petrjanda

Unfortunately the media are complicit in equating anti Zionism with being racist against the Jews. They call this anti-semitism even though the origin of this word is from the right wing Jew haters themselves in order to make their hate of the Jews more palatable to the general populace. The right wingers always need somebody to hate, it used to be the blacks, then the Jews , then the Asians and now it's the gays and the Muslims.

Israel has certainly the right to exist, but so do the Palestinians in their state. I don't have blind folds, I see there are many radical Muslims who hate Jews and westerners but in order to create peace, the west cannot simply equate every protest against the actions of Israel with hating Jews. It's wrong, it's immoral and it holds us back.

Furthermore, while not every extremist group formed because of society ailments it is** a well known factor recognised by scholars*.

There is robust evidence that radicalisation is a social process and that identity is a key factor in why individuals become involved in violent movements. In conflicts involving violent extremism (as opposed to terrorism directed against the West), socio-economic discrimination and marginalisation do help to explain why extremist groups are able to recruit support in large numbers (Allan, Glazzard, et Al. 2015)

Sorry the inclusion of Taliban was a mistake, was typing too quickly. What I meant to say was the Afghan Marxist government .

Studying the history of al-Qaeda is a key to understanding the ideology and even the mentality of the movement as a whole. It began in Afghanistan in 1979 in response to the introduction of Soviet troops into the country, which caused an influx of foreign fighters from all over the Islamic world. > (Vasiliev & Zherlitsyna, 2023)

Why did the Soviets invade Afghanistan?

In April 1978 Afghanistan’s centrist government, headed by Pres. Mohammad Daud Khan, was overthrown by left-wing military officers led by Nur Mohammad Taraki. Power was thereafter shared by two Marxist-Leninist political groups, the People’s (Khalq) Party and the Banner (Parcham) Party—which had earlier emerged from a single organization, the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan—and had reunited in an uneasy coalition shortly before the coup. The new government, which had little popular support, forged close ties with the Soviet Union, launched ruthless purges of all domestic opposition, and began extensive land and social reforms that were bitterly resented by the devoutly Muslim and largely anti-communist population. > (Encyclopaedia Britannica , 2025)

The aim of the Soviet operation was to prop up their new but faltering client state

There you go.

I've committed a substantial amount into copper in my retirement account.

As far as spare cash, I'm just investing it into my 2 houses.

State ownership of means of production is the very definition of state socialism, thus removing power from the capitalists, which is strictly an implementation of the leftist ideology. I have no trauma, I just don't live in a lala land. I'm sure you spend a great amount of time thinking about what society could be, instead of accepting what it is and dealing with it. Libertarianism, centrist? Oh please. Its very foundation is rooted in anarchist concepts, distinctively left wing ideology.

I agree there is no point discussing things any further. Just keep dreaming of your utopia, eventually you will grow up.

With Shiller PE at 40x, only fools are investing into the market right now. History will be the judge again in due time. It's a repeat of the 1920s.

That is true about the state of capitalism today. However, you choose not to see the relationship between the inherent nature of human tribalism, which is as old as humanity itself, and seeing a large influx of aliens in your tribe, as part of that same tribal nature. If you want to change the human nature, you will require a long time, if it's at all possible. The left, just like the right, gets caught up in the cycle of "we have power, we can do everything we want, and we want do it now" when these deep societal changes require very long time to be implemented peacefully, perhaps the length of a life time.

Thanks for proving all my points. In one paragraph you justify left wing violence as long as the cause is honourable, and in another paragraph, you claim the eastern block socialists as not really left wing.

I've got some news for you. They were as left wing and as forceful as they come. You didn't own property , everything was state owned, society was very progressive (abortions were legal - ex USSR , socialised medicine, free schooling all the way to getting a job, gender equality, LGBT rights were a lot further than in the west).

Conservatism/right-wing is not inherently violent, that's fodder. Some societies are more conservative than others. There are even right wing libertarians. It becomes evil when it seeks to impose its will over minorities or majorities, and in effect invalidate their voice. There are many examples of this from the left and the right (more right for sure).

If you are not a centrist, you are a dogmatic

This is not a chicken and egg problem. Extremists are a result of society's ailments, not the other way around. . I'll give you a few examples from the 20th century.

• Hitler - became leader of Germany because of the impact WW1 had on German society
• Al Queda/ISIS - got into position of power due to the suppression of moderate leaders by authoritarian regimes ie. Taliban.
• IRA - the discrimination of Irish Catholics by the British-protestant colonialist.
• Khmer Rouge - got into power due to Vietnam war bombing of Cambodia.
• Kokutai - the perceived betrayal by the west after WW1 (yes Japan fought against Germany in WW1), lead to the rise of extremist ideologies which supplanted Japan's desire to fight against the West.

And democracy is an ideology that we are supposed to follow. That ideology comes mostly in the form of representative democracy where you elect someone that is supposed to represent your group.

You don't know if Tyler Robinson is left or right , that is all media speculation at this stage. As someone that lived behind the iron curtain, the concept that left is inherently peaceful is complete nonsense. Neither left or right is inherently violent or peaceful. Violence of the far left and far right is always a result of someone who thinks their ideology is superior, disregards all moral grounds, and forces their will and/or dogma on somebody else. Leninist-Marxist, PLO, Earth Liberation Front, too many examples to list. I do agree that the left is generally less violent today.