The Realist Left

socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.fi/2016/09/a-wikipedia-entry-for-realist-left.html

(1) the Realist Left supports full employment, Keynesian macroeconomic policies and management of our economies, a high-wage economy, industrial policy, managed trade in the national interest, a humane welfare state, and an end to offshoring of manufacturing and service jobs to the Third World.

(2) Realist Left politics supports reasonable and sensible civil and equity women’s rights and gay rights, but not cultural leftist identity politics or endless cults of victimology, and the bizarre conspiracy theories that blame all our problems on the capitalist, white-male, heterosexual patriarchy and universal “institutional racism.”

(3) the Realist Left is critical of Third Wave Feminism.

(4) the Realist Left rejects extreme social constructivism and the “blank slate” view of human beings.

(5) the Realist Left defends free speech and freedom of expression from cultural leftist and politically correct witch hunts and restrictions.

(6) the Realist Left is anti-imperialist and largely
non-interventionist on foreign policy, but not isolationist.

(7) the Realist Left is pro-nuclear family and – at the very least – open to serious and rational discussion of the breakdown of the nuclear family in the Western world, and what harm this may have done to our societies, but with humane policies free from right-wing viciousness or free market economics.

(8) the Realist Left recognises that most people have a normal and natural wish to preserve their nations as homelands for their majority culture and their people. Low-level immigration and reasonable refugee quotas are fine, as long as minorities actually do remain a minority of the population, and people who wish to stay assimilate and do not bring hostile and incompatible cultures.

(9) the Realist Left opposes regressive and illiberal Islamism, and promotes the assimilation of immigrants in the West.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=6meqOKGTZkE
twitter.com/AnonBabble

wow okay, this sounds reasonable almost makes me not want to kill every negroe on the street

No. Just because Skype changed their blue color to red it doesn't make them a better company. Fuck off.

I mean, I'd give it a listen. My problem with the left is a lack of rationality and senseless hand outs. I'd love to have these as the opposition. Maybe a couple of years off after the SJW movement is killed and laid to rest.

Here's a good 3 minute video describing how identity politics is a scheme to turn the left into controlled opposition.
youtube.com/watch?v=6meqOKGTZkE

I could be convinced to support this.

The problem is that we need a unified front against the globalists first before we can have a decent opposition movement.

Is this sort of ideology not what brought effective utopia to Scandinavia in the 20th century? You guys literally had perfect societies until the thought police came in and called anyone who didn't want to import millions of foreigners an irrational bigot

Would it work in practice, though?

>the Realist Left
I'm pretty sure that this is what centrism is about.

So... why do they call themselves Left Wing?

What part of any of that requires Big Government?

in 2016 these are all conservative positions

Explain how this is a leftist position at all?

Seems like they are just afraid to come to the correct side of the spectrum

Sounds like classic socialist left from the twenties.

> Wikipedia
You're retarded. Your idea is ripe for co-option to begin with, but you've set out to allo, allow, the wikipedians to define you.

They will define you to be whatever they please, you will be co-opted, ruined and absorbed back into the regressive left.

You're trying to hold on to your principles while keeping the label "left". I admire the principles, but a label is just a tool to control you.

You haven't broken free. Your mind is still trapped in the system.

>reasonable and sensible civil and equity women’s rights and gay rights
>but not cultural leftist identity politics
There is no difference

What about muh guns?

Exactly.
See
>(1) the Realist Left supports full employment, Keynesian macroeconomic policies and management of our economies, a high-wage economy, industrial policy, managed trade in the national interest, a humane welfare state, and an end to offshoring of manufacturing and service jobs to the Third World.

Yes. Before the insane immigration policies the Nordic Social Democrats built the most succesful societies on earth.

Women are already equal and gays don't deserve rights.

There's a difference between saying "anyone can apply for this position" and forcing companies to fill a quota, for instance.

>Maybe a couple of years off after the SJW movement is killed and laid to rest.
>*thrown from a helicopter

why should the gays get married?

>women's rights
you can reject all the manipulative behaviour you want, but giving women a say inevitably causes it to come back

...

>Implying Capitalism isn't the best system but was still corrupted by the kikes with the banks.

Banks would get corrupted anyway, because temptation of making money from air is to great.

>Implying that banks are required for a healthy capitalist economy instead of the jew created cancer that they are.

Fuck that shit, full communism

If not for "bad" people even socialism would work.
That's why you have to design your system around idiots and exploitation.
Or just remove said people.

Oh. A centrally planned economy. Oh dear.

While I applaud this Realist Left for not being completely insane like the regular left, they might want to investigate countries that have tried centrally planned economies. Venezuela being a recent example. There's a good reason why we moved away from that.

Ther other problem with Big Governments is that they give birth to Global Corporations as a sort of disaterous byproduct. In essence they create their own demise.

Other than that, then, yeah, it's an okay position to aim for.

>reasonable and sensible

that means literally nothing in terms of law

His special brand of socialism hasn't been tried yet.
But you can trust him because he disagrees with feminists.

I think the main issue with all these left/right splinter groups is that the left/right dichotomy doesn't make any sense post communism getting btfo in the cold war.

If you look at the policies that characterise the globalist orthodoxy in the western world its a mixture of things the right wing people like, and things they hate, and the same for the left.

So idiots mark themselves out as left and right and squabble over the minutae that each of them doesn't like, making it seem like there is an actual debate and potential for change going on.

All the while rich cunts (or if pol would prefer (((rich cunts)))) make out like bandits.

It was tried out in Nordic countries, but it the soc dem parties did a mistake by thinking its compatible with the current system of immigraiton.

Basically the same old commie bs with a new name.

>the Realist Left
kek good goyim didn't read btw

Then you would have to remove leftists in the first but people living in prosperity grow obvious about dangers around them.

Economic left = wealth must be redistributed to the needy
Economic right = wealth should gravitate to the most worthy
Social left = removal of hierarchy
Social right = preservation of hierarchy

This is why the progressive left is actually socially right. They just use out-group preference instead of in-group preference.

Oblivious. Dangit.

that's just Old School Commies

we still have a party like that here

Commies are Marxist, not Keynesian.