NationStates Jolt Archive

Fellow right-wingers!

I'm concerned that the UN has became an arm of socialism, liberalism or whatever is your favorite label regarding left-wing politics. Most resolutions, including the current anti-AIDS initiative clearly proves that. I therefore recommend that every greedy capitalist, religious freak and evil dictator, in short every sensible leader, joins the UN to fight this leftie disease. We must turn the tide, and work together to restore the hegemony of evil on this planet!
If this cannot be done, perhaps we should consider creating a parrallel institution, where we can work for this lofty goal...

Heksefatter
God of Heksefattania

Hey, rightists don't have a monopoly on greed! Why do you think I tax my people 48%? Oh well, I'm still going to recommend that leftists join the UN and fight the right-wing coup.

I have a good idea for fighting liberalism!!!11

I think we should increase welfare, enforce public ownership of all services and industries, ban capitalism, ban unsustainable exploitation of the environment and remove the state.

Liberals (as in supporters of liberalism) would really hate that.

You want to fight liberalism Wolomy?...quite interesting I must say as your nation is described by the UN as a scandinavian LIBERAL "paradise", complete with an imploded economy and all that!
But then again, in a way you are right, liberal means two different things, in the USA and UK liberals are lefties, whereas in continental Europe they are capitalists. I expressedly mentioned the liberal as understood in a leftie context. Lefties go by many different names, but no matter the name, Heksefattania will oppose them!

Heksefatter
God of Heksefattania

PS: Do you know what is the similarity between Satan and Santa? Both of them are RED!

You right wingers can fight me all you want. You will never win.

modalert flamebait?

Uh...eh...Yeah sure Qaaolchoura

Heksefatter
God of Heksefattania

Well it was in the UN Forum when it is not a proposal, so I was wondering if you were attempting to provoke angry reactions.

Heksefattania, careful now.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Cappies are angry

Cool

Fellow right-wingers!

I'm concerned that the UN has became an arm of socialism, liberalism or whatever is your favorite label regarding left-wing politics. Most resolutions, including the current anti-AIDS initiative clearly proves that. I therefore recommend that every greedy capitalist, religious freak and evil dictator, in short every sensible leader, joins the UN to fight this leftie disease. We must turn the tide, and work together to restore the hegemony of evil on this planet!


It can't be done. Read the mandate of the UN. It is set up as a "leftie organisation". If you don't like it, all you can do is resign.

If this cannot be done, perhaps we should consider creating a parrallel institution, where we can work for this lofty goal...


That you can do. Start your own organisation which does everything "right-wing", and nothing "left-wing". If enough people join, maybe they'll even add it to the game. But even if they don't add it, you can set up agreements between various "right-wing" states to ban taxation, ban social welfare, ban free education, and so on.

Retracting earlier note, the thread author contacted me and this is perfectly valid IC stuff. :)

Heksefatter,

It is indeed true that the UN has become, if it ever was anything else, an arm attached to a very limp wrist. The policy of the Conglomerate, however, has been to abandon, and incourage the abandonment of, the United Nations. With only themselves left to play with, the insignificant remaining UN states find themselves drenched in their own over-regulation and flimsy, punctured economies.

Still, your idea of an alternate organisation is perhaps slightly intriguing. Tell me more!

Jenna Timothy
Public Assets Department Director
PrattCo Conglomerate

Retracting earlier note, the thread author contacted me and this is perfectly valid IC stuff. :)
Contacted me too, I basically got the same impression.

the republic or Sal-Sana strongly disagrees with your plans to create a "hegemony of evil". the aids initiative is a basic human rights and aid initiative that will save countless lives, quite possibly those of your subjects, whom may or may not be the source of all your power. so i say, let this aids initiative pass, and contest the environmental protocols (they sure do throw a wrench into thise pland to let big praetorian buisness into my humble island state).

I am sure even some of those who would deem themselves right-wing would be quite offended by how you classify that political outlook.

Since when has humanitarianism become the exclusive domain of the left?

Grow up, kiddo, and by all means, please form your own cabal of like-minded (sic) nutters.

That way the rest of us can keep a close watch on you while we get on with real politics; not the infantile position you have adopted merely to shock or annoy people.

Well, yes, Stakanovia. You are always welcome to get on with real politics, here on nationstates.net. As for the way I classify right-wingers, I really don't think I am much worse than the game itself, where people wants to bulldoze the rain forest to extract uranium for nuclear bombs and complain about falling over beggars on their way to a meeting with the government to discuss social equality!
I didn't adopt my position to shock or annoy other people, I adopted it to have FUN, as in this game I play an evil person. There are probably quite a lot like me out there, so why take offence when we play?

Yours Godly
Heksefatter
God of Heksefattania

You want to fight liberalism Wolomy?...quite interesting I must say as your nation is described by the UN as a scandinavian LIBERAL "paradise", complete with an imploded economy and all that!
But then again, in a way you are right, liberal means two different things, in the USA and UK liberals are lefties, whereas in continental Europe they are capitalists. I expressedly mentioned the liberal as understood in a leftie context. Lefties go by many different names, but no matter the name, Heksefattania will oppose them!

Heksefatter
God of Heksefattania

PS: Do you know what is the similarity between Satan and Santa? Both of them are RED!

No, you're wrong. Idiot.
Liberal in America means: everybody who isn't a McCapitali$t, environmentally unfriendly, far right, hawkish religious rightist. In short, "commie-liberal".
Correct use of liberal = someone who permits high levels of freedom in all areas. ie., free-market, pro-choice, etc.
My hypothesis is that somewhere in a rightist's brain 2+2=5.
And are you calling all communists Santa? Satan isn't even red - that's post-Paradise Lost. God, I shouldn't have to teach you your own religion.

Well I do have the opnion that words get their meaning in a social context, and not because they express any "true" meaning of the word, like the Platonic forms. And in the USA it is common to call people hwo are inclined towards the left "liberals", whereas the people of the right are "conservatives". But you really shouldn't be so insistent regarding language, unless you improve your grammar.
Also I believe you are wrong regarding Satan. I know that he is definitely red, and this from the ultimate source of religious authority: Sergio Aragones of Mad Magazine.

It is an incorrect use of the word. Conservative Americans just call everyone "darn commie-liberals". That is grossly oversimplified.

I believe, as Wittgenstein said "the meaning is the use". Therefore there is no such thing as label that is broadly used, but used wrongly. Also, I'm writing this as a defender of everyone, who is a McCapitali$t, environmentally unfriendly, far right, hawkish religious rightist and all that.

So it should not be surprising that I used liberal in the left-wing sense.

Hmmm... not really. The meaning is independent of the use. Besides, it doesn't even make sense... "the use is the meaning" would make sense, but not the other way around.

On the other hand, the use is the interpretation... we hope. That's when you get miscommunication problems.

How can meaning be independent of the use? If you look at many contemporary words, their meaning have evolved through slang and misconceptions. For example the word "ponder" comes from french, where it means to lay eggs or create. However, because its use has changed through the times we say that the word has changed its meaning. I do not believe that there is any use-independent "meanings" that words "represent". But even if I accepted that assumption, it would not affect my argument, as I would then say that the sequence of letters "liberal" is used to represent two different "meanings" in different contexts.
As for "The meanings is the use" and "The use is the meaning" they are the same to me by the symmetry of of the identity relation, that is, a = b and b = a are logically equivalent. However, if the sentence understood as a subject - predicate relation, as in "Socrates is mortal", where the claim is not that Socrates is identical to the quality "mortal", but only that Socrates has the property "mortal". I think that Wittgenstein's sentence should be understood as an identity, and not subject - predicate, relation. But then again that's just my opinion.

In that case, everyone right-wing is a Nazi and everyone left-wing is a communist.

See the problem? The political scale is not 2D - left and right. There are 4 quadrants which roughly correspond to: Anarcho-communist, Stalinist, Free-market fascists and libertarians. These are only the extremes, however.

Okay, so you are both right!

Words change naturally as a process of evolution, take for example "cool", which has far more meanings than I care to list. Cool however is what I would call a 'general' word, as opposed to 'Liberal', a technical word.

'Quark', a technical word, has its origins in an old English word, meaning "croak". Having since been precisely defined by physicists, no one today has a 'quarky voice', but the fundamental particles of the universe are made from quarks.

Likewise, Liberal, once a word for general use; meaning "generous" (eg he was given a liberal portion), Liberalism as been defined by social and political scientists as

1. Of or relating to liberalism, where liberalism is a political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.
2. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

From context it is clear when this word is being used in a general sense, or in a technical sense. When using "Liberal" to describe a political belief, one is required to use the strict technical definition which applies.

In normal circumstances words have several, carefully defined meanings, and the context selects between them.

In that case, everyone right-wing is a Nazi and everyone left-wing is a communist.

See the problem? The political scale is not 2D - left and right. There are 4 quadrants which roughly correspond to: Anarcho-communist, Stalinist, Free-market fascists and libertarians. These are only the extremes, however.

Definitely not. Among both left and right, there are many sub-distinctions, some of which are more or less meaningful. For example fascists, anarcho-capitalists and conservatives are all considered to belong to the right. This does not make them identical, but they belong to the broad "family" of the right. Likewise I oppose the ENTIRE left, communists, socialists, social-democrats and liberals (in the left-wing sense of the word). I do not believe there was any ambiguity in my choice of words, I expressedly wrote that it was the left that should be opposed, whatever label was put on it. Though "liberal" in political science may mean this or that, it is uncontestable that the word "liberal" is being used to label lefties.

Fellow Cnosevratievs! There is already an elite anti-liberal alliance in Nationstates! The "New Conservative Alliance" is a region dedicated to fighting the evils of liberalism! Join now before it is too late!

us leftists will not only join the UN, but enevitably CONTROL the whole thing....have fun.

No, it is arguable that libertarians and neoliberalists are left-wing. But to illustrate the political spectrum properly, we need the 4 quadrants.

And please don't complain about my grammar when your topic title doesn't have a question mark.

No, it is arguable that libertarians and neoliberalists are left-wing. But to illustrate the political spectrum properly, we need the 4 quadrants.

And please don't complain about my grammar when your topic title doesn't have a question mark.

libertarians in the anarchist sense perhaps but neo-liberalism is certainly not a left wing ideology.

We of Letila, decendents of the glorious nation of Terra Pvlchra, ask you to think of all the poor that would die if we didn't help them. No one to exploit.

We of Letila, decendents of the glorious nation of Terra Pvlchra, ask you to think of all the poor that would die if we didn't help them. No one to exploit.


Ulp, Letila...I really must say: You have got a very good argument there! A pox on you and your kin! :)