[FEDERALIST] Why Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Could Be The Left’s Donald Trump

What does any of this have to do with political science?

Can you tell me, globally, where Obama is on the political compass?

Except, the creator of the thing says the EXACT opposite lol.

In your twisted mind, sure, but he basically said everything I've said, you are getting things all confused in your mind here. The political compass is to chart people historically and globally on the political spectrum, period, end of story. That's what it was created for.

You realize he too said that American democrats are on the RIGHT? Look at the charts he showed lol, do you know how to read these charts?

Now, can you tell me where Obama is globally on a political compass?

 

SMH, well I tried. Globally Obama is on the right just like how those who make 16 bucks an hour are 1%ers globally and there are effectively no people in the entire country under the global poverty line..

Clearly you think those things are relevant in conversations about US policy.

 

Lol, and this was my entire point.

It is pretty relevant when you are trying to make the case that Ocasio is a nutjob radical leftist, yes.

 

I think he is trying to make the case that Ocasio is a nutjob radical leftist in the context of American politics, not as compared to Chairman Mao.

 

Ah, so you are trying to make the case that the kid flipping burgers is rich when his salary is compared globally? Brilliant. I'm not sure why you think things like that are relevant.

If you look at a guy like Obama, at the time he ran he was pretty far to the left when it comes to American politics, American politics has moved pretty far to the left since then....but Ocasio-Cortez is still completely off the chart to the left as an actual socialist.

Exactly my point. When talking within the context of American politics you don't compare things based on the entire spectrum, you discuss them within the context of American politics.

 

Yeah but it's not smart because America is on the planet Earth and when Ocasio wants policies that work in other countries people can clearly see this. America isn't in a vacuum and no matter how much you(Or rather Bobby) try to make her out to be Chavez or Castro it just won't work because she's not globally (or historically) that far left.

LOL, you don't even know why the Political Compass was made, remember that? Remember how you told me it's purpose was this and the creator himself said the purpose wasn't that?

Again, from the website...

I mean, the reason it is done is obvious for anyone who thinks logically. History matters. Calling it irrelevant is calling history irrelevant.

This is why you think Ocasio is a radical nutjob leftist, when she's really not, because you are not thinking logically.

You say it isn't relevant, but without historical precedence then you really won't see the next Castro or Stalin coming because you're unwilling to compare politicians to the past and so you are only comparing Ocasio to the present time in America is not helpful, because she'd seem like a super radical leftist compared to Hitler...now, is that a bad thing?

 

You act as if there's only one.....I hope you know enough to know that's not the case.

a broad political compass could be relevant in a historical conversation....but it's irrelevant in just about every other conversation....much like using global poverty numbers when talking about people in the US. It's even worse when you try to misuse that information as you are attempting to do. You want to make someone who is clearly a radical appear as if they are not and that's no different than suggesting that a US company paying people in the US 2 dollars a day is acceptable simply because it is above the global poverty level.

She absolutely is. Again, saying that Ocasio-Cortez is not a radical is similar to saying that a burger flipper making minimum wage is rich and using global wages to justify that position. It's dishonest at best.

Actually yeah, Ocasio-Cortez is to the left of Hitler, which puts her at odds with just about every other American politician in history. When it comes to left vs right, Hitler was a centrist when you look at the broad political compass. The extreme part of his ideology came from being a total authoritarian, not left vs right.

Only other socialists are left of Hitler when you look at that scale. That's why it's best to look at a political compass centered on American politics when discussing American politics. If not, you'd only have a handful of crazy left wing types and literally everyone else would be a right winger of some type.

 

Using a broad political compass in a conversation about American politics is similar to using this map to discuss the location of planets in the solar system.



or using this map to discuss the location of restaurants in Houston



I mean, technically you can do it, but you are going to be giving off a lot of false impressions when it comes to distances between locations you point out.

 

They all serve the same purpose...

I have no idea why you keep referring to global poverty as if it has any relevance here.

You say Ocasio is a radical leftist but to do this you need to define why that is and WHY that is a bad thing. You can't do that without historical precedence.

Well, she is to you because you thought Obama was a radical leftist, remember? You now just said yourself that Obama was right of center, remember that?

so in effect, you admitted that you are so far right that someone right of center like Obama is a radical leftist as well.

So yes, I understand how someone so far right as yourself would think that Ocasio is a radical leftist. You keep going more to the right each year and keep wondering why everyone to the left of you is a radical lol.

Yeah...no. She's not left of FDR, no way and probably right about where all the other pre-Clinton democrats were at.

Not sure about that centrist bit. He didn't favor socialist policies at all. He favored private business, the only difference is that his authoritarian side gave him the ability to destroy companies that he didn't like for this reason or that...reminds me a bit of Trump and how he goes after certain businesses actually...

The problem with doing this is that it ignores how far right the conservative party is so that now when Obama does something like extend conservative tax cuts its considered a 'liberal' idea. So no, we won't be doing that.

There are left-wing policies and there are right-wing policies, and if left-wing policies are going to survive then we must realize that the country's left political party has moved too far to the right and fix that.

Now, I know you don't want that fixed because you are a radical yourself and probably would support a one party government but for those that want what is best for the country we have to ensure that both parties are playing their correct roles so that we can pick the best left wing policies and the best right wing policies and #MAGA.

 

Smh I'm not surprised that you failed to follow along and that you embarrassed yourself, I'm just disappointed.

 

Are you...

Look, the positions of a planet do not change, only your perception, as in your personal perception of them changes.

I'm not sure why this is hard to get for you.

Houston can be south to you if your in New York but it's actual f'n geographical position has not changed, it is merely south of YOU...and north has not changed. That's how a compass works, by telling you where is north.

No. The analogy you are using makes it even dumber, honestly, because now you are talking about math.

The distance of light years between the sun and earth does not change because you pulled up a bigger map of the galaxy. I'm not sure why you think that is but it just isn't true.

 

The position of planets, along with literally every stellar object are changing literally constantly.....but that has nothing to do with the analogy that apparently went over your head.

The analogy clearly went over your head as happened with so many others in this thread to this point. Even if we assume that the distance between objects remains constant (which isn't true of stellar objects but it is true of most things on earth), the point was that if you are looking at a map zoomed out to show the entire solar system, how close is Austin going to appear to Houston? Pretty close right? Now look at a map of Texas, how close is Austin going to look to Houston? The distance won't have changed, but on one map the two places look MUCH closer together than in the other. Also, you probably won't get much use out of the map of the solar system when it comes to pointing out directions from Houston to Austin....are you starting to follow along now?

You get no use out of a political compass that has essentially every sane politician in American history clumped up in what appears to be the same spot. When you center the compass on American politics, it gets zoomed in close enough to see the difference between those on the American left and the American right.....and those that are so far to the left that they are falling off the end of the chart like your girl.

 

It's just an analogy that went over your head. You keep referring to a global political compass as if it has any relevance here, so I pointed out how referring to the global political compass makes as much sense as pointing to global poverty levels. It's a spot on analogy, but.....well, you tried.

The fact that she's so radical that she would fall completely off an American centered political compass tells you all you need to know. When you fall off of that chart, it's bad no matter which direction you go.

SMH, this is either incredibly stupid, or incredibly dishonest. You pick.

First and foremost, Ocasio-Cortez isn't far left "to me", she's far left when the political compass is centered on current American politics....or even historical American politics. The American center has moved drastically to the left over the last decade so while Obama was considerably left of center when he was elected, the movement of the center has him closer to the center while still being firmly on the left.....and that has literally nothing to do with my political ideology.

You attempting to suggest that an outright socialist isn't a radical leftist merely shows where you stand ideologically because there is no case for her not being a radical within the scope of American politics.

Since you brought it up, where I stand politically is that I am a slightly right of center libertarian....but yeah, slightly right of center is "far right" compared to outright socialists....hell even liberals are "far right" compared to socialists. Their belief in individual liberty, support for limited government, and private property ownership makes them seem like right wing radicals compared to socialists.

That's simply not true. FDR was absolutely not a socialist, and he would take great offense to you suggesting otherwise, which puts him firmly to the right of Ocasio-Cortez. Now he was certainly on the American left in that he was very similar to Mussolini politically (facism was seen back then as a "third way" between capitalism and socialism). Fortunately the court struck down most of what FDR tried to do so that things never got out of hand. You can think of FDR as a much more authoritarian version of Obama and both are firmly on the chart when it comes to a political compass centered around American politics.

You might not be sure about it, but that means very little. On a global political compass, Hitler is near the center when it comes to left vs right, but near the top when it comes to being an authoritarian. Of course, the global political compass has nothing to do with American politics where someoen like Hitler would be viewed as a radical leftist authoritarian on a political compass centered on American politics.

It really doesn't "ignore" that because it's not really something that has happened. On top of that, a political compass centered on American politics would have moved pretty far to the left over the last decade, so that would make anyone on the American right appear to be further to the right even if they didn't move at all.

There is a fairly small range of political ideas that are acceptable in American culture, that means those on the American right and the American left will appear pretty close together on a global political compass. All acceptable ideas come from the top right box, now there is plenty of room for disagreement within that zone of sanity and that's why a more usable chart would be one centered on American politics.

You just want to make excuses for radicals that you support who fall well outside the zone of acceptable politics. I sympathize with you, but it's not something that is going to change.

 

Do you realize that we know how fast a planet moves in relation to other planets? These things Do. Not. Change. You are literally arguing math and science now. This is how we launch a rocket from one place to the next. If you zoom out...nothing changes. That is the point.

Again, how the planets APPEAR to you is based on perception, that's all. Your argument is that your perception changes the reality. It doens't.

Sure, the orbit of a planet changes, it changes over time, but you are suggesting that if you zoom out that the orbit then changes again? Just because you perceive it differently?

Which, this one doesn't, but go on...

Yes, she's so far off the chart even though her and Bernie hold the same positions and they put him center left...

It actually went over your head kid as discussing global poverty is relevant, America isn't in a vacuum. When you are calling someone so far left that they are radical its important to say "Radical compared to what though?" Radical compared to today's right wing, I guess, you guys are so far right now that FDR would be Stalin. Congrats.

Lol. No.

I'll say it again. You called Obama a far leftist...then turned around and said he's globally on the right. In the end, you are so far right that for you Ocasio is a radical leftist when she'd fit right in with liberal moderates in many European countries.

...wow....

 

I had to separate this from the other post because it is so....it just describes everything about you.

From this one bit.

That FDR would disagree with Ocasio...
FDR...

Here is FDR talking about living wages. You know what, there are TONS of these quotes of FDR saying things very very similar...

Next...you call FDR a fascist...I mean really...no words for this one, you're going to need a strong argument to make that one stick.

More great centrism from Bobby!

Hitler would be a radical leftist if he were in America! Everything left of center is BAD...you're supposed to be center right, by the way lol...

Well, you can continue to think that but people that actually study such things disagree.

....You contradicted yourself...What the...

You just said the American politics are center left...then follow it up with "All acceptable ideas come from the top right box..."

That means globally, American politcs are RIGHT.

W.T.F

The only radical here is you. I think anyone that htinks the other side has 0 good ideas and that Hitler, Stalin, and basically everyone that's bad is left of center is probably a right wing radical.

You can't even give FDR credit, that told me then a long time ago that you are a radical. It is widely accepted across the world, historians, whatever that FDR was one of America's greatest presidents, his major fault being the internment camps...but you can't even say "Yes, FDR was a good president." Because that would mean admitting that someone left of center did something good for your country. That's a radical, when you think everyone opposite of you is evil or "Has no sane ideas" then yeah, that's a radical position.

I have no problem admitting that Reagan was a good president on the flipside.

 

SMH the analogy appears to still go completely over your head. It's cool, you did your best.

You've ignored every relevant portion of what you are responding to in order to what I'm guessing is intentionally fail to understand the analogy. Again, at least you tried.

I'm not sure which one you are looking at right now, but a standard global political compass would have essentially every US politician ever clumped up in the top right quadrant. I don't fit there, you CLEARLY don't fit there, but every major US politician save the socialists that you support are in that zone. All of them.

First of all, they don't hold the same positions, Bernie is a captialist, Ocasio-Cortez is a socialist. Secondly, we were again talking about an American-centric political compass. Talking about someone being "center left" on the global compass is similar to saying someone is upper class on the global wealth chart. It simply lacks any valid meaning in context.

LOL that didn't go over my head, in fact it was my point that you need the context to say someone is radical. When I say that someone is a far left radical, I am saying they are a far left radical compared to literally all of American politics. I don't care if Stalin would consider them a centrist. It has absolutely no value in the conversation.

I'm not sure why that is over your head, it's actually something that most people can easily comprehend. At the time Obama was elected, he was pretty far to the left in the context of American politics, which is why he struggled to get his own party to go along with a lot of what he wanted. They simply weren't aligned that far to the left at the time.

At the same time, you could say he was globally on the right, as essentially all American politics are.....and have always been. Bringing up how someone that is off the chart to the left in America would be a moderate in another situation is completely irrelevant.

 

Learn your history kid, then get back to me.

 

When it comes to what's RELEVANT to Americans, I don't think placing our politicians in relation to the entirety of the world political spectrum is helpful. Its just an attempt to make the extreme seem less so. Sorry Jay Google

 

I understand that your FDR was a fascist critique then comes from a complete place of ignorance that you simply can't defend it. Again, anyone that thinks Hitler would be an American leftist all while thinking FDR was a fascist probably is historically ignorant of politics.

Nope, it's entirely relevant. It's why political scientists do it.

Otherwise, again, you make Ocasio out to be a radical leftist when none of the positions she's championing are all that radical at all. It's not helpful at all to actual leftist positions if the entire country has moved so far to the right that Obama is called a far left liberal...when he didn't support actual left-wing positions.

Unless you think ALL left wing positions are bad, then sure, this is unhelpful to you and you'd see it as a bad thing.

But if you were more of a centrist and thought that left-wing policies can actually help the country then you'd look at history and global politics, otherwise what are you comparing them to?

When you call Ocasio a radical leftist, what are you comparing it to? Just a certain decade of American politics? Why? Is she radical compared to FDR? No, she's not. What years are we deciding to base our political compass on?

Basically, if the country moves so far right that you don't even understand what is left anymore then there is every reason for it. When people are calling actual politicians that are right of center like Obama far left...then that means America's compass is actually the one that's broken.

 

I'm not spelling this out for you, I truly want you to go out and further your education.

As to pointing out that on the global political compass that YOU posted, Hitler was left of pretty much all American politics....I mean, you've gotta do better guy. You seem to know nothing about history OR politics, two subjects I have studied at length and I would suggest you do the same.