Poll: Are most leftists utopianists?

[JRslinger]

From my interactions with leftists I get the idea that they are utopianists, often in denial. When asked if they are utopianists they will say "no, but I think we can do more to (insert cause here)" Yet they never seem to be satisfied. They always want another law to try to advance their causes.

Some seem to want complete economic equality, a classless society, believing anything else would be unfair. Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society; England for example. Some believe that there is a right not to be offended and that "hate speech" laws will make a civil and polite society. Some are bothered by other people poor health and want taxes or bans on certain foods/ingredients such as trans fats. I think they'll continue to push their agendas no matter how many laws they pass or how the results turn out.

The name of a major leftwing group suggests utopian thinking.
There is a leftist group called ANSWER who's goal is to stop war and end racism.

Conservatives on the other hand generally want to preserve the things they like, but don't expect to create a utopia. Proponents of capitalism aknowledge that the system isn't perfect. Socialists/leftists seem to think they have all the answers.

 

[-Drifter-]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

 

[Ernie1042]

I think most 'leftists' try to change things to create what they believe is a better world.

Sometimes it can end up in a utopianist mindset, but until things are at the point where the majority can agree "This is alright, we don't need to change it anymore", can we label anything utopian?

 

[-Drifter-]

Both wings are fucking retarded in completely different ways.

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

 

[JRslinger]

Both wings are fucking retarded in completely different ways.

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

I wouldn't say that fascism is the opposite of communism. They're more like cousins, both are totalitarian systems. The real opposite of fascism and communism is anarchy.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Oh boy.
"Are all x y?"

Are all conservatives fascists?

Honestly. Political bias is stupid.
Both wings are fucking retarded in completely different ways.

This

 

[Good morning blues]

So you're arguing against trying to improve the world?

 

[NeutralDrow]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

Texas has one of the highest crime rates in the U.S. New Hampshire has the lowest.

 

[-Drifter-]

Both wings are fucking retarded in completely different ways.

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

I was going to say, "They're completely fucking retarded in completely different ways that are exactly the same," but I figured nobody would be able to puzzle out just what the fuck I was trying to say, so I dropped it.

As hard as it may be at times (it sure as hell is for me,) it's worth remembering that not everyone is an idiot.

 

[GRoXERs]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

No, THAT's the opposite of true. Texas has the 15th highest crime rate in the country. Get your facts straight or we may shoot you.

OT: Is seeking to improve quality of life the definition of a utopian mindset? I thought that included, you know, every rational being.

[small]That was sarcasm - I won't actually shoot you unless you get within shotgun range because I am a terrible shot with a rifle and don't get me started on handguns but I am very good at skeet shooting[/small]

 

[Dancingman]

Oh boy.
"Are all x y?"

Are all conservatives fascists?

Honestly. Political bias is stupid.
Both wings are fucking retarded in completely different ways.

Max wins the thread!

 

[-Drifter-]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

Texas has one of the highest crime rates in the U.S.

What? Since when? I've always heard they had the lowest.

 

[-Drifter-]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

No, THAT's the opposite of true. Texas has the 15th highest crime rate in the country. Get your facts straight or we may shoot you.

OT: Is seeking to improve quality of life the definition of a utopian mindset? I thought that included, you know, every rational being.

Okay, fuck, calm down. I've just always heard they have the lowest. Besides, you really want to threaten me? I'm the fastest draw on the Escapist (as far as I know.)

 

[Rajin Cajun]

Having known a ton of commies from across the world I can tell you that most aren't Utopian by any stretch especially Stalinists. Now some were narcissistic as fuck and the younger they were the more highly they thought of themselves even trying to garner cults of personality around themselves on the internet it is pretty pathetic. Yet that is the extreme end of the spectrum on the Left. I wouldn't say they were so much Utopian as Idealistic.

Now in regards to the far right that is a completely different story with a variety of well thought out ideas to complete mad dog foaming racism depending on the group.

 

[Dys]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

Look at every western country that isn't America, less crime and nobody is packing.

Both are stupid examples, so don't hit me with other reasons why there might be less crime in swedan, because I don't care. I'm just highlighting that weapon laws are effective depending on the culture more than the law.

Both wings are fucking retarded in completely different ways.

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

I wouldn't say that fascism is the opposite of communism. They're more like cousins, both are totalitarian systems. The real opposite of fascism and communism is anarchy.

Anarchy is generally likened to communism, a lot of communist supporters beleive communism can only exist alongside Anarchy.

How can a system where everyone has equal power be totalitarian? Totalitarian means the government or dictator controls controls the people, yet with communism everyone is the government (or there is none). Fascism isn't the exact opposite of communism, but it is as close as you are likely to find.

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

How can nobody be happy under a communist system? Wouldn't it make sense for a large scale communist society to at least exist before we make those claims? I mean, by definition it us utopia, which is by definition the perfect world so then surely it stands to reason that if a communist society was to exist, everyone would be happy?

 

[CrystalShadow]

Sigh. If you're going to generalise, most liberals would be socialist not communist. (if you don't understand the difference... Well, it's a matter of degrees, I guess. - Things like welfare, and national healthcare systems are socialist. Paying everyone the same wage, and the idea that the state owns and controls everything are communist.)

 

[-Drifter-]

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

How can nobody be happy under a communist system? Wouldn't it make sense for a large scale communist society to at least exist before we make those claims? I mean, by definition it us utopia, which is by definition the perfect world so then surely it stands to reason that if a communist society was to exist, everyone would be happy?

Semantics. If I must be so specific, I mean communism as we know it, not as how it's supposed to be. I realize there hasn't really been a true large scale communist society yet.

 

[JRslinger]

So you're arguing against trying to improve the world?

Leftists tend to favor an authoritarian government approach to improving the world. I tend to disagree with that.

Having known a ton of commies from across the world I can tell you that most aren't Utopian by any stretch especially Stalinists. Now some were narcissistic as fuck and the younger they were the more highly they thought of themselves even trying to garner cults of personality around themselves on the internet it is pretty pathetic. Yet that is the extreme end of the spectrum on the Left. I wouldn't say they were so much Utopian as Idealistic.

What's your distinction between utopian and idealistic as far as government policy? What did the Stalinists expect to acheive?

 

[-Drifter-]

In pretty close to the same way if you ask me. They both seem to think they know what's best for the people, but that hardly seems the case. On one side, you've got fascism, on the other you've got communism, and the people don't seem to happy with either.

How can nobody be happy under a communist system? Wouldn't it make sense for a large scale communist society to at least exist before we make those claims? I mean, by definition it us utopia, which is by definition the perfect world so then surely it stands to reason that if a communist society was to exist, everyone would be happy?

Semantics. If I must be so specific, I mean communism as we know it, not as how it's supposed to be. I realize there hasn't really been a true large scale communist society yet, just fascism thinly disguised as it.

EDIT: I appear to have accidentally clicked the QUOTE button, instead of EDIT.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Some seem to think that enacting strict enough weapons laws will lead to a peaceful, weaponless society

That's about the opposite of what's true. There's less crime if everyone is dangerous. Just look at Texas. It has the lowest crime rate in the U.S. and why? Because everyone is packing. Your not going to fuck with people if you know there's a good chance they'll shoot you.

Texas has one of the highest crime rates in the U.S.

What? Since when? I've always heard they had the lowest.

Since the latest crime statistics I could find (<url=http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Search/Crime/State/RunCrimeOneYearofData.cfm>2007). Texas was 14th in the nation for violent crime*, and 2nd in property crime (behind South Carolina).

Granted, it's nothing compared to the hellhole that is Washington, DC.


*Beaten by South Carolina, New Mexico, Tennessee, Nevada, Michigan, Maryland, Louisiana, Illinois, Florida, Delaware, California...dammit, Arkansas, and Alaska.