This YouTube video clip sums up the problems with the far left quite nicely. I don't know if this link will work or not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXbR3oADwaM
Somewhat off topic, but I see "far left" or "radical left" thrown out a lot. How do you define those versus normal left, moderate left, or centrist? If you could, please give some examples of either people or policies that would fit into these categories. It feels like now anything left of conservatism is labeled "far left" so I wanted to try to parse this out.
I view "liberal" or left as those who favor social programs to help those who have come on hard times because of no fault of their own. I am big believer in education, because that is the key improving the general welfare with a workforce that has the skills to be productive. I have been supportive if this kind of liberalism. The trouble is throwing money at education has not been the answer. We spend as much or more as any country in the world on education, yet we turn out people who don't have basic skills. A big part of the problem is that the money is not spent wisely, and bureaucratic administrators who are incompetent or who are rewarded with a system that does recognize meeting the goals of educating people for the workforce. This is why I favor growing the private sector over the public sector. In the private sector, you either produce or you don’t last for long in many cases. In the public sector, if you screw up, chances are there are few consequences. I define the hard left as those want to impose socialism or communism on all of us. They are sore heads who think that the world owes them a living, or who believe criminality to get them to their goals. They are the no accounts who converting peaceful protests into riots. They should go to jail, and their leadership should be sent prison for long periods of time if their actions have resulted in the loss of life and/or extensive loss of property. They bring nothing worthwhile to the discussions or solutions to our problems. Some of the hard left get into teaching and poison the minds of the students they instruct. They waste our time teaching victimization to their students, especially the minority students. If you are Africa-American you are far from being a “born loser” as these incompetent teachers and professors claim. I have been out of corporate America for over 25 years, but I can tell you that if you were African-American or female in the companies for which I worked, there plenty of opportunities for you if you had the qualifications and were willing to work. The mandates were there which forced companies to hire and promote women and minorities. All you had to do was take advantage of them. For hard left, like AOC, who complains about people having big houses and heliports and the like, I can’t even relate to that. I have never had that stuff, and I don’t need it. I don’t care if someone lives better or higher than I do. I am comfortable with what I have and resent people like AOC who want to take it from me for some utopian system that even they don’t understand. One message that you learn about hard left politicians like AOC and Nancy Pelosi is that other people will be the ones who will have to sacrifice to create their utopia. Their life styles and the life styles of the people who keep them in power will not change in the least because they are the “leadership.” The little people are the ones who will pay. If you want to see their utopian in action, look a Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, North Korea and Communist Red China. Their leadership lives well. In Venezuela people raid garbage trucks for food, and in North Korea people are being asked to give up their dogs so that they can slaughtered and eaten. I saw that in the news a couple of days ago. I remember the satellite of North Korea when Kim’s daddy was the dictator. The whole country was dark, except around his palace where he sat up a night and watched U.S. westerns. All of the rest of the country was in a blackout because of his greed and the inefficacy of the system he ran.
I watched the video. My biggest beef is something I have not posted here before. But it's out there now so I'll say it..... I cannot imagine in my mind what it must feel like to be young and rather than being taight to use my mind, rather telling me how to interpret the world. I didn't make it to higher education so my judgment comes from earlier education. I never once had a teacher impose a thought on me. Rather, I was given the tools to reach my own conclusion. Why would we want to handicap children that way? And why on earth would we want to confuse them on gender? If somebody chooses that path, fine. But why encourage confusion in children? It's just unconscionable to me. It's hard enough growing up these days.
Yes, precisely, why confuse children, especially young children with these issues? Tolerance is one thing, and can be quite beneficial. Recruitment is quite another
Oh the thinks that you think. I am seriously wondering where the Right gets these silly talking points from and more curious why they believe them. If you look across the country at what Right-wing school boards are doing to actually curtail critical thinking in K-12 public schools, you would eat your own words. Although book burning and banning books was just the tip of the iceberg popularized by bible thumping zealots not that long ago, they have since moved on to curriculums that include the "Intelligent Design" and some conservative state boards of education such as Texas have outright banned teaching critical thinking. This is absolutely true and you have this completely backwards. GOP Opposes Critical Thinking Party platform paints original ideas as a liberal conspiracy BY RICHARD WHITTAKER, 1:17PM, WED. JUN. 27, 2012 Who needs a frontal lobe anyway? Texas GOP platform opposes critical thinking. It's official: The Republican Party of Texas opposes critical thinking. That's right, drones, and it's part of their official platform. One of our eagle-eyed readers emailed us to point out this unbelievable passage in the RPT 2012 platform, as adopted at their recent statewide conference. "Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority." What this really means is that the GOP is doubling down on learn-by-rote fact recitation – of the kind spearheaded by the worst of the pro-testing advocates, and locally by IDEA Public Schools, which has committed to the anti-analytical direct learning model (aka "press button A, B or C.") But what the hell is all that bunk about "undermining parental authority"? Could it be that the Texas GOP has shown its paternalistic streak a little too overtly? And, let's face facts, that's just policy-wonk speak for "honor thy father and mother." Yup, the Texas GOP is officially enshrining blind obedience into its doctrine of political domination. And be careful that you don't disturb a student's fixed beliefs, like, say, that the Loch Ness Monster is real. Sadly, this is just one of 30 pages of head-in-the-sand, pretend-the-Enlightenment-never-happened thinking from the state's dominating party. Other gems include: – Abstinence-only sex ed (yeah, because that's worked so well so far.) – Trying juveniles as adults – Faith-based drug rehab should be emphasized (Scientology front operation NarcAnon should be rubbing its hands at that one) – Oppose the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Yeah! Who's the UN to tell us we should ban child slavery?) – Flat rate income tax (go Team 1%!) – Repealing the minimum wage (suck it, wage slaves!) – Opposing homosexuality in the military (don't ask, don't tell, and don't do that!) – Opposition to red light cameras (because if you run a red, kill someone, and there's no witnesses, was the light ever really red?) – Oppose the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, because firms should be able to fire people for what they consider "sinful and sexually immoral behavior." Like, say, growing a beard? – Continued opposition to ACORN (even though it has not existed since 2010) – Opposing statehood or even Congressional voting rights for the citizens of the District of Columbia (who writes this crap, Rand Paul?) – And no-questions-asked support for Israel because, and this is another direct quote, "Our policy is based on God’s biblical promise to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel and we further invite other nations and organizations to enjoy the benefits of that promise." Yes, for every measure that everyone can agree on, like labeling GMOs, there's another entry or three from the crazy ideas discount bin. So, next time some Tea Partier tells you the GOP is all about freedom and liberty, remind them that the GOP doesn't want people to learn how to think critically. Because people who can think critically might start looking at their platform.
You said that children shouldn't be confused. That it is hard enough for kids growing up today. Children have been confused on gender for far too long already. Your concern seems to be only for those kids that fit the male/female dichotomy. When in reality, gender is a range, not strictly a male/female only bifurcation. What has been taught in school for years has been wrong. There are thousands and thousands of kids in our society that do not fit neatly into a boy/girl paradigm. Are you advocating that we deny those children the chance to live the way they were born because it makes others uncomfortable to tolerate? They exist whether you like it or not. Children just like them have existed for countless millennia. You can't deny them into non-existence. So rather than pretend that there are only two types of gender, wouldn't it be better to teach the truth? Or would that be liberal indoctrination?
That isn’t what I said at all. However putting it in the framework that you offered, yes it is unfair to confuse millions of kids in order to placate the thousands....... Teaching tolerance is one thing. Teaching confusion over ones own gender is entirely another. By and large most kids are fully aware that they are boys or girls. And yes I do have issue with confusing them. Frankly, I wish I had been taught that tolerance as a child because most of my life I did in fact view it as an abomination. I know better now. My girl is as frilly and girly as they come and I am as amiable a fellow as you will ever meet. But I certainly would have harsh words for any teacher that attempted to teach her that she was anything other than a girl. Teach her tolerance, yes. Teach her confusion over her body, then absolutely that fits the definition of indoctrination and I will be writing strongly worded letters to the district superintendent.
Well, you and her are fortunate. Because no teacher would ever do that. A teacher would only include the fact that there are people that do not identify as either male or female. That doesn't change what a girl or a boy that is cisgendered would believe about themselves. You really seem to want to exclude anything that isn't cisgendered identification. And you said that you were for critical thinking? Not sure how you reconcile those two positions but OK.
I’ll add this as well. I market construction materials. Would it surprise you to know that I am considered the areas expert on gender neutral bathroom design? I frequently am called upon by designers, architects and facility owners to provide guidance on gender neutral bathroom design. I am in the midst of a major project where all the facilities are gender neutral. It is a state visitor center. Boys, girls and all others will use the same bathroom facilities. And I designed the place..... Yeah, yeah I know.... Don’t bring out the marching bands or anything. There’s Good money in it for me..... Point being, I am not in the dark here by any stretch. But confusing otherwise perfectly centered children to placate a few is an issue with me.
If a child didn't feel like they fit into the dichotomy, wouldn't that be confusing for them to not understand why they don't fit in? I think the whole non-binary concept is trying to alleviate some of the existential stress children and teenagers face. Additionally, it is helpful for people it doesn't apply to in that it teaches them these people exist and are no better or worse than they are for it. There's nothing quite like learning about something to combat fear and bigotry.
Sorry, not calling you bigoted. What I meant was that children can be cruel to "different" people. Which many grow out of, but it's hard for the "different" kids that experience it to be poked and prodded for their differences. I was calling that behavior bigoted because they single out people that aren't like them. The hope, is that educating children on this and normalizing the concept can help the children who are non-binary feel accepted. There's a reason nearly 3 in 10 trans people attempt suicide at some point in their life.
Crickets?? You see, I do rather feel that is a pre-programmed response. I have said before in this forum that bigotry is the ugliest word in the English language. So where does that come from in a conversation that wasn’t remotely touching on bigotry?
I was a “different” kid in school. I didn’t care about sports and social circles. I was the weird kid with long hair and a guitar by himself hiding in the corner. In the early 70’s that was pretty weird and different. I didn’t stay in school because I was so out of place. I get it..... Could it be that many of these gender neutral kids are the long haired kid in the corner? Could it be that they feel forced to be different because society is forcing that upon them somehow?