right to Strike | Mises Institute

American law protects what is called the "right to strike." However, Leonard Read found no moral code that permits such action.

mises.org

You are conflating issues. You have to understand, the state of labor relations in this country is a mess.

When one faction is in power many laws are passed to favor labor. Then when another faction is in power many laws are passed to favor employers. The end result is a dense thicket of laws and regulations that neither side can easily navigate.

Employees have a right, under free association, to form a union. Employees have a right, under refusal to do business, to refuse to sell their labor to the company. Now, having read that article, I see a few things in particular the author is criticizing.

The thing criticized is "when one faction is in power many laws are passed to favor labor". He points out that striking employees cannot be fired, making a strike a coercion. A strike should be as risky as any other business activity. Asking for special protections is exactly the same form of "each side wants regulations that favor them" that I wrote about above.

I know you think that labor hasn't a chance without government backing, and I disagree with that. I think that labor would definitely have a strong case, if businesses didn't also have government backing. If you get rid of the pro-union AND the anti-union laws and regulations, it would be a level playing field. You see libertarians as only wanting to get rid of the pro-union side because that is the side you care about.

There is a reason some people like right-to-work laws. It is because they are a counter-narrative to closed-shop laws. Both are government activities.

I've answered your questions, so maybe now you answer mine.

Tell me about center-right. Tell me about moderate right. Preferably with examples even.

I call myself a centrist because I do NOT have clear answers. Often I appreciate both sides of an issue and am grateful I am NOT a legislator with the need to take a stand. For example -- and now the progressives here may call ME a right-winger and/or homophobe -- I am NOT happy about coercing bakers. Many experts think teacher's unions are an obstacle to improving public schools. I do not know if they are right.

Ask me specific questions if you wish, but I'm likely to say "I don't know." Even if I have a strong position on an issue, I do not speak for all "centrists."

Just as you do not speak for all libertarians. Most SUPPORT right-to-work laws. I didn't want to waste more than one click on Gary Johnson but Google came up with "He's no friend of organized labor (he supports so-called “right to work” laws) and favors relaxing child labor laws. He calls for abolishing the IRS ..."

Pity. I did answer yours, and you beg out "but I'm a centrist".

 

[bilby]

It is very predictable on this board. Something like "anarchist fascists who want to be hermits and rob everyone".

I think Libertarians are more like idealistic 16 year olds who haven't really thought things through.

Individual liberty is such an immature belief. Once people mature they realize that all people belong to the collective, be it the proletariat, the state, the nation, the race, or in some older traditions, the crown or the church.

Yup. Homo Sapiens is a social species. Individuals are unlikely to survive without assistance, even as adults; They absolutely cannot survive childhood without very significant assistance from far more members of their tribe than just their immediate parents.

I know you think you are being sarcastic, but you are actually just stating a demonstrable fact, with a spin intended to make it look absurd.

Which really isn't clever at all, though an idealistic 16 year old would likely find it hugely impressive.

 

[Swammerdami]

SPOILER Alert!! When someone treats me with contempt I return the favor ten-fold. Yes, I know that's because at age 75 I'm still immature. But I'm proud that it's been several years since I lost my temper in public. Congratulate me! Compared with the stupidity and obnoxiousness I encounter on-line, my encounters with real people in the real world are almost universally friendly and uplifting.

WOW! I thought Jason wanted to engage sincerely. Instead he is full of insult and malarkey.

1. Taxes. Liberals and "statists" recognize that taxes are necessary. Conservatives and libertarians oppose taxes.

Government assistance to businesses. Conservatives and Progressives support it.

Hmmm. Where does government get the money to assist businesses? I thought libertatians don't think government should pick winners and losers. And a blanket "Government assistance to businesses" leads to cronyism, no? I think Trump's government is likely to assist Musk's businesses and other favorites.

Deliberately misunderstanding me?

WHEN did I ever deliberately misunderstand anybody? Or do you assume that others have the same faults that YOU have?

YOU wrote "Government assistance to businesses". (In future perhaps COMPLETE sentences would be better, ok? Color me stupid but I LITERALLY thought you were agreeing with the "Conservatives and Progressives." If you opposed "government assistance" I'd expect someone of your ilk to accompany the phrase with derogatories. You have no problem making your contempt for me quite visible.

For sincere dialogue Complete sentences are your friend. Capische?

And "Deliberately misunderstanding [the other]" ??? That's what YOU like to do, not me.

2. Regulations. E.g. Should drug companies be permitted to sell defective drugs? Should government mandate number of toilet stalls for employees? All viewpoints along the spectrum favor good regulations and oppose bad regulations. Fiscal conservatives and libertarians think regulators, even when enforcing good rules, must make do with a cheap skeleton staff since reducing taxes is of highest priority.

You've bought the hype and not the reality. It is said that conservatives campaign like libertarians and govern like progressives. Conservatives, like progressives, support regulations that help their side.

Everyone supports regulations they think are good. Will you pay for it? FDA budget is $7 billion. Too little?
FDIC had $128 billion in its insurance fund, and raised the mandatory premiums paid by private banks to increase the fund further. It spends about $3 billion annually even when there are zero bank failures. Regulations cost money.

The point, which you missed, is that conservatives don't oppose regulations. They like them just as much as progressives do, they just support different regulations. Your position on this one reminds me of a Christian I once met who insisted that Muslims were Atheists because Muslims denied the divinity of Jesus.

OMG. Are you really that dense? EVERYONE supports regulations that they APPROVE of. Your bragging that YOU support GOOD regulations is just laughable gibberish. You're infatuated with your own fatuity!

What you (deliberately?? ha ha ha) overlooked is the question I asked -- Will you raise taxes to PAY for regulation ?

4. Liberty, the very eponym of "Libertarian." This is where controversy enters and needs its own paragraph.

Liberty and Rights. Gays have the liberty to buy a gay wedding cake; but do bakers have the liberty not to sell them a cake? Jason?

Is there really only one bakery in the country? Wouldn't you rather know who the bigots are instead of accidentally funding them?

"In the country"? People busy planning a wedding should drive for half an hour hoping a baker a friend of a friend told them of will help?

You still make it sound like there is a severe dearth of bakeries in the US. One per town at most? Try searching for bakeries on Google Maps.

Oh, let's do micromanage a geographic detail. Force the gays to squander 3 hours Googling for a gay bakery is OK, just not 4 hours.

And what about restaurants; they are far more plentiful than bakeries. Restaurants should have the LIBERTY to disallow blacks, no?
"Try searching for restaurants on Google Maps."

Then go to one owned by Muslims and ask for a "gay wedding cake" as it is called.

I guess it was essential to your "argument" to expose your own bigotries. Christians (or atheists or Randists or whatever your religion is) are better than Muslims; is that your point?

People have the liberty to visit a beach in California; but does a landowner have the liberty to post a No Trespassing sign on the privately-owned access to the beach? Jason?

Again, two things can be true at once. Is the only way to access the beach to trample on private property?

This was not a hypothetical.

Get off my beach! How the wealthy are laying claim to California's coast

Complaints have been streaming in about security guards, hired by wealthy homeowners, removing people from public beaches

www.theguardian.com

Okay, you found one example. Good for you I guess.

Hunh? We were exploring the limits of your stupidity via examples. Do we need three identical examples of the same thing?

You really are infatuated with your own fatuity!
Have you wondered why only about 1% of intelligent people support Johnsonism or Randism or whatever your trite little religion is?

There are still plenty of beaches open to the public. I guess you're not free until you can access every beach, even the ones that other people own.

I gave you a clickable. Had you not been lazy you would have learned that all beaches in California are public property (up to mean high tide IIRC). For someone who pretends to be knowledgeable on Randism or Johnsonism or WTF your ism is, you sure know nothing!

The example was just to confirm that by "Rights" you join with your fellow libertarian fanatics by thinking only about Property Rights, Property Rights, and Property Rights.

I know, I know. The homeless person living under a bridge has just as much RIGHT to buy his own private beach as a billionaire does! Ha ha ha.

Employers have the liberty to reduce raises and worker safety. Should workers have the liberty to unionize and picket, or to expect a government mandated minimum wage? Jason?

Of course workers have the right to unionize and picket. Unionization is nothing more than free association, a fundamental right. Going on strike is nothing more than denying the sale of labor, and refusing to do business is another fundamental right.

Now who's deliberately misunderstanding? Your follow-on paragraph suggests that you DO know a teeny-tiny bit about the "right-to-work" controversy. But in the sentence I've bolded you've pretended not to know.

If you sincerely want to understand the unionization controversies Google is your friend. Just click somewhere besides crackpot sites like Mises, or wherever you get your confused ideas.

I've answered your questions, so maybe now you answer mine.

Tell me about center-right. Tell me about moderate right. Preferably with examples even.

I call myself a centrist because I do NOT have clear answers. Often I appreciate both sides of an issue and am grateful I am NOT a legislator with the need to take a stand. For example -- and now the progressives here may call ME a right-winger and/or homophobe -- I am NOT happy about coercing bakers. Many experts think teacher's unions are an obstacle to improving public schools. I do not know if they are right.

I've reddened my remarks to emphasize that Jason insulted my response WITHOUT EVEN READING IT.

Ask me specific questions if you wish, but I'm likely to say "I don't know." Even if I have a strong position on an issue, I do not speak for all "centrists."

Just as you do not speak for all libertarians. Most SUPPORT right-to-work laws. I didn't want to waste more than one click on Gary Johnson but Google came up with "He's no friend of organized labor (he supports so-called “right to work” laws) and favors relaxing child labor laws. He calls for abolishing the IRS ..."

Pity. I did answer yours, and you beg out "but I'm a centrist".

I try to explain why centrists don't have the easy answers that your ilk and other extremists have. I offer to answer specific questions. You respond with insult. You really are infatuated with your own fatuity!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

On this board I see the phrases "far right" and "extreme right" used an awful lot to describe political opponents. It made me wonder.
What does it mean to be just plain right, neither extreme nor moderate?
What does it mean to be moderate right or center right?

Do they even exist? Or is all of the right either far or extreme?

On this board, extreme right, Qanon nazi etc is applicable to anyone who has the slightest disagreement with the prevailing views. I’m sure you know this.

It's not a matter of the slightest disagreement. It's a matter of worshiping Faux etc and disregarding anything that contradicts that.

The reason we pretty much only see the extreme right is that they are so far right that those on the moderate right are closer to the Democrats than to the current Republican party.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't consider myself center though.

I'm in one of the corners of that chart, just not a right corner or left corner.

Having a spectrum implies points along the spectrum exist. Your position is that the area between center and far right is empty. So tell me, what would make someone center-right or moderate-right.

They're terrified of what the right has become and see the left as the lesser problem. Thus the sets we see are extreme right (MAGA), center left (comprised of the center right and center left) and far left (which is pretty much what it used to be.)