🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@JonKramer

> 100 would be Genghis Khan. 0 would be government at all.

No im not asking examples of things that are at 0 or 100... I am asking, what quality is 0 to 100 measuring?

> I just don’t see the need for anything other than whole numbers here.

My objection has nothing to do with you using whole numbers. I used whole numbers in my example too. The difference here is more fundemental than that...

my line had an absolute inflection point (0) that divides the two categories, yours has an arbitrary point (50) which is relative rather than absolute, that makes a huge difference. Your scale represents things like "hot, cold, warm" but would fail to represent things like "what is my altitude above sea level" where there is a clear 0 people, clear negatives, and clear positives, and no maximum or minimum

So by going from an unbounded (infinite at both ends) scale with an absolute center point (0) to one that has none of that is a VERY different representation and is not capable of representing the information we want.

> If you want to toss in authoritarians

Nope, I have no interest in tossing this in, why would we want to it has no relavance to if your on the left or right, it is a different metric. My point is two things can be on the exact same point of the left-right scale and still be vastly different when measured by other scales.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

> Looking at your number line… you see the Dems, Obama, and Biden as closer to the socialists, Greens, etc. than to the GOP? Really??

Nope, lets use the analogy to show why.

I am just going to pick arbitrary numbers they dont represent where I think these parties fall on the left-right spectrum. They are just to illustrate a point:

Lets say, hypothecially, that communists were -10000, socialists -1000, green party -100... so all on the left... now if the democrats were -1, and the GOP were +1, then the democrats would be on the left, and the GOP on the right, but the democrats would be more similar in general to the GOP than they would any of the other parties on the left. Doesnt change the fact they are on the left.

> On a scale from 1-100, I see the GOP about 80. I see the dems about a 70. Dem socialists about 50, socialists about 20. Greens come in at about 30 maybe? Anything to the right of Saunders, at 50, is ‘right wing.’ Anything to the left of him is ‘left wing.’

Thats an odd scale being one-sided to represent a two dimensional property.... in this scale 1 represents "the least X" and 100 represents "the most X" what is X?. A single magnitude scale makes no sense when talking about a binary unbounded spectrum.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

> just curious, where would you place

So keeping in mind the left isnt a single point in space... as a politicial spectrum its a bit like the real number line. There is a clear center dividing left and right in an absolute way, the 0.. but the left goes off into the negatives infinitely, and the right goes off into the positives infinitely.

In other words just because two things are on the left doesnt mean they are anywhere near eachother in the extremity of their ideology. Something at -1 (slightly on the left) will not at represent something that is -1000 (extremely left) which in turn wont look much like anything at -1000000... I mean sure they may all match a core defintiion, but some may embrace that definition to a larger extreme... much as all those numbers are all negative numbers (and thus similar in one way) they are still very different numbers.

> Democratic socialists

left

> actual socialists

left

> communist party

left

> or the Green Party...

left

That said they are all on very very different parts of the left spectrum and not at all near eachother on that spectrum, but still clearly in the left.

More important on other political spectrum scales (such as authoritarianism) these ideologies vary greatly and arent on the same sides of many of those scales.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

Your free to think that... and of course i would say your wrong.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

No they are **objectively** left wing to anyone who is objective and knowledgable in the matter.

I do expect people who have strong biases (particularly those ont he extreme end of the spectrum) to think that though.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

ahh there you are making the Fallacy of Composition yet again... yea this is why its clear your in the wrong, you lay into fallacies and even when they are explained to you you just ignore it and keep repeating it....

As stated, I listed over 20 specific votes and introduced bills by both Obama and Biden within the thread that are clearly left wing. So there is that but thats not the point.

You just listed a bunch of left wing things you want to see.. your upset because all the ideals adopted by the left in the USA are moderate left ideals rather than the more extreme left ideals you demand... Just because they arent as extreme as you in their leftism doesnt make them right... A person on the left doesnt have to adopt every single fathomable left-wing idea anyone can favricate in order to be considering ont he left... thats just absurd... That said there have been a ton of left wing stuff they DO support, so the point has been very well proven.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

> That you consider an actual left party to be "fringe" is supporting of my position. The ARE fringe. Because they are actual lefties. Obama and Biden are not.

Jesus christ... no... they are fringe because they are a party that has no policy stance on anythign other than a single issue, rent, and in a single state, NYC... They are a joke of a party not because they are too left, but because they arent on the spectrum at all because they have no policy stance on anything other than one remote thing in one state.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

> My point was, and is, that there do exist some actual lefty parties. They are NOT in power. Only right wing parties have power in the United States. All left parties are out of power.

Seeing as all the evidence clearly showed the democrats are a left-wing party. Arguing some other left-wing party that is a joke and has no stance on any issue excpet one issue in one state, completely fails to make your point. An obscure non-functional left wing party not being elected but a different left wing party (DNC) being elected does nothing to advance your argument as to whether or not the DNC is left wing.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

> That part isn't true. they support laws banning all abortions.

A blatant lie you pulled out your butt there buddy... You just spewed that without ever fact checking it.

Lets look at the real numbers:

Currently there are 22 red states banning abortion. Of those 22 states **every single one of them** has an exception for having an abortion when you have a dead fetus. Although some of may be challenged in court and be in flux, in none of them is the life exception being challenged itself.

In fact all 22 states go beyond this and allow exceptions on abortions when it threatens the life of the mother (which a dead fetus stuck in their whomb would qualify as).

How about the leaders themselves? Well of the whole of the GOP there are only about 5 in all my hours of research I could find who said they would create an abortion ban with no life-exception.. and only one of those people (rubio) would I consider a party leader.

> The push for laws criminalizing women who would travel to other states to get a legal abortion.

Now you just moved the goal post... we are discussing the GOP's stance on abortion when a woman has a dead fetus... not traveling, we can address that seperately but first lets both agree your wrong about the nonsense you spewed earlier before we address other stuff you said.

> In short, there is no argument that the leadership, leaders those 66% of the GOP members support, is in any way, shape or form in favor of body autonomy.

Except for the fact that everything single thing you said to try to argue that point turned out to be a bald face lie without any basis in a reality, and that was shown by both what is actual law, and stated policy

> By extension, if you vote for leaders who stand against body autonomy, YOU are against it. I see no grey here.

Sure, luckily thats not the case here as per the above proof.

@ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

No but you did make the argument that not having fringe politicial group in power whose sole purpose is to lower rent prices is an point supporting your argument here (which is about if Obama and Biden are left or right)

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

Thanks, yes that confirms what i said earlier, it is a single issue party whose focus is on the rent being too high in NY.

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

66% of "THE PARTY" and its leaders, pushes for exceptions to abortion. 4% push for abortion being illegal under all circumstances... Thereis virtually no support across the whole or aggregate of the GOP to force women to carry dead babies.

@ech @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@JonKramer

Yes, one whose main focus is addressing the issue of the rent being too high (and other matters)... and thus my point

@Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@lxo

I am not autistic myself, but i did do an informal expierment with a doctor friend of mine... he wasnt formally my doctor, this was just to prove out the point im talking about here.

I filled out all the questions and did the tests to diagnose autism twice. The first time through I answered all the questions where I explicitly put myself in the mindset of my American social interactions, and in that context. Then I did it again but answered based on my mental state when I live in europe.

Unsuprisingly the test done in the USA context indicated I would strongly on the autistic scale. But then the result for the European test (where mental health and toxicity is far less an issue) showed I was not remotely Autistic.

To me this ultimately proved my point.

> though not formally diagnosed, I often feel the frustration you describe. our being largely insensitive to common propaganda/advertisement triggers used quite effectively for manipulation of the majority of the population makes us Cassandras, able to see through the smokescreen, but unable to break the spell that blinds others.

Thats an interesting take... I'd say what this is describing is the fact that with 90% of the population having severe mental health issues (personality disorders mostly) that they are easier to manipulate emotionally and thus propaganda will work on them more. A person (autist) who is mentally healthy and clear headed cant be as easily manipulated, so it wont work on them.

> but I don't like the us-vs-them stance I sense in your post. difficult as it is to cross the chasm that sets in because of our fundamentally different ways of reasoning and being influenced by emotions, I believe this diversity too can be very enriching to humankind. we need tolerance, inclusion, and disposition to overcome the difficulties from people at all spots in the spectrum, whether neurotypical or neurodivergent

Its not about us vs them... "They" being toxic due to their mental health issues is not somthing intended to attack them. The point here is that this can be realized and instead of wasting psychiatry efforts on treating people that are just the victims, maybe the bulk of the population will address their mental health issues and finally have a healthier society.

@ech

> I do not want to weigh in on what counts as “left” or “right”, but just what is this: “(66%) of the GOP beleive abortion should be legal under extenuating circumstances such as a dead fetus” – no! Pretty much absolutely nobody wants to ban whatever surgery is indicated for miscarriages/etc. Yikes!

I dont still have it in front me.. but only 4% of the GOP support banning abortions even when the mothers life is at risk or a miscarriage. 66% think abortion should only be allowed with extenuating circumstances... the rest think abortion should be allowed in all circumstances.

> This reminds me of something. Awhile ago, there was a poorly-worded bill in CA that righties were saying was going to legalize infanticide. When this was pointed out, it was immediately fixed of course to clarify that it didn’t do that. But this didn’t stop some people from continuing to scaremonger about CA democrats wanting to kill children or whatever. That scaremongering is absurd, and a ridiculous thing to do.

The one thing i realize is that people feel a **need* to misrepresent the facts... almost with everything they have an opinion on... its almost like any nuanced opinion is the same as being the evil guys on the other side.... its tiring and infantile.

@JonKramer @Free_Idealist @pyranose @georgetakei

@funny Weird, why did you post a video that is just black with no image?