Why are all trannies radical leftist dipshits? Anonymous
05/11/26(Mon)04:41:17
No.
43535235
[Reply]
►
File: hionejkgrtfhjtgrbfojnhiojknrtgenjhbtigrejkihterg.png (640.9 KB)
I despise how hugboxey and radically left the trans community is but want more trans friends since they can relate to my struggles. People tell me that /tttt/ is the most vile hateful place of all time. I go there and everyone here is just a hugboxing radical leftist except they say retard and make rape jokes. Why are there no right leaning or even liberal trannies for me to be friends with?
Showing all 198 replies.
>>
>>
>>43535235
>radical leftists
Unless they're actively planning to topple the government in an armed uprising and rexistribute wealth after executing all the wealthy people then they're just liberal progressives at most.
>>
>>
>>
File: Mematic_20260510_104610.jpg (257.1 KB)
>>43535235
im a leftist but I don't consider myself to be like some of these performative xitterfags that watch fucking breadtube all day, then think they're somehow a morally superior person than me. I fucking hate most other leftists cause I think they're massive pussies. I don't like rightiods at all, don't get me wrong but most leftists are fucking insufferable TikTok using faggots.
>>
>>43535235
there are plenty of liberal trannies.
there are no sane right-leaning trannies, because every major right-wing faction in the world has decided to make us into a scapegoat for all social ills. it's simple self-preservation. there are some trannies who are still libertarians, but socially they just hang out with the liberals because organized libertarian groups all sold their souls.
>>
>>43535322
>every major right-wing faction in the world has decided to make us into a scapegoat for all social ills
this is a lie.
95% of the world doesn't live in angloidistan and doesn't give af about the brainworms in your shithole of a country.
angloidistan is not the world. get that through your thick skull.
>>
>>
>>43535403
The republican party in the US doesn't gaf about trans people as long as we don't molest kids or threaten to kill people and it's the same with pretty much every right wing party in pretty much every country
>>
>>
>>43535403
The liberal party in Brazil has trannies in Congress. The SPD (the 'far right') in Czechia has trannies among its members.
There is no requirement to be "progressive on trans issues" on anyone actually. I'm a tranny and I don't like progressives on anything. I just want to be left alone, which is not an option on the left at all.
>>
>>
Why? Well because all liberals are retards, plus you can 100% find liberals in your average mainstream sneedhon community. There’s 49 chaser liberals waiting for you at all times. Right wing trannies? Yes lol good luck. The most you’ll get here is pro-gun mfers (based) but don’t start acting like ppl here are tankies. Just because some retards here are rational and realize the system is fucked which hellooo relates to being a tranny doesn’t mean this is the CCCP party for you to bitch about. Either go stealth and get cissoid rightoids to suck your clit or cry about it. No right-winger in most countries would respect a hon, and most trannies are smart enough to realize that. You either stealth and right-wing maxx just for passing points with cissoids or accept being friends with “radical leftists” who will possibly defend you even if you’re a hon. It is what it is, live with that.
>>
>>
>>43535480
liberal party in brazil defunded healthcare and shut down many local transgender healthcare initiatives. I know this because my hrt appointment had to be delayed 6 months because they were in the process of creating a trans healthcare program in my local hospital because the previous one was shut down during the PL government. They don't like trannies. They just aren't as outspoken about it because it's not election season yet, but when it is they absolutely will be. They were the ones who supported total and complete hrt and blockers ban for minors in brazil.
>>
>>
>>
There's been some serious brainrot too where even people I thought were sane became socialists over time with the most basic retard views (you know the ones that every leftist has) that if you challenge them even once they say that you must die
pure insufferable and like walking on eggshells around and they just have bad and destructive views of the world
>>
>>43535703
Yes people this person is right. I was the right ring Texas tea party Trump supporter, when I was younger and passed real well. Now that I'm not passing so well, I'm a liberal again living in California.
>>
Honestly having friends is retard 99% of the time and if you go off of “political alignment” (aka right or left) instead of specific political beliefs you’re just looking to get yourself fucked LOL. I’m a raging left winger but I’ve met many “left wing” who support government + don’t believe in guns + don’t believe in violence etc etc and I’d rather be friends with a rightoid who agrees that we shouldn’t trust presidents than a politician cocksucking leftist. To soulpass as mtf tranny some of you dumb fucks need to stop caring about politics. Real fembrain requieres you to become a lukewarm “liberal” who doesn’t care abt or stand for anything and whenever anyone questions just say you hate war and want peace and safety. Easy work. Cissoids (except for /pol/ users and retard chuds) usually don’t even care abt politics that much except if you meet them at a political party,
>>
>>
>>43536294
>...because leftism is correct? and being transgender puts you in a position where you are not made blind to that fact by your own privilege?
I'm not blind to my privilege, in fact I am very much in tune with the fact that I am blessed to live in the greatest country on earth (The United States of America) where freedom reigns, and I want others who live in darkness to experience that same blessing. That's why I am a huge advocate of invading cuba, iran, venezuela and overthrowing their tyrannical governments.
>>
>>
>>43536294
Transgenders are by far the most privileged people to ever exist in all of human history by a landslide. Leftism gives us MORE privilege than we already have. Nobody actually believes leftism is correct, you pretend to believe it is because you're a nazi and want to take away cis peoples rights so you can live an easier life than the already piss easy one you live. Sorry I have morals, faggot
>>
>>
>>43535235
The reason why is the same reason desocialised people become conspiracy theorists. Because they look for community, and adopt the views of the community as a part of joining it. Tranny communities are communist so trannies who join those communities become communist
>>
>>
File: 1750954855943746.png (1.0 MB)
>>43535235
transgenderism as a modern sociological phenomenon in the 21st century is largely a product of fabian socalist leftist institutions like universities pushing a whole paradigm package of infinite niggers, marxism/socialism and incoherent morals based on harm principle and subjectivity. it's intentionally incoherent because the movement is just supposed to be a cudgel to implement social disruption and a social revolution.
this is why you see all these things associated together. good luck finding a tranny that doesn't hate white people, hate the idea of kids or family beyond the few who wish they could be mothers (a minority) and doesn't have a fundamentally leftist understanding of everything.
leftist think tanks and the leftist paradigm pander HEAVILY to the mentally ill and infantilize them, and this is unsurprisingly appealing to the majority of trannies. it's a paradigm package to the point if you're slightly right of marx, most of this board will oust you for failing the purity test.
/tttt/ is called leftypol for a reason. it's just extreme far left sentiments taken to a suicidal extreme. leftist dialectics all fundamentally rely on the oppressor-oppressed class dynamics and the entire world is viewed through this dynamic.
it's very appealing to bpdemons who were bullied and called faggot and otherwise cannot accept that a normal world does not want to incentivize deviant behavior. you may notice that the entire ideology appeals to the exception as the main argument for most things.
likewise if you want right wing or something closer to the actual center you'll have to accept some "chud" behavior like saying nigger. for most people like you even that is too far so they retreat back to the left whether they know the modern left is almost exclusively extreme far left or not.
>>
File: 506623930_3689443571187600_7542764449132640175_n.jpg (163.3 KB)
>>43536413
first sentence and you're already lying.
>>
>>43536401
You're retarded and just believe whatever you hear without questioning it. It's the radical left that wants cis people and trans conservatives like me dead. They're the ones CONSTANTLY calling for our death while it is unbelievably rare for a conservative to call for the death or even discrimination of trans people (And before you say anything conservative and far right are 2 very different things that are not associated with one another the same way liberal and radical leftist are)
>>
>>
>>43536431
>>43536437
read nigger, read
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-USCT-Strate gy-1.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>43536345
>I'm not blind to my privilege
you are, however, obviously blind to the words i wrote down because i did not say that. i said your privilege makes you blind to the fact that leftism is correct. also, you trust the government to hand-pick the governments of other nations? and to topple foreign governments on a whim, with no cooperation with, like, local advocacy groups or non-corrupt politicians? with no consent from the american people to involve ourselves in other nations' affairs? and then it turns out that there's conveniently oil involved, or the effort is at the behest of one bb netenyahu? make this make sense to me, anon. do you just think it's, like, badass, and that gets your heart pumping because you're a deeply cucked individual in the real world?
anyway, what actual problem do you have with leftism as an ideology?
>>
>>
>>
>>43536473
>and to topple foreign governments on a whim
Uh yeah? America should be far more hawkish. We should have bombed harder and faster during the korean war so that north korea doesn't exist? And that was pretty awesome actually?
And we can literally just spend an afternoon and get rid of the cuban government and that would be pretty cool? And also make Iran free and get rid of their north korean tier government?
>anyway, what actual problem do you have with leftism as an ideology?
It's authoritarian and impoverishes nations and it's just overall awful and makes life worse, duh. It's all based on emotions and not based on reason or logic or any true real understanding of the world
>>
>>43536473
Hilarious how you just made up a bunch of shit I've never even talked about and said I believe it while claiming I didn't read what you wrote when I directly addressed it. Leftism is evil because it tells you white people are inherently bad, men are inherently bad, cis people are inherently bad, trans people should be allowed to rape as many little kids as they want, killing people for being white and cis is a good thing and if you disagree you should be verbally and/or physically raped, etc.
>>
>>
>>43536460
>plain as day in text
>on a government website
>they still act like the left is being hyperbolic
you can't engage these people in a discussion. it can be in black and white. printed. they don't care. they're willfully ignorant.
>>
>>
>>43536513
resentment towards the first world is the root of all modern leftism so that makes sense
too bad, you are losing lol. Assad lost and now global financial capitalist institutions are now operating in syria. How does that make you feel, impotent loser?
Anyway, I hope you seethe harder you impotent spiteful mutant. I'll just keep enjoying my life and all the cool shit capitalism gives because I'm not a jobless loser lol
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43536559
>I've personally experienced far more transphobia from the left than the right
they'll never believe you, nona.
nevertheless, it is true. outside of brainwormed online spaces, it's ALWAYS a leftoid who bothers me.
do keep in mind that Burger leftoids unironically assume the world is one giant New York and also assume niggers' and illegal aliens' homophobia and transphobia doesn't exist. in fact they want to kill you for noticing that it absolutely does exist and it's by far the biggest issue.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43536522
>Hilarious how you just made up a bunch of shit I've never even talked about
you said you want the us to overthrow 'tyrannical governments', i laid out the implications of that statement.
>Leftism is evil because it tells you...
it actually doesn't tell you a single one of these things. how did you possibly get it in your head that it does?
>>
>>43535235
Because
liberals:
>"Yeah I totally like tranny rights, as long as they don't look like men and start hrt after 18 and only with a doctor. What do you mean you look like a man because you started hrt after 18 and the doctor put you on a waitlist?"
Moderates:
>"I believe trannies should have equal rights, and I don't need hrt so you shouldn't have it to be equal."
Conservatives:
>"fox News told me theyre all pedos so kill all trannies. The epstien files were a hoax btw."
>>43535435
>"the moment one of you trannies shoplifts we are removing your hrt. We reserve the right to give guns to white teenage boys though."
>>
>>43535235
I'm a liberal tranny, but yeah I just don't interact with trans spaces because I get accused of being a satanic brown-child murdering poor-people hating historically illiterate brainwashed monster for simply believing that the current system is not that bad, and can be even better with a few more centuries of democratic reform...
>>
>>
>>43535235
Because being right leaning in an actionable capacity as a tranny is suicidal in most of the world.
>conservatives want to kill all trannies
>progressives want to not do that
gee I wonder who the trannies will align with
>>
>>
>>43537859
I mean it wasn't too long ago that I literally got shamed and accused of being a "bioterrorist" by a tranny I met because I said that I thought economic growth was important and governments are sensible to focus on it. I feel like like the sane person honestly...
but maybe not, I'm the one who's alienated from all sides after all.
>>
>>43537859
>Saying that "blowing up brown people we don't like using taxpayer-funded missiles" is bad makes someone a "psychotic liberal"
Have you considered that maybe you're just a dumbass chud, tranny or not?
>>
>>
>>
>>43535235
Why are you so desperate to stay retarded?
>>43535435
topkek
>I want others who live in darkness to experience that same blessing. That's why I am a huge advocate of invading cuba, iran, venezuela and overthrowing their tyrannical governments.
Again, why are you so desperate to stay retarded? You can see the effects of the US spreading “freedom” in *the 21st century alone* on multiple countries in the Middle East and Africa that you would dismiss as shitholes “in darkness”
>>
>>
>>43538603
>You can see the effects of the US spreading “freedom” in *the 21st century alone* on multiple countries in the Middle East and Africa that you would dismiss as shitholes “in darkness”
nta but the effects are in fact amazing. UAE of today is a livable place compared to before. Jordan (formerly Transjordan) too. Kenya same.
you just don't travel, are very very young and are a terminally shut in weirdo (like all leftists).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43538458
>>43538488
idk what you are on about. Liberals sound psychotic when they say the system is working and like things are going to be better in a century because obviously things are getting worse. You need to increasingly fuck around with the data and statistics to paint a rosy picture.
>>
>>43538700
In the 21st century
Afghanistan is worse
Iraq is worse
Libya is worse
Prior to that
Iran is worse
And the UAE is actually a shithole for anyone who isn’t a noble or a wealthy foreigner, this quite well known and I have indeed been there
>>
>>
>>
>>43539329
>Afghanistan is worse
>Iraq is worse
False.
>Libya is worse
True.
>Iran is worse
Thank russia for that 'cause they supported the pisslamic revolution.
>And the UAE is actually a shithole for anyone who isn’t a noble or a wealthy foreigner
just stop being poor.
places should be nice for rich and high-achieving people, not for subhumans. poverty is a personal fault in 2026.
>>
>>43539209
>>43539339
Still didn't happen.
Accurately writing your sex in your passport doesn't mean your passport got revoked.
Being asked to go to the bathroom that matches reality isn't being banned from bathrooms.
And HRT literally isn't banned no matter how much you screech about it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43539255
You should study history, I don't mean that in a snide dismissive way, but rather it puts things into context.
Each generation had their hardships, but broadly speaking everything since the proliferation of liberalism has been getting better, significantly better in fact, only 100 years ago and you'd like be drafted to fight in WW1, and then return to a ruined city where you'd be lucky to sleep on a flea infested mattress and drink clean water. 200 years back and you'd break your back at 30 farming wheat or some shit, you'd also be illiterate probably experience a famine that makes what happened in Gaza look like a diet.
I'm certain that people in 100 years time will be mad that some have it better, but every single one of them will have it better than we do today by a massive amount, and I'm also certain that there will be moments that they feel as if everything is slipping back into the feudal ages and that liberalism (or whatever technology accelerated liberalism derivative they end up embracing) has failed.
>>
>>43539255
>>43540922
A simple way to observe this is by looking at the numbers of hours worked on average for each country. People complain more than ever about being wage slaves despite working less than any other generation in history except paleolithic tribes.
Is liberalism perfect? Obviously not, but it's pretty incredible that it works so well given how radically unnatural our way of living is compared to the circumstances we evolved under. That's not to say we should become complacent, but rather we should be patient and not destroy everything with another risky (and quite frankly, impossible, revolution)
>>
>>43540922
Historical cherry picking is just making liberalism look worse since world war i and ii are well after the proliferation of liberalism already started. In fact, those wars were in response to crisis of liberalism and now we are getting ready for a third entry in global wars of liberal progress of gradual improvements. I really shouldn't have to study history to see that things are getting better but when I do study history it only becomes more obvious that things are getting worse in fact.
>>
>>43540986
Where is the data on people working less? This is what I mean by manipulating data and statitstics, by playing around with what counts as work you can easily make it look like things are getting better but in practice hardly anyone has time everyone is always busy with bullshit work or forms of uncompensated labor that dont count as "work" on the liberal spreadsheet but still need to get done for things to keep running.
>>
>>43535235
Because most of the trannies nowadays are retarded agp faggots who have transitioned not because of a mental condition called “gender dysphoria„, but because they're easily influenced weirdos that was poisoned by jews, and there are nobody to tell them that this is not ok to be a perv faketran crossdresser.
I'm nazitroon myself and it makes my life worse, even though I pass and could fit into society and be successful in romantic life if I were a normie or at least leftist/libtard
>>
File: 1747957430436637.png (82.4 KB)
>>43541016
ww2 and ww1 are the absolute worst things that happened in europe during the 20th century nona, I could've easily picked the greatest technological, economic or medicinal advancements of each century since liberalism instead if I really wanted to cherry pick, and the scale of and destruction of ww2 and ww1 can't be blamed on purely on liberalism, would it not have been even worse under feudalism instead? Remember that 40-70 mil people died under Maoism from famine alone
>>43541040
I mean, at some point you have to trust what data we do have, or at the very least provide a clean refutation, otherwise you're just denying evidence that conflicts with your preset world view. Unions literally used to protest for 8/8/8 as if it were an idyllic ideal and everyone knows about the horrors of child labour, even pic related which is a very short snapshot paints a wonderful picture of just how far we've come in under a single lifetime.
And guess what? Plenty of offices are experimenting with 4 day work weeks all over Europe, many are finding that it results in much greater efficiency than 5 day work weeks
>>
>>43541040
https://ourworldindata.org/working-more-than-ever
forgot to link
>>
>>43539515
>Accurately writing your sex in your passport doesn't mean your passport got revoked.
I have a vagina. I can't get a new passport once my current one expires, because they don't accept revised birth certificates anymore. The sex on my birth certificate was updated to accurately say female, and the originals were destroyed. I can't renew my passport unless I have a document that doesn't exist anymore.
>Being asked to go to the bathroom that matches reality isn't being banned from bathrooms.
Reality is that I have a vagina and have had lower testosterone levels than cis women for a decade. Why would I ever use the men's bathroom?
>And HRT literally isn't banned no matter how much you screech about it.
It was banned on Medicaid and through many government insurances, and many health organizations have fully stopped providing it already.
>>
>>43541463
>I have a vagina
okay, I agree in your case there should be accommodations.
>It was banned on Medicaid and through many government insurances
I fully support this. Trooning should be 100% private and exactly zero taxpayer money should support any of this. Live and let live. Do your thing, but on your own dime.
>>
>>43542125
>Trooning should be 100% private and exactly zero taxpayer money should support any of this.
Why though? The same should be done for any other illness if that's what you truly believe. Also, government healthcare is funded the same way any other healthcare is, it's a subtraction from the wages someone would've otherwise earned. Why the hell should any tranny have to pay into a healthcare system that doesn't even provide for their own needs?
>>
>>
File: qoyh8l64tujg1.jpg (61.7 KB)
>>43540986
>t.
>>
>>43542434
>The same should be done for any other illness if that's what you truly believe
yes, actually. I find the whole concept of stealing from people to support a state bureaucracy that mostly kills people to be immoral. reminder that the 2nd or 3rd most common cause of death is murder committed by doctors and then covered up under the coding "medical errors".
>Why the hell should any tranny have to pay into a healthcare system that doesn't even provide for their own needs?
I agree, she shouldn't. Nor should anyone else. The very idea is retarded. Which is why I don't pay into any of that shit. I have a savings account that grew nicely over the years that allows me to pay for even the most complicated interventions in any private hospital in europe. That is my "health insurance".
>government healthcare is funded the same way any other healthcare is, it's a subtraction from the wages someone would've otherwise earned
yes, and that is immoral. And I fought tooth and nail against that in my country for the right not to pay into that shit. I reserve my right not to give money for free to doctors or to subsidize anyone else's choices. You should too.
>>
>>43542511
>reminder that the 2nd or 3rd most common cause of death is murder committed by doctors and then covered up under the coding "medical errors".
its always interesting to get a glimpse into the alternate realities people have to develop for themselves in order to hold onto rightoid beliefs
>>
>>
>>43542550
>alternate realities
so you're saying the CDC is lying or you genuinely think doctors (the profession with the highest amount of psychopaths, even higher than CEOs) don't kill people? which part of the reality are you denying, flat-earth anon?
>>
>>
>>
>>43542933
in-group outgroup distinction.
killing my own people using my money is immoral and don't want to give money to such an institution.
killing the enemy is perfectly moral and I do support such an institution.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: 1751220900932988.png (445.3 KB)
>>43535260
The most radical leftist politician in the US wants to tax the rich and has some social democratic policies.
>>43543094
Why do you prefer the party that would celebrate your murder/suicide?
>>43543883
Which politician in the US supports America having a violent revolution?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43544307
So true, it’s crazy how more people don’t see that both sides are the same and that the TRUE way to fix society is to be a third way post-monarchist neo-anarcho crypto capitalistic feudalist government.
>>
>>43544342
So who did you vote for in 2024 and why?
>inb4 didn't vote
Good
>>43544346
Oh, just name for me 3 and the quotes of them saying just that.
>>43544362
Good one
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: 1767797954085912.jpg (78.2 KB)
>>43535235
As someone who was pretty active in far-right online spaces up until like 2022 and still holds mostly the same beliefs/philosophy, if you don't support temporary libtard victory for troonpolitik reasons then you're a retard.
The current GOP is composed of 90IQ zioboomer slopulists and mulatto tradcucks. If you are truly right wing, and thus value self-preservation, then you should want them to lose.
>>43535435
You are genuinely delusional if you still believe that this is true in 2026
>>43535904
If you believe that medical transitioning is something that minors need to be protected from as if it were sex, then that would mean:
>A.
You believe that medical transitioning is just a sex thing, which by following your own logic would make you yourself a transvestic-AGP fetishist who transitioned to get off.
>B. (more likely imo)
You are a lateshit bitterhon with sour grapes. Sucks to be you, but that doesn't mean you get to force others to suffer.
>>43536431
For years now it's been quite common to see people openly calling for TTD, and those people actually tend to be way less functionally evil than the ones advocating for the government to forcibly """help""" trannies.
>>43536730
Obviously trannies should have access to hrt before they turn 18, why shouldn't they?
>>43538538
Julius Evola disagrees with you btw
>>43538587
There is no universal good guy squad, and there never will be.
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: maxresdefault-6.jpg (93.9 KB)
>>43546121
Death to minorities
And my balls
Don't call me he
I'm a real girl
Trans Nazi
Trans Nazi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43536473
>anyway, what actual problem do you have with leftism as an ideology?
Depends on what you mean by leftism.
My problem with Marxism is that the labor theory of value, and by extension the entire premise of class struggle, is wrong.
My problem with liberalism is that it is infected by identity politics and cares more about shit like racial equity than protecting property rights.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43547109
>Depends on what you mean by leftism.
for me it is about minimizing suffering. this requires a complete overhaul and/or dismantling of many of the systems that govern our world. to me, a human rights centric, collectivist, anti-capitalist framework (i am not well read enough to confidently ascribe to any particular alternative, i only know that what is in place is evil) is the clear approach to this. how would you define your ideology, out of curiosity?
>>43547126
>I'm not a centrist I'm a liberal.
anon...
>>43547224
>Yes country's can belong to racial groups
i mean i hate to ask but... says who? what does that even mean? it's not ingrained into the fabric of reality that a certain portion of the earth's landmass is the birthright of a certain group of people for all eternity.
>>
>>43547448
>how would you define your ideology, out of curiosity?
Right wing libertarian. I want to maximize people's personal freedoms and power to live their lives the way they want so long as it doesn't violate the NAP. I think this would naturally result in less suffering though I would hesitate to say I want to minimize suffering because suffering is ultimately an internal, subjective thing. Someone might "suffer" from experiencing envy, for instance, and that's not something I would have an interest in minimizing.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43549878
it was wrong for me. glad I no longer rep.
it's retarded to think i should be in favor of repressive fiscal burden or for the destruction of my nation just because I sometimes wear dresses, take hrt and saving up for surgeries.
>>
File: Screenshot_20260512_161054_Firefox.png (49.3 KB)
>>43535235
gee anon, idk why so many trannies are left-wing
>>
>>43535235
I'm a liberal tranny. I'm here, where else would I be?
As always radicals are a extremely vocal minority and getting riled up over that all goes fundamentally against liberal beliefs.
Like, sure, move to China but uhm, I'd rather defend and 'enjoy' the last few broken pieces of liberal European policy that haven't been policed to hell and back.
>>
>>
>>
>>43555200
nta but disabled people suffer a lot more under socialism. The very concept of disability privileges is a capitalist one. Socialist republics treated disabled people with a gulag or indifference.
there is no such thing as life without suffering for anyone. nobody owes you anything. this is true regardless of political system. what you want is privileges for the crippled at the expense of the strong. that is straight up immoral like any other privilege funded by theft/taxation.
>>
>>
>>43555200
If someone is disabled to the point that they are incapable of being productive then at least their loved ones would keep more of their wealth to provide for them. Likewise charitable people would keep more of their wealth to direct to such causes. This certainly wouldn't ensure that disabled people don't suffer but neither does authoritarianism.
>>
>>43555229
? that's not an answer to the question.
>there is no such thing as life without suffering for anyone.
i know, but that anon said they thought libertarianism would "naturally result in less suffering" so i was wondering how it would naturally result in less suffering for the disabled.
>what you want is privileges for the crippled at the expense of the strong. that is straight up immoral like any other privilege funded by theft/taxation.
we are all coerced one way or another. you are coerced into provisioning food by your body via hunger, and you are coerced into laboring for others in order to acquire that food. why does it suddenly become immoral when someone is 'coerced' into taking care of someone who can't care for themself? (of course the people caring for the disabled aren't coerced, they signed up for the job, but i guess we're saying the people who farm the food that the disabled carers eat are unfairly propping them up or whatever. well, let's not kid ourselves, we're saying the people who own the farm are being coerced into giving the food from their farm to people who care for the disabled people rather than the disabled person coughing up so their carer can buy the food, but lets not be pedants.)
we live in a scarce world, coercion is necessary one way or another. why is a system in which those who can't care for themselves die on the street more fair than a system where people are coerced into contributing a portion of the fruits of their labor to them? i don't think the disabled person would find that very fair. why does the 'privilege' of the disabled person in this instance matter more than the privilege able-bodied people have by circumstance of their birth?
>>
>>43555606
>then at least their loved ones would keep more of their wealth to provide for them.
not all disabled people have loved ones or loved ones who are willing to provide for them.
>Likewise charitable people would keep more of their wealth to direct to such causes.
why? are charitable people meeting the needs of the disabled today? do you think that would magically change under libertarianism?
>This certainly wouldn't ensure that disabled people don't suffer but neither does authoritarianism.
just because you call making people take care of the disabled 'authoritarian' doesn't mean that that policy can't exist without an evil authoritarian government attached to it. in fact it is literally the policy of many real countries right now, would you call all those countries authoritarian? do you think the needs of the disabled would be better met under libertarianism than it is under those countries' governments?
>>
>>43556047
>coercion is necessary one way or another
So you are evil. This is textbook evil thinking. I would gladly shoot you in the head if you were anywhere near my property. People like you are the enemy by default.
Your definition of "fairness" is automatically against me, my family and my community. Your existence is a threat to me. That simple.
>>
>>43556120
anon, you are born coerced. you were coerced into sucking your mother's teet and will continue to be coerced every single day for the rest of your life. it is simply the unfortunate nature of our existence, and by making yourself blind to it you only contribute to the ongoing misery of our species.
>>
>>43555200
no system currently ensures that disabled people don't suffer, so that's not uniquely a mark against libertarianism
i'm a leftist but let's be reasonable here, this is a crazy high bar you're setting that is aspirational, not a baseline expectation, unfortunately
>>
>>43556103
>do you think the needs of the disabled would be better met under libertarianism than it is under those countries' governments?
I think the needs of many disabled people would be better met under libertarianism but the needs of a few would be woefully unmet. So it depends on what kind of utilitarian you are.
>>
>>
>>43556169
>no system currently ensures that disabled people don't suffer, so that's not uniquely a mark against libertarianism
yes anon, i am aware no system will have a 100% success rate... obviously. i am speaking on a comparative basis, and asking how libertarianism generally ensures it much like how a social program will attempt to ensure it by guaranteeing certain benefits for the disabled.
>>
>>43556188
can you elaborate on that? how would many have their needs better met and what would that look like for them, and what sorts of people's needs would be woefully unmet? what does the moral calculus look like that justifies the anguish of those individuals for the benefit of the others, in your mind?
>>
File: the-fire-rises-tfr (1).gif (2.9 MB)
you aren't alone anon
I'm completely burnt out by activist politics on the left.
I still have the same values but now that I actually have a job within the state security apparatus my perspective on what actual governance and practice looks like has greatly changed. it's supremely easy to criticize from the sidelines, and a much different question to see your program actually carried out, just look at MAGA as a recent example.
the American left is so completely hollowed out and paralyzed by identity politics that it is basically a waste of time to be anything more radical than a social democrat.
Any situation where the radical left would come to power would necessarily entail a vacuum of power that would preclude the states monopoly on the legitimate use of force (that is, a constitutional right to due process), and the integrity of various necessary institutions like the medical and sanitation systems. No revolution is worth seeing your countrymen die from preventable communicable disease caused by political dysfunction.
there is a process for change. immature and unserious people may not like it, but it is infinitely better for our country than the alternative
>>
>>43556255
>how would many have their needs better met and what would that look like for them
Loved ones retaining more of their earnings plus cheaper goods and services from the greater economic efficiency would result in an overall more comfortable life for most disabled people.
>what sorts of people's needs would be woefully unmet?
Disabled people who are abandoned by their family and lack access to charities would basically just be left to starve.
>what does the moral calculus look like that justifies the anguish of those individuals for the benefit of the others, in your mind?
Like I said, my morals are based on maximizing personal freedoms, not minimizing suffering. I think antinatalism and even elifism are the logical conclusion to suffering minimizing morality.
>>
>>43556399
>Loved ones retaining more of their earnings plus cheaper goods and services from the greater economic efficiency would result in an overall more comfortable life for most disabled people.
so people with families who support them get more/better everyday commodities... in theory. i mean, that's nice i guess? i'm not sure it's nice enough to justify letting people starve to death either? i guess that's woke of me.
>my morals are based on maximizing personal freedoms
why? none of us are free, the disabled person who can't take care of themself certainly isn't free. they're just constrained by their body, and you're talking about being constrained by the state. why is one acceptable but not the other?
>I think antinatalism and even elifism are the logical conclusion to suffering minimizing morality.
i actually agree, but both are impractical because you can't stop everyone else from making babies and you can't kill everyone, so if you try to act them out you're just going to end up with a world where the people who cared about minimizing suffering are dead and the people who wanted to live and make babies consequences be damned are the only ones remaining.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43556722
who said i have axiomatic values? my thinking is as simple as "i have experienced suffering and i don't like it." i don't think it's like 'objectively' bad, i don't think that's a meaningful concept, but in my experience it sucks and i wish it didn't exist. i don't see how you could even arrive at any other way of thinking without it being brainwashed into you. the word 'value' has no connection to material reality, it is not a quality something can objectively possess. suffering, on the other hand, is actually a real thing we experience, so i think it's a slightly better basis for conducting ourselves.
>>
>>
>>
>>43557110
>I don't like suffering
>in fact I dislike it so much that I would kill every living thing in the universe to stop suffering
>huh? no of course I don't ascribe negative value to suffering
I don't know man, I have no idea what you're trying to say.
>>
>>43557299
you can't get an ought from an is. my ought is minimizing a real quantity that we are all familiar with and all dislike because it sucks. your ought is maximizing a quantity that is completely imaginary because it feels right in your tender baby heart. you are so devoted to this imaginary concept that you think a perfectly moral world is one where people would be allowed to starve to death. your worldview makes no sense and is dependent on a complete fiction. mine is dependent on actual feelings felt by actual people who have to actually experience those feelings. i don't know how i can make this make any more sense for you anon.
>>
>>43535235
I believe in strong communities and extended (not nuclear) families, closed borders, and ethnic nationalism, but I hate Christards, I'm a tranny, and a big supporter of tech (especially medical and biotech) development. There's basically no party anywhere that represents my beliefs because those that support the first half tend to hate some or all of the second half. Most of the ones that support the first half are liars too. So what am I to do? Logically, the first thing I should do is support me and mine, my cohort, and as a a tranny with an unsupportive family the closest level of cohorts happen to just be my friends and other trannies. Self-interest is a circle radiating outwards from the self. So to protect my cohort, I would logically need to prioritize whatever group will protect my ability to transition and live as a tranny. In the US, this is the liberal party, as awful as they are otherwise.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43557542
i'm not the one who believes it exists! if you think humans have intrinsic value the burden of defining that term falls on you. i am operating on my best guess at what you mean by that word in that context, but you're the one who said it so enlighten me.
>>
>>
>>43557627
Sure, so to value something means to desire more or less of that thing.
I positively value human life -> I want more human life to exist.
I negatively value aggression -> I want people to be less aggressive.
You negatively value suffering -> you want less suffering to happen.
Both human life and aggression are real things, I have experienced both as well as suffering.
>>
>>
>>43557728
Sure I understand. My reasoning is that there is a lot of suffering that I am indifferent to. Like if an mtf sees another mtf that passes better and they suffer from the envy and dysphoria they feel, or if a morbidly obese man's body starts to fail, I don't care. But if the suffering is the result of aggression, like if someone is kidnapped and tortured, then I put immense negative value on it.
Then I realized that I dislike aggression even if the victim doesn't suffer. There is a woman, Jo Cameron, who doesn't feel physical or emotional pain. I would not want someone to kidnap and torture her even if she didn't suffer.
>>
>>
>>
>>43557865
I mean I started from a perspective that I negatively valued suffering caused by aggression(the cause of the suffering being the distinguishing variable rather than who is experiencing it), but then I realized that it was the aggression itself that I negatively valued.
>>
>>43557894
can you at least agree that aggression is arbitrary? do you have any basis for upholding this arbitrary value other than your personal distaste for it? reducing suffering isn't about what i personally prefer, it is about a fundamental thing all sentient beings prefer: we are all constantly trying to minimize our own suffering and maximize our own pleasure, like that's literally just what we're engineered to do.
>>
>>43558122
No I disagree. I appreciate a lot of my suffering. If I could take a pill that would prevent me from ever suffering I would reject it. For example, if my brother were to die I would not want to be robbed of suffering his death.
Now if I could prevent myself from ever being aggressed upon, I would do that.
>>
>>
>>43559296
>if my brother were to die I would not want to be robbed of suffering his death.
but anon that's only because you get emotional fulfillment (pleasure) out of that grieving process. we will only tolerate suffering when greater pleasure is promised. if you did not grieve you would feel empty, the thought of which is more painful to you than grieving. plus the idea of not grieving the death of a loved one feels gross and inhuman to us.
>>
>>43559346
>if you did not grieve you would feel empty, the thought of which is more painful to you than grieving
The pill in this hypothetical would prevent feeling such emptiness, I still would not take it. I also would not take a pill that made me feel maximum happiness, pleasure, and fulfillment all the time.
>>
>>43559324
it absolutely is a radical idea (and evil and immoral) to rob people to then "give" anything to other people.
if you're not my relative or my husband, I owe you exactly jack shit. get to work and pay for your own healthcare, you lazy fuck.