The opposite of right...
- Thread starter Stripe
- Start date
Kit the Coyote
New member
Sorry, couldn't help this given your avatar.
Of course, the statement itself is an absolute which is ironic.
Of course, the statement itself is an absolute which is ironic.
Left as a direction isn't the opposite of right as a direction. If you want to illustrate that make a mark on paper then make a mark slightly to the left of that one. It's different, but it isn't opposite. By the time that mark is moved to where it would be the opposite of the first mark it ceases to be one reasonably explained by using the term.
And no one walking up to the mark will know which is which without a context.
The opposite of right as an empirically verifiable proposition would be wrong. Outside of that, subjectively speaking, it's back to the need for a fixed mark and where you stand in relation to it.
So overall your opening statement is more false than true taken broadly, and insufficiently fleshed to be meaningful taken otherwise.
When used to denote objective truth "too" doesn't really enter into it. When used otherwise it only expresses bias, not truth.
One of the dangerous ways extremists normalize their behavior is by attempting to convince others that their mentality either is or should be the norm, making any opposing thought inherently wrong and potentially dangerous without supporting the wrongness or danger objectively. It's the problem of conflating the subjective with the objective. One great way to get people to do that is by making sure they remain uneducated by opposing public education, calling it a public evil of some sort.
To sum, when the word right is used to underscore or shorthand objectively verifiable, empirically established truth it's one thing. When it's used to indicate direction it's another. And when it is used to conflate subjective value with empirical truth it's something else again.
So, depending on the usage and the circumstance, right can mean a number of things. It can't, however, mean all of them at the same time.
There, I just took the ridiculous seriously, which is only arguably right.
A Dark and Constant Rage: 25 Years of Right-Wing Terrorism in the United States
In March 2017, a white supremacist from Maryland, James Harris Jackson, traveled to New York City with the alleged intention of launching a series of violent attacks on black men to discourage white women from having relationships with black men. After several days, Jackson chose his first victim, a 66-year old black homeless man, Timothy Caughman. Jackson later allegedly admitted that he had stabbed Caughman with a small sword he had brought with him, describing the murder as a “practice run.”
To illustrate the threat of right-wing terrorism in the United States, the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism has compiled a list of 150 right-wing terrorist acts, attempted acts, plots and conspiracies from the past 25 years (1993-2017). These include terrorist incidents from a wide variety of white supremacists, from neo-Nazis to Klansmen to racist skinheads, as well as incidents connected to anti-government extremists such as militia groups, sovereign citizens and tax protesters. The list also includes incidents of anti-abortion terror as well as from other, smaller right-wing extremist movements...There are, after all, hundreds of thousands of adherents of right-wing extremist movements in the United States and all such movements have some degree of association with criminal activity. No one should think, therefore, that the incidents listed here represent the breadth of right-wing violence in the U.S. But, as acts of terrorism, they do show right-wing movements at their most vicious and ambitious.
...
The anti-government extremists, who are often collectively termed the “Patriot” movement, consist primarily of adherents of the tax protest movement, the sovereign citizen movement, and the militia movement (with the latter including Oath Keepers and Three Percenters). Though the “Patriot” movement goes back to the mid-1960s, it was in the mid-1990s that it really came into its own in terms of becoming a major domestic terrorist threat, one that equaled the threat posed by white supremacists. Oklahoma City bombers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were dedicated adherents of the “Patriot” movement and their 1995 attack on the Murrah Federal Building gave notice that anti-government extremists now posed a major threat.
It is common for the media and others to assume that anti-government extremists are also mostly white supremacists, but this is not the case. Though there is some overlap between the two spheres, the main anti-government extremist movements direct their anger at the government and there have always been people of color in these movements.
Indeed, the sovereign citizen movement in particular has unfortunately seen particularly strong growth within the African-American community in recent years. Two of the sovereign-citizen related incidents on this list, the LaPlace, Louisiana, shootings in 2012 and the Columbus, Ohio, bomb-making attempt in 2016, involved African-Americans. Two incidents not included on this list involved extremists who were primarily black nationalists but who had secondary sovereign citizen affiliations: the 2014 plot by two men to blow up the Gateway Arch and kill law enforcement officials in St. Louis, Missouri, and the 2016 deadly ambush killings of three police officers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
https://www.adl.org/education/resou...ears-of-right-wing-terrorism-in-united-states
In March 2017, a white supremacist from Maryland, James Harris Jackson, traveled to New York City with the alleged intention of launching a series of violent attacks on black men to discourage white women from having relationships with black men. After several days, Jackson chose his first victim, a 66-year old black homeless man, Timothy Caughman. Jackson later allegedly admitted that he had stabbed Caughman with a small sword he had brought with him, describing the murder as a “practice run.”
To illustrate the threat of right-wing terrorism in the United States, the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism has compiled a list of 150 right-wing terrorist acts, attempted acts, plots and conspiracies from the past 25 years (1993-2017). These include terrorist incidents from a wide variety of white supremacists, from neo-Nazis to Klansmen to racist skinheads, as well as incidents connected to anti-government extremists such as militia groups, sovereign citizens and tax protesters. The list also includes incidents of anti-abortion terror as well as from other, smaller right-wing extremist movements...There are, after all, hundreds of thousands of adherents of right-wing extremist movements in the United States and all such movements have some degree of association with criminal activity. No one should think, therefore, that the incidents listed here represent the breadth of right-wing violence in the U.S. But, as acts of terrorism, they do show right-wing movements at their most vicious and ambitious.
...
The anti-government extremists, who are often collectively termed the “Patriot” movement, consist primarily of adherents of the tax protest movement, the sovereign citizen movement, and the militia movement (with the latter including Oath Keepers and Three Percenters). Though the “Patriot” movement goes back to the mid-1960s, it was in the mid-1990s that it really came into its own in terms of becoming a major domestic terrorist threat, one that equaled the threat posed by white supremacists. Oklahoma City bombers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were dedicated adherents of the “Patriot” movement and their 1995 attack on the Murrah Federal Building gave notice that anti-government extremists now posed a major threat.
It is common for the media and others to assume that anti-government extremists are also mostly white supremacists, but this is not the case. Though there is some overlap between the two spheres, the main anti-government extremist movements direct their anger at the government and there have always been people of color in these movements.
Indeed, the sovereign citizen movement in particular has unfortunately seen particularly strong growth within the African-American community in recent years. Two of the sovereign-citizen related incidents on this list, the LaPlace, Louisiana, shootings in 2012 and the Columbus, Ohio, bomb-making attempt in 2016, involved African-Americans. Two incidents not included on this list involved extremists who were primarily black nationalists but who had secondary sovereign citizen affiliations: the 2014 plot by two men to blow up the Gateway Arch and kill law enforcement officials in St. Louis, Missouri, and the 2016 deadly ambush killings of three police officers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
https://www.adl.org/education/resou...ears-of-right-wing-terrorism-in-united-states
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Right. :chuckle:
Because they're homonyms. Homographs and homophones, spelled the same and sounds the same, but different words. Like identical twins that are nonetheless distinct and different people from each other.
Not when the 'right' we're talking about is the one that opposes 'wrong,' correct.
While this 'right' is the one opposed to 'left,' it is arguably another homonym, because of its political context here.
I have lost almost all use for dividing politics between 'left' and 'right,' since there's so much confusion about the differences.
Are you implying something sinister? Apparently, Stipe's first language isn't English, so it's an easy mistake for him to make.
The two-axis classification with "left/right" and "authoritarian/libertarian" scales, seems to work much better.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Not at all.
I've pretty much abandoned these too. When I'm referring to someone who disagrees with my politics, I say 'Democrat.' Democrats are libertarians on some matters while Republicans aren't on some matters. In some matters, I'm libertarian, and in others I'm decidedly not. And both Democrats and Republicans can be authoritarians in different matters also. It's a question of what we should be authoritarian on, and what we shouldn't be.
Can never be "too" right, or "a right wing extremist," ay?
Mark 7:1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. 7:2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. 7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 7:4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables. 7:5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Its called Legalism.
Think I'll pass - on your "extreme."
:chuckle:
:rotfl:
It sure is. Like wrong is the opposite of right.
Or drive down the road till you reach an intersection. The two roads are different, in opposite directions.
That's what you specified, wasn't it?
One will be on the right and the other will be — wait for it — on the left.
And yet, whenever there are two marks, there is always a reference point to tell right from wrong.
Nope. The opposite of right is both left and wrong.
I think that's what I said. I think. :chuckle:
Should this be a normal response?
:rotfl:
How on Earth is an education denied if there is no public education? And who is it wanting public education ended? You can send your kids to whoever you like, just don't expect me to pay for it.
That's why it can have two opposites. :chuckle:
There, I just took the ridiculous seriously.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
This is exactly the sort of nonsense the left presents.
How on Earth is murder right?
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
:thumb:
Politics is a necessary evil.
I prefer to stick to what is right (as opposed to what is wrong).
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Nope.
Stipe is an outpatient at the Dihua clinic for the completely wrong.
Rather, as a point of reference to a third position right and left can signify a choice of opposites, but the terms are not opposing in their nature, which is why if you draw a circle only one point on that circle moving left will take you to an opposite point to your starting point.
Only if you begin with the assumption that someone approaches the marks from your orientation. Which is why I've noted the need for a context to make it meaningful.
Well, no. The reference point can vary between individuals, just as the physical approach to those marks may be different. What will then seem obvious or true to you may seem obvious and true to someone else with a different reading.
It really isn't and for the reasons given.
In the sense that normal responses are best guided by examination and reason, sure. The extremist wouldn't care for it, being largely driven by something other than that faculty and relying on something other than its operation on the whole to move and maintain their base.
It's denied to everyone who then can't afford a private one. It's denied to the poor.
Almost no one here.
Then the answers, respectively, would be people like you and that's private education.
To match, nope.
Sure enough.
Trying your hand at this again? :chuckle:
Left can't be wrong if right is reliant upon it, by necessity...like an outside needs an inside or up necessarily infers a down.
All you're 'left' with regarding this insipid display is the self-inspired 'right' to be an equivocating jackass.
Nope.
Lon
Well-known member
Its the same when comparing elephants and donkeys as well, more of a play on words although a bull market is indeed opposite a bear market :mmph: