Colin Moriarty is back

[Aura7541]

WolfpackN64 said:

Aura7541 said:

And guess what? If you want to prove that the authority is valid, then you need to argue on the merits of the term as in show me the reason why the dictionaries do not include Regressive Left in the dictionary and why that reason is valid. It always goes back to arguing the merits. This is not a circle I made. This is a circle you made.

You know what? Fine, let's look at the Wikipedia article.

""Regressive left" (also formulated as "regressive liberals") is a political epithet, used as a pejorative to describe a section of left-wing politics who are accused of paradoxically holding reactionary views by their tolerance of illiberal principles and ideologies, particularly tolerance of Islamism, for the sake of multiculturalism and cultural relativism."

And see, there is already a problem. A tolerance of illiberal ideas. Not the holding of them, but tolerating them. As a far leftist, I don't tolerate the far right. I'd ban them outright if I'd had the power to. If anyone would declare their religious law to be absolute and above the law, they'd face the law (and potentially, jail). If the far left fraternizes with people of foreign origin and religion, it would be to fight injustice.

Remember when I said that the term was coined by a Muslim and you said you didn't care? Perhaps you should read the second paragraph of the same page.

WolfpackN64 said:

Aura7541 said:

And those types of people are not liberal because they are opposed to equality of opportunity, where the particular opportunity is to achieve material wellbeing if one works hard enough to earn it.

That is ideal in an early stage of capitalism, but capitalism inevitably leads to monopoly and concentration of wealth, in which case your meritocracy has largely ceased to exist.

Which type of capitalism? You're only naming one type of capitalism as it is possible to run on a capitalist system with government oversight and regulation. Your post is ultimately an over-generalization.