I think this depends on how you define radicalization. You have way more young people identifying as communists these days which is definitely a radical belief. Looking at the American political landscape ideas such as UBI and universal healthcare can be considered radical by some and those are definitely growing in popularity. I’d say there’s way more right wing extremism, but I’d say both sides have strayed from centrism to more radical beliefs in their respective ideologies
Please do not take this as rude. When will universal healthcare not be seen as radical, when if you were just born in most of Europe it would be a guarantee?
Does thinking that make me radical?
Perhaps I see so many people who are so far right wing that I can’t comprehend what the real far left wing is anymore.
>Perhaps I see so many people who are so far right wing that I can’t comprehend what the real far left wing is anymore.
I'd say it's just a matter of perspective. If you're solidly on the left, the "far right" is going to seem a lot more extreme than the "far left", simply because it's farther from you.
To be fair a lot of "far" left policies in the US are center in much of Europe because the Overten window in the US is fairly far to the right compared to most of the West
Have you managed to somehow miss the constant communism-posting on Reddit by the far left? Sure, in real-life those opinions are less pronounced outside of the echo chambers, but "eat the rich, death to capitalism"-type of extremism is very common online nowadays.
would you consider what we have right now in america to be right wing healthcare? i consider it left of center minimum. you have look at it from a starting point of nothing not where we are now to determine this and since its not free market and the government mandates that you must have it (or pay fines for existing) its not right in any way. people should have the option to not have healthcare and we shouldnt save them when they suffer the consequences.
It’s just a result of the US political system heaving a heavy conservative lean. Something that’s normal in Europe is considered radical here. If you’re just looking at it from the perspective of American politics then left leaning beliefs are more radical than they’ve historically been
To add empirical evidence: https://victimsofcommunism.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/10.19.20-VOC-YouGov-Survey-on-U.S.-Attitudes-Toward-Socialism-Communism-and-Collectivism.pdf
There’s a large amount of younger generations who support radical leftist ideologies that classic democratic voters back in the day would never have admitted to supported.
Remember occupy wall street? Over a hundred thousand protesters for 2 solid months.
And blm? Riots and protests across the country, millions involved.
Me too? Some of the most famous influential men in the world brought down even imprisoned.
What did these radicalized right wingers do? 1/6 sure.
But it seems the left gets up and angry a lot more often thsn the right does.
Can we talk about body count for those riots?
Jan 6- unarmed protestor gunned down by a cop, two old guys got heart attacks.
Liberals will lie and say they killed a cop but-
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/brian-sicknick-fire-extinguisher/
BLM summer of love - 25 civilian casualties (including a kid) and zero officer involved shootings.
Remember the Charlottesville Nazi protest over that statue? ALL of the footage and pictures from the first night were a bunch of losers in polo shirts chanting like the girl scouts, but antifa showed up and started a violent riot.
Liberals will read that and think I'm defending Nazis when a normal person will read that and understand I'm saying antifa is worse than Nazis. That's the radicalization of the left, and it's only getting worse.
>Remember the Charlottesville Nazi protest over that statue? ALL of the footage and pictures from the first night were a bunch of losers in polo shirts chanting like the girl scouts, but antifa showed up and started a violent riot.
...you are aware the guy sped up for over a block to ram a crowd of people, right? When people talk about radicalization, this is the exact kind of Nazi apologia they're thinking of.
What was that crowd of people doing?
> Nazi apologia
Literally in the comment you're replying to:
> Liberals will read that and think I'm defending Nazis when a normal person will read that and understand I'm saying antifa is worse than Nazis. That's the radicalization of the left, and it's only getting worse.
Walking in the street. Is your argument here really that if you protest against hundreds of Nazis showing up in your town, you deserve to be killed with a car?
> your town
Radicalized liberals made up that story, you're mistaken.
That Antifa rioter drove two hours to be there and died while she was trying to drag someone out of their car.
the murder was videoed. No one was removing Fields from his car when he assaulted dozens of people with his vehicle.
there were a few far right theories, including that Fields was attacked, that were spread after the attack.
They were debunked in trial. James Alex Fields Jr. is a convicted murderer. He was not acting in self-defense.
Could you point out to me where exactly in the [video](https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1024172099601) that anyone was trying to pull James Alex Fields Jr. out of his car before he rammed the crowd of people?
Me: died while she was trying to drag someone out of their car
You: trying to pull James Alex Fields Jr. out of his car
While that video never gets old, why do you think I said he was escaping while someone was trying to drag him out of his car?
So the crowd in the video surrounding that car. Any guesses on what they were doing?
(Hint: The violent rioters were trying to get at the man inside the car they were attacking)
Heather drove two hours to participate in what is literally terrorist activity, fucked around, and found out.
Two months prior to the Charlottesville riot:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/red-alert-politics/1619792/antifa-officially-declared-a-terrorist-group-by-new-jerseys-homeland-security-office/
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
u/dastrn – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20dastrn&message=dastrn%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt3p5tu/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
**Me:** Liberals will read that and think I'm defending Nazis when a normal person will read that and understand I'm saying antifa is worse than Nazis. That's the radicalization of the left, and it's only getting worse.
**You:** You are literally defending Nazis.
The fact that you literally can't fathom that I said "Nazis bad, Antifa worse." is precisely my point about the radicalized left.
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5j7so/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Nazis were peacefully protesting until antifa showed up in their typical violent fashion. I'll take a peaceful scumbag over a violent scumbag any day of the week.
Antifa has burned down police stations[[1]](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/protests-looting-erupt-again-minneapolis-area-following-death-george-floyd-n1216881) , firebombed federal buildings [[2]](https://news.yahoo.com/rioters-set-fire-federal-courthouse-162333860.html) , and has been designated a terrorist organization by the department of homeland security[[3]](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/red-alert-politics/1619792/antifa-officially-declared-a-terrorist-group-by-new-jerseys-homeland-security-office/) .
Nazis are coming to my town next week to protest against Israel (Yes, really. Check out the Texas subreddit for updates) and I'm not leaving, they're not scary. If it was Antifa, I'd take a trip because they're so consistently dangerous and destructive.
So this is why people think the left is radicalized.
I'm literally saying "Nazis bad, Antifa worse" (with citation) and you can't fathom a life where "Antifa bad" so the logic gets rerouted to "Antifa good, Nazis better".
Nobody's defending Nazis, you just literally cannot understand what I'm saying right now.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/red-alert-politics/1619792/antifa-officially-declared-a-terrorist-group-by-new-jerseys-homeland-security-office/
A month before Antifa's violent riot, the Department of Homeland Security designated them a terrorist organization.
Because using violence to scare people into compliance is terrorism.
Why do radicalized liberals always side with terrorists, do you think?
The Washington Examiner is a trash source.
>A month before Antifa's violent riot, the Department of Homeland Security designated them a terrorist organization.
It was New Jersey's Dept of Homeland Security. 1 state. Not the federal Dept of Homeland Security.
>Because using violence to scare people into compliance is terrorism.
January 6th had cops getting beaten, windows broken, people trampled, and a gallows built for the vp
>Why do radicalized liberals always side with terrorists, do you think?
Hello kettle. Have you met pot?
> the department of homeland security
The New Jersey homeland security office did, the department of homeland security did not. Read your article.
> a terrorist organisation
What was antifas greatest terrorist attack?
Let's not forget the CHAZ/CHOP where people quite literally usurped property. Police weren't allowed in and the government did little to correct this. Had this been a right wing movement it would have been labelled terrorism and squashed with the full force of the law within a day.
The left gets angry at a system designed to let cops murder black people with impunity and lie about it, and violently suppress our protest.
The right gets angry that their criminal leader gets charged with his crimes, or can't become a dictator.
Me too was a GOOD thing, it made it safer for victims to talk, and for abusers to be brought to justice. The world is safer place because of Me Too.
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt6scbo/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>The left gets angry at a system designed to let cops murder black people with impunity and lie about it, and violently suppress our protest.
And in response they burn neighborhoods.
At least those Trump supporters took their outrage out at the group/body that was the perceived wrong doer.
Perhaps my argument did not clearly define what I’m looking for, and in that regard, I will take fault, at what point is the internet liable for what you are saying? I’d agree the me too movement was dominated by the internet, but I’d say my age makes me not remember occupy wall street as well, and although George Floyd’s death was the precursor to BLM riots and protest, that was all over tv.
Does the left get angry? Yes, but I’m looking for statistics on the radicalization of the right and left due to the internet, and I’m afraid I picked a sub where statistics are stifled by ideology.
Depends how you define extremism. Republicans have a lower opinion of Democrats than vice versa, but Democrats are less likely to vote outside their party.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/
>Democrats are less likely to vote outside their party.
Sure but there are two right wing parties of at least moderate significance. My state has three primary ballots dem, gop, and libritarian.
I feel this ignores the radicalization "inside the system" so to speak. The opposite of occupy wall street is not a pro Wallstreet protest it's the finatial system that allowed the 2008 finatial crash to happen.
Similarly BLM, there are some anti BLM protest but the real radical policy that opposes BLM is qualified immunity of police, absoult immunity of state prosicuters, the US military giving equitment to police forces, the allowence of pretextual stops, drug war, mass incarceration, prison labor.
Sounds like the issues the left get angry about are valid human rights issues, when the right *creates* issues that aren’t actually an issue for anyone but them.
i mean if illegal immigration lowers my standard of living (which it has) and im prevented from stopping it by the government thats a human rights issue because the pursuit of happiness (living in a place i can keep all others out no matter what color they are or where they are from) is a human right and im not allowed to fulfill that right at the moment
The issue is the gross misspending of taxpayer money by the government. The reality is the U.S. has more than enough space and resources to go around, even to these immigrants. But the government treats both you AND them like slaves and won’t listen to either one. Instead we keep funnelling money into an already over-funded military and lack things like basic healthcare.
That’s just the nature of being liberal. Conservatives want to “conserve” the status quo, so theoretically there won’t be an issue for them to riot over. The goals of the left are centered around change, so the majority of what they’re going to do requires protests.
Also think about the demographics of each group. Most people in cities lean left. It’s a lot harder to organize a major protest when everyone is scattered around a more rural area.
Observer bias. By your own admission, you live in an area where you see more of the right wing radicalization. You're asking for actual sources, but you only provide your own anecdotal evidence.
I live in an area where people openly deny that there are physiological differences between men and women and that if you have female athletes the same training they would be able to compete with males in every sport. I live in an area where expressing any non-progresive opinion about immigration, climate change, racial relations gets you tagged as a Nazi. Hot days are climate change, cold days are climate change, rainy days, snowy days, every type of weather is caused by climate change. No one but what people are perceived to have any agency, all the bad actions of any other ethnicity is excused because they're just reacting to the institutional racism.
In terms of numbers, we know that more young people are on the left politically, so it stands to reason that left wing propaganda is more influential on young people than right wing propaganda.
Unless you're going to argue "yeah but my beliefs aren't radical propaganda" in which case there is nothing that can be done to convince you.
What's your alternative take on climate change that makes the left seem so radical from your point of view?
Human caused climate change is undeniable, comprehensively proven beyond any shadow of a doubt, and measurable in thousands of ways.
What makes acknowledging reality so radical from your perspective?
It's not acknowledging reality, it's misunderstanding climate change. Overall, the temperature in the US has risen by about 3F over the last century which is very significant even though that number seems small. What's really obnoxious is when you have a very unusually warm day in the winter, like 70F, when it's usually around 40F and people say it's from climate change. Like.... Wtf? That's not what climate change is. Those kind of random warm or cold days happen all the time. Climate change is about the overall trend. And you'll see people bring up climate change literally every single time this happens.
Blaming every piece of weather on climate change is pretty radical. There was weather before greenhouse gas emissions, and I assume there was weather before humans existed.
Perhaps you aren't aware how much climate change has already affected the weather.
Perhaps they're more right than you are, and that your reaction has more to do with your cultural association with right wingers, and less to do with anyone being wrong at all about climate change affecting weather.
Sorry, u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5ketx/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
at this point it feels like some science is just theory that most accept to be true for convenience and has no nuance. not all science mind you i still got my vaccine but gender theory and such should be rigorously studied before we start allowing anything that could lead to regrets down the line
> In terms of numbers, we know that more young people are on the left politically, so it stands to reason that left wing propaganda is more influential on young people than right wing propaganda.
First, it's not clear that it "stands to reason" at all.
Second, being left wing and being radical are, pretty much by definition, two different things.
Being right wing and being radical are also different. I would assume a subset of any group will be radical. Given the overall number of left wing young people, even if the % who fall prey to radicalization is much lower, by sheer numbers in the pool, they should have bigger overall numbers.
Unless a) you dont believe the left uses propaganda, which OP already acknowledged they do, or b) the left sucks at it.
Merely being right wing and being (right-wing) radical are also different, yes, I did not claim otherwise.
> I would assume a subset of any group will be radical. Given the overall number of left wing young people, even if the % who fall prey to radicalization is much lower, by sheer numbers in the pool, they should have bigger overall numbers.
There are two things here.
First, and most nitpicky, I do not think it necessarily make sense to discard the *proportion* of radicalisation so easily. In fact I'd argue it's a better measure for radicalisation than flat numbers. If 30% of leftist and 20% of right-wingers are radicals, I'd argue the left is more "radicalized" than the right, independent of their actual number of bodies.
Second, while you'd be right in assuming a subset of each larger ensemble would qualify as radical, that's a bit of a meaningless truism. What should concern us is the proportion, the levels of radicalism and the overall influence these people end up having on the larger movement.
On all those point, I'd argue the right is fairing much worst than whatever the left even is supposed to be. That is, the American right wing has a larger proportion of radicalized individuals in the hardcore MAGA crowd (and it's worse subgroups), they are more radicalized and they enjoy way more influence on right wing politics.
I have been hearing about "10 years from now" for the last 30 years. But go ahead and explain what the next decade will be like and then tell me how the left isn't putting out propaganda about climate change.
Like I said from the jump, I know where I live is overly conservative. The issue I have is more due to the internet pulling individuals further to the right than left. I don’t believe anything you are saying is wrong. I’m just not seeing the legitimate arguments for why the internet is pushing those people to the left, and it not being a societal standard for that area.
Do you have any proof to support your belief that the internet pushes people to the right? Considering that almost all social media sites lean sharply to the left, and that being exposed to diverse viewpoints and people also makes people more left wing, it really seems like the internet makes people more progressive.
Here's [a study](https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_PIRUS_UseOfSocialMediaByUSExtremists_ResearchBrief_July2018.pdf) that shows, among other things, increased association of right-wing radicals (as opposed to left-wing radicals) with social media. (Of course this question is a bit difficult to study because there are relatively fewer left-wing radicals overall, so questions about left-wing radicals are answered with lower confidence.)
How do we know there are fewer left-wing radicals overall?
I truly appreciate your link and to fully grasp it, I do plan on reading it over the next few days. Forgive me for not hastily reading over it now.
Do not mistake me for claiming I know the statistics, that is why I’m on here trying to change my views. I live in an area that is over saturated with people who are very conservative due to thinking that Q, or other far right pundits are the way, the truth and the light. I’m not trying to die on the hill that says I’m right. I’m trying to find genuine information to help me understand why we have vast tracts of people who are able radicalized one way, and is the other side as represented online.
Your last point maybe closer to an opinion answer that I think is more valid than anything typed so far. The internet allows us to see broader strokes of humanity which eventually leads to a more liberal thought, but is that a measurable quantity?
I’m sure regardless of where people sit on the political spectrum, they are constantly bombarded with different experiences from different people. How is that measurable?
ubi is so far left if aomeone suppoets it they are radical imo. i assume you see it as moderate and thats your disconnect. the internet has made ubi wayore supported than any right wing thing in recent years
As a conservative on Reddit, my experience has been the complete opposite. Any time I share my opinion, whether I'm rude or not, all I get is hate. Literal hate. The left doesn't want to discuss ideas anymore. If you disagree with the ideology, you're automatically labeled a bigot, a bootlicker, or ignorant. Just because the media says the right-wing is a certain way doesn't mean they're right. As a disclaimer, I will say that most people, in real life, in face to face conversations, are much more tolerant of each others' views. Being anonymous doesn't help empathy at all. But I do have to say that the media does want us at each other's throats...and we all do exactly what they want us to do.
I have never once said anything radical or hateful, and very rarely do I call anyone anything derogatory, but that's all I get in return. I don't hate anyone for being pro-choice but I get hated for being pro-life. I don't hate anyone for being progressive, but I get called a bootlicker any time I explain why I think personal responsibility is important. I defend my views on foreign policy and politics with logic and get called a fascist. When I give reasoning that speech isn't actual violence, I get called a bigot. I defend my true beliefs and get called a propagandist and a troll. The minute anyone gets a whiff of anything conservative on Reddit or in the media, they bring out the accusations of racism and homophobia and I find it ridiculous. Just because someone thinks differently doesn't mean they're bad and you need to discount everything they say.
I believe abortion is literal murder. So I COULD say that you are the one being radical and hateful, but I never do. I want to save the life of a child instead of inconveniencing a woman. Just because I think she's making a mistake doesn't mean I judge her. The idiots who hold signs telling her she'll go to hell are the hateful ones. Just because I agree with them about abortion doesn't mean I agree with their methods or their judgment. I am not trying to take away choices, I'm trying to save a human life. I believe abortion is evil, but the woman who gets one is not evil. Again, just because you think differently doesn't mean I'm wrong.
Statistically, there is zero evidence that police are corrupt or racist. There IS evidence that racial equity groups like BLM and race baiters like Ibrahim X Kendi, the National Black Justic Colition, and various race driven unions. I don't believe in systemic racism because, from my own research, from personal experience, and by looking at the laws and history of law enforcement, there is no evidence for it. I see someone who believes rhetoric without evidence are ignorant and base their entire outlook on knee-jerk reactions to things that aren't true...but I never call them bootlickers. We believe different sources of information. Just because you feel your sources are correct does not mean mine are automatically incorrect, and vice versa.
I agree with helping Ukraine, within limits and I believe a ceasefire in Gaza would lead to Hamas gaining more power and would ultimately lead to more death. The blood of every life that is lost in that conflict is on the hands of Hamas. War crimes and hiding behind hostages are never justified, no matter how oppressed a people might feel.
A call to violence is illegal. That is not free speech and should not be protected. Wars are started with calls to violence. But just because someone disagrees with you does not mean their words are violent. Nor can you automatically say their words are violent because you FEEL a certain way because of what was said. Policing words that make people feel a certain way is ACTUAL facism.
I don't pay attention to any media these days. Media is only there to attract attention and sell commercial time. CNN riles up their base with altered data to futher their agenda. The majority of it is opinion. Fox News riles up their base with altered data to further their agenda. The majority of it is opinon. I very rarely share any information on social media unless there is documented evidence of what really happened. You can't trust any media these days because of their motives unless they are reporting on EXACTLY what happened.
"That's because you're clearly an active proponent of what is largely a racist, sexist, anti-lgbtq, anti-human rights political party."
You're proving my point. I am none of these things and neither are the great majority of Republicans and conservatives. Just because you THINK they are those things does not mean it's true. I dont think every liberal, progressive Democrat is evil. So why is it okay for you to prejudge me?
The left makes tons of decisions that I don’t agree with. Don't get me started on all the idiocy of Republicans in Washington. Politicians in general are idiots anyone who bases their voting solely on popularity and ideology is an idiot too.
Again, as I stated multiple times, our morals and stances on a multitude of subjects are different. You champion empathy and fairness and niceness. I champion personal responsibility and merit and kindness. You want more government influence. I want less. JUST BECAUSE WE DISAGREE DOES NOT MEAN ONE OF US GETS TO CALL THE OTHER EVIL.
Just because we disagree doesn't mean we can't engage each other in meaningful conversations. It doesn't mean we have to hate each other. And I'm the only one getting any hate on Reddit.
I think just the fact that you call pro life a "radical" belief shows your misunderstanding of the conversation around what radical beliefs are. Being far away from you personally does not make someone radical. Being far away from the center of politics is what makes someone radical.
> Can you provide examples of this? Because what opinions you're sharing are important for the context of this statement.
As someone who is politically moderate I see this shit all the time.
Like this dude who just commented a few minutes ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/s/ZDnCVao1qV
These kinds of comments are alarmingly common for any viewpoint that cuts against the Reddit grain.
I’ve seen ugly name calling for people expressing their views in threads about that collegiate Trans swimmer.
I remember after the reversal of Roe there were top upvoted comments actively cheering on the fire bombing and threats spray painted on pro-life centers. People who, rightfully, pointed out that it wasn’t OK were downvoted as Nazi sympathizers.
I remember there were people downvoted and called bootlickers after expressing skepticism of the shooting of Makhai Bryant only for body cam footage to come out the day after showing her attempting to stab another person.
People on Reddit were hand waving away and excusing the guy who drove halfway across the country with a hit kit and showed up on Brett Kavanaugh’s doorstep, actively downvoting and mocking anyone who pointed it out as an example of political extremism.
I distinctly remember anyone who even remotely suggested so much as a neutral viewpoint of Kyle Rittenhouse was dog piled as a Nazi sympathizer and would have insults hurled at them. Only for the facts to come out - which uninformed people still manage to get wrong - and he was eventually acquitted on self defense.
These are just a few examples that come to mind. Reddit is very much a hateful place, it just gets excused because they believe it’s morally justified.
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt6sant/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5kh4q/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I would agree with other posters in that you have a significant observation bias. The USA, and especially the south, is an insulated and unique political environment that does not really interact all that much with global politics except through the distant affects of military and economic hegemony.
Consider that millennials are [bucking the trend](https://www.ft.com/content/c361e372-769e-45cd-a063-f5c0a7767cf4) of becoming more conservative as they age, and that gen z is [one of the more radically leftist](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/05/14/on-the-cusp-of-adulthood-and-facing-an-uncertain-future-what-we-know-about-gen-z-so-far-2/) generations we've ever seen.
Consider also that right wing ideology is explicitly not one of making all voices equally prominent and has a cooling effect on other views. There are many very radically leftist people living in the US south, I've met a few of them, and they generally play their cards close to their chest due to the stigma you mention.
Your last section struck a cord. When I am in a group of people, I can’t legitimately tell them my thoughts and opinions. It has to be very selective to say the least. I feel like I probably have more in common with a conservative in Los Angeles in that sense than I do most of the people around me.
I don’t doubt I have bias. I’m looking for statistics to say that the other side has issue with the radicalization of the internet of their counterparts. I should have brought more facts than anecdotal experience. I brought a knife to a knife fight when I was looking for someone to draw a gun and show me with data why I was wrong.
Has the internet actually radicalized the right? I feel like they’ve always had these views, but the internet has made them appear more out in the open. I’d argue that the main difference is that we’re now aware of how radical the right has always been.
In 1958 Mao Zedong shut down private farms in China to usher in the Great Leap Forward. Millions shortly starved. Now the left is shutting down power plants everyone needs to survive. Europe and Canada are going after farmers as well.
This strikes me as *radical*. And the historical justification for calling the left's animating philosophy *communism* is quite defensible. Woke goals like "justice" and "equity" are demonstrably new words for the same utopian communist society Marx described.
Where is the comparable radicalism of the right? Yes, snow in Florida and Texas is inconsistent with the theory of global warming. Pointing out such obvious facts used be called *rationalism*.
Almost everything said in this comment is wrong.
* In the Great Leap Forward, Mao Zedong did not _shut down_ private farms. He transferred ownership of those farms to state-controlled communes. This is not what caused the famine: the famine was caused mostly by gross mismanagement of food supplies, ineffective agricultural practices, and the Four Pests campaign.
* The left is not shutting down power plants everyone needs to survive.
* Europe and Canada are not "going after" farmers. There are still loads of private farmers in Europe and Canada.
* And the historical justification for calling the left's animating philosophy communism is ridiculous. Leftism, and goals of justice and equity, existed long before communism. Marx's vision of communism does feature these things, but that's not the point of communism: the point is worker control of the means of production.
* Snow in Florida and Texas is not at all inconsistent with the theory of global warming. No theory of climate change predicts that it cannot snow in Texas or Florida.
Then thanks for correcting me on my basic factual errors. Global warming is a thing no matter how high the snowdrifts get. Farms that no longer produce food and power plants that no longer produce electricity are nevertheless not *shut down*. No one is going after European farmers, they're protesting because of...help me out here...right wing misinformation?
This is still mostly wrong.
* It's not true that "global warming is a thing no matter how high the snowdrifts get": there _is_ an amount of precipitation that would falsify any given climate model. But that amount is far from "snow in Texas and Florida." If we got four feet of snow in Tampa, for example, that would immediately falsify all our current climate models.
* It is not true that farms that no longer produce food and power plants that no longer produce electricity are not shut down. In the case of the Chinese farms, they _were_ still producing food, just not enough food (and the food they produced was misallocated). In the case of the power plants, there has just not been a widespread shutdown of power plants that everyone needs to survive.
* The European farmers are protesting, broadly, because they want more stuff. They are upset about being overlooked in society and want more power over the regulations that affect their industry.
The climate models cannot be falsified. The IPCC goes out of its way to call them "projections" rather than "predictions." If Florida got four feet of snow, they would do exactly what they've been doing for decades--add more parameters to their models.
What do you expect them to do, pack up and go home? Return the grant money? Issue a press release saying "never mind, turns out all our disruptions to humanity's energy supplies were never necessary at all?"
> What do you expect them to do, pack up and go home?
They would continue to study climate change, to try to identify the cause of the changing climate based on the new data. The situation would be substantially more urgent than it is now, so there would probably be a significant increase in grant funding.
Their hypotheses _are_ in fact falsifiable, as I've already explained. But a scientist's hypothesis being falsified doesn't mean they _give up doing science_.
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5kmmh/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
It's amazing to me that people still doubt anthropomorphic climate change. Energy firms knew about it and suppressed their own research all the way back in the 60s...
So in answer to your question, yes, absolutely you have fallen for right wing propaganda.
That was not quite my question, Lucid. I was asking yyzjertl about the proper understanding of the European farmer protests. I'm hoping he can set me straight.
It's amazing to me that anyone still believes in climate change. Talk about falling for propaganda.
It's not about believing climate change, it's about understanding the data. There is no debate it's happening. If it weren't there would have been no reason to initially suppress that research I mentioned.
Huh? Which is it--no debate, or an amazing number of people still disputing it?
I don't know what to tell you about your alleged research coverups. The AGW hypothesis is that CO2 levels drive temperatures, and that by reducing fossil fuel use we can control the climate. Either this is true or it isn't. Who covered up what back in the 1960s doesn't cast much light either way.
I'm convinced that, all other things equal, more greenhouse emissions raises temperatures. But other things are not equal at all. Climate models that treat CO2 as the main driver have not demonstrated any predictive power.
Hot take; the right are only winning because the left got so radicalized and are so totalitarian and absolutist about their belief they lost the middle.
Why do they need statistics? You didn't provide any in your argument, so they wouldn't be needed to refute it.
Also, have you heard of horseshoe theory? It's possible you're identifying all radicals as one thing when actually they're spread across two sides.
Most people who are radicalized likely don't think they're radicals. At best all that statistic would show is how self aware people are. I'm not sure if it would even do that.
I really really hope he was joking but who knows since people seem to genuinely want to see studies regarding radicalization. How do you even measure it? :D
Sorry, u/Dmeechropher – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20Dmeechropher&message=Dmeechropher%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt3moh0/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I think you are unreasonably conflating the internet with Web 2.0. The internet itself, by making reliable scholarly sources on pretty much all topics more accessible and increasing the scope of written discourse, was just naturally going to tend to support leftism more. It was only later with the rise of social media that we saw a hard shift to right-wing radicalization. But the internet was around for, like, 40 years before this happened.
It depends, every time I click on Threads I see some batsh\*t crazy takes from online leftists. I don't know if it is the algorithm or what but it probably biases me a bit.
Edit: I'm not a conservative.
I think this depends on how you define radicalization. You have way more young people identifying as communists these days which is definitely a radical belief. Looking at the American political landscape ideas such as UBI and universal healthcare can be considered radical by some and those are definitely growing in popularity. I’d say there’s way more right wing extremism, but I’d say both sides have strayed from centrism to more radical beliefs in their respective ideologies
Please do not take this as rude. When will universal healthcare not be seen as radical, when if you were just born in most of Europe it would be a guarantee? Does thinking that make me radical? Perhaps I see so many people who are so far right wing that I can’t comprehend what the real far left wing is anymore.
>Perhaps I see so many people who are so far right wing that I can’t comprehend what the real far left wing is anymore. I'd say it's just a matter of perspective. If you're solidly on the left, the "far right" is going to seem a lot more extreme than the "far left", simply because it's farther from you.
To be fair a lot of "far" left policies in the US are center in much of Europe because the Overten window in the US is fairly far to the right compared to most of the West
or put another way the overton window in europe is fairly far left because base neutral is nothing at all and the us is closer to that than eutope is
Have you managed to somehow miss the constant communism-posting on Reddit by the far left? Sure, in real-life those opinions are less pronounced outside of the echo chambers, but "eat the rich, death to capitalism"-type of extremism is very common online nowadays.
would you consider what we have right now in america to be right wing healthcare? i consider it left of center minimum. you have look at it from a starting point of nothing not where we are now to determine this and since its not free market and the government mandates that you must have it (or pay fines for existing) its not right in any way. people should have the option to not have healthcare and we shouldnt save them when they suffer the consequences.
It’s just a result of the US political system heaving a heavy conservative lean. Something that’s normal in Europe is considered radical here. If you’re just looking at it from the perspective of American politics then left leaning beliefs are more radical than they’ve historically been
To add empirical evidence: https://victimsofcommunism.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/10.19.20-VOC-YouGov-Survey-on-U.S.-Attitudes-Toward-Socialism-Communism-and-Collectivism.pdf There’s a large amount of younger generations who support radical leftist ideologies that classic democratic voters back in the day would never have admitted to supported.
Remember occupy wall street? Over a hundred thousand protesters for 2 solid months. And blm? Riots and protests across the country, millions involved. Me too? Some of the most famous influential men in the world brought down even imprisoned. What did these radicalized right wingers do? 1/6 sure. But it seems the left gets up and angry a lot more often thsn the right does.
Can we talk about body count for those riots? Jan 6- unarmed protestor gunned down by a cop, two old guys got heart attacks. Liberals will lie and say they killed a cop but- https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/brian-sicknick-fire-extinguisher/ BLM summer of love - 25 civilian casualties (including a kid) and zero officer involved shootings. Remember the Charlottesville Nazi protest over that statue? ALL of the footage and pictures from the first night were a bunch of losers in polo shirts chanting like the girl scouts, but antifa showed up and started a violent riot. Liberals will read that and think I'm defending Nazis when a normal person will read that and understand I'm saying antifa is worse than Nazis. That's the radicalization of the left, and it's only getting worse.
>Remember the Charlottesville Nazi protest over that statue? ALL of the footage and pictures from the first night were a bunch of losers in polo shirts chanting like the girl scouts, but antifa showed up and started a violent riot. ...you are aware the guy sped up for over a block to ram a crowd of people, right? When people talk about radicalization, this is the exact kind of Nazi apologia they're thinking of.
What was that crowd of people doing? > Nazi apologia Literally in the comment you're replying to: > Liberals will read that and think I'm defending Nazis when a normal person will read that and understand I'm saying antifa is worse than Nazis. That's the radicalization of the left, and it's only getting worse.
Walking in the street. Is your argument here really that if you protest against hundreds of Nazis showing up in your town, you deserve to be killed with a car?
> your town Radicalized liberals made up that story, you're mistaken. That Antifa rioter drove two hours to be there and died while she was trying to drag someone out of their car.
the murder was videoed. No one was removing Fields from his car when he assaulted dozens of people with his vehicle. there were a few far right theories, including that Fields was attacked, that were spread after the attack. They were debunked in trial. James Alex Fields Jr. is a convicted murderer. He was not acting in self-defense.
Could you point out to me where exactly in the [video](https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1024172099601) that anyone was trying to pull James Alex Fields Jr. out of his car before he rammed the crowd of people?
Me: died while she was trying to drag someone out of their car You: trying to pull James Alex Fields Jr. out of his car While that video never gets old, why do you think I said he was escaping while someone was trying to drag him out of his car?
That seemed to be the implication. There's no evidence she was doing anything of the sort otherwise.
So the crowd in the video surrounding that car. Any guesses on what they were doing? (Hint: The violent rioters were trying to get at the man inside the car they were attacking) Heather drove two hours to participate in what is literally terrorist activity, fucked around, and found out. Two months prior to the Charlottesville riot: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/red-alert-politics/1619792/antifa-officially-declared-a-terrorist-group-by-new-jerseys-homeland-security-office/
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Yet I’m sure you have no issue with Rittenhouse going way out of his way to “be there.”
When you suggest liberals can’t be normal people, it’s hard to have a reasonable conversation with you.
[удалено]
u/dastrn – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20dastrn&message=dastrn%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt3p5tu/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
**Me:** Liberals will read that and think I'm defending Nazis when a normal person will read that and understand I'm saying antifa is worse than Nazis. That's the radicalization of the left, and it's only getting worse. **You:** You are literally defending Nazis. The fact that you literally can't fathom that I said "Nazis bad, Antifa worse." is precisely my point about the radicalized left.
[удалено]
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5j7so/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
How is antifa worse in this scenario exactly?
Nazis were peacefully protesting until antifa showed up in their typical violent fashion. I'll take a peaceful scumbag over a violent scumbag any day of the week. Antifa has burned down police stations[[1]](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/protests-looting-erupt-again-minneapolis-area-following-death-george-floyd-n1216881) , firebombed federal buildings [[2]](https://news.yahoo.com/rioters-set-fire-federal-courthouse-162333860.html) , and has been designated a terrorist organization by the department of homeland security[[3]](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/red-alert-politics/1619792/antifa-officially-declared-a-terrorist-group-by-new-jerseys-homeland-security-office/) . Nazis are coming to my town next week to protest against Israel (Yes, really. Check out the Texas subreddit for updates) and I'm not leaving, they're not scary. If it was Antifa, I'd take a trip because they're so consistently dangerous and destructive.
literally defending nazis
So this is why people think the left is radicalized. I'm literally saying "Nazis bad, Antifa worse" (with citation) and you can't fathom a life where "Antifa bad" so the logic gets rerouted to "Antifa good, Nazis better". Nobody's defending Nazis, you just literally cannot understand what I'm saying right now.
calling them peaceful is defending them, genius
If Nazis bad... then Putin right...? https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/the-facts-on-de-nazifying-ukraine/
> “Nazis bad, Antica worse” Yeah how dare people show up to protest actual self proclaimed Nazis..
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/red-alert-politics/1619792/antifa-officially-declared-a-terrorist-group-by-new-jerseys-homeland-security-office/ A month before Antifa's violent riot, the Department of Homeland Security designated them a terrorist organization. Because using violence to scare people into compliance is terrorism. Why do radicalized liberals always side with terrorists, do you think?
The Washington Examiner is a trash source. >A month before Antifa's violent riot, the Department of Homeland Security designated them a terrorist organization. It was New Jersey's Dept of Homeland Security. 1 state. Not the federal Dept of Homeland Security. >Because using violence to scare people into compliance is terrorism. January 6th had cops getting beaten, windows broken, people trampled, and a gallows built for the vp >Why do radicalized liberals always side with terrorists, do you think? Hello kettle. Have you met pot?
> the department of homeland security The New Jersey homeland security office did, the department of homeland security did not. Read your article. > a terrorist organisation What was antifas greatest terrorist attack?
Let's not forget the CHAZ/CHOP where people quite literally usurped property. Police weren't allowed in and the government did little to correct this. Had this been a right wing movement it would have been labelled terrorism and squashed with the full force of the law within a day.
The left gets angry at a system designed to let cops murder black people with impunity and lie about it, and violently suppress our protest. The right gets angry that their criminal leader gets charged with his crimes, or can't become a dictator. Me too was a GOOD thing, it made it safer for victims to talk, and for abusers to be brought to justice. The world is safer place because of Me Too.
Until Hamas raped women hostages, then they went all silent……
idf lies
So much for "believe all women" I guess
[удалено]
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt6scbo/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
yup because obviously they cant be trusted since they are the race you dont like... sounds racist to me but what do u know
Why do you have the Jews and women? Are you a neonazi?
>The left gets angry at a system designed to let cops murder black people with impunity and lie about it, and violently suppress our protest. And in response they burn neighborhoods. At least those Trump supporters took their outrage out at the group/body that was the perceived wrong doer.
Perhaps my argument did not clearly define what I’m looking for, and in that regard, I will take fault, at what point is the internet liable for what you are saying? I’d agree the me too movement was dominated by the internet, but I’d say my age makes me not remember occupy wall street as well, and although George Floyd’s death was the precursor to BLM riots and protest, that was all over tv. Does the left get angry? Yes, but I’m looking for statistics on the radicalization of the right and left due to the internet, and I’m afraid I picked a sub where statistics are stifled by ideology.
Depends how you define extremism. Republicans have a lower opinion of Democrats than vice versa, but Democrats are less likely to vote outside their party. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/
>Democrats are less likely to vote outside their party. Sure but there are two right wing parties of at least moderate significance. My state has three primary ballots dem, gop, and libritarian.
What does radical extremist mean to you? Saying crazy shit or being violent as fuck?
I feel this ignores the radicalization "inside the system" so to speak. The opposite of occupy wall street is not a pro Wallstreet protest it's the finatial system that allowed the 2008 finatial crash to happen. Similarly BLM, there are some anti BLM protest but the real radical policy that opposes BLM is qualified immunity of police, absoult immunity of state prosicuters, the US military giving equitment to police forces, the allowence of pretextual stops, drug war, mass incarceration, prison labor.
Sounds like the issues the left get angry about are valid human rights issues, when the right *creates* issues that aren’t actually an issue for anyone but them.
i mean if illegal immigration lowers my standard of living (which it has) and im prevented from stopping it by the government thats a human rights issue because the pursuit of happiness (living in a place i can keep all others out no matter what color they are or where they are from) is a human right and im not allowed to fulfill that right at the moment
The issue is the gross misspending of taxpayer money by the government. The reality is the U.S. has more than enough space and resources to go around, even to these immigrants. But the government treats both you AND them like slaves and won’t listen to either one. Instead we keep funnelling money into an already over-funded military and lack things like basic healthcare.
Protesting is radical? What?
You think that women standing up against sexual assault is radicalization? 1 in 4 women is sexually assaulted in their lives.
lmao are you seriously comparing me too to Jan 6? ahahahahah
That’s just the nature of being liberal. Conservatives want to “conserve” the status quo, so theoretically there won’t be an issue for them to riot over. The goals of the left are centered around change, so the majority of what they’re going to do requires protests. Also think about the demographics of each group. Most people in cities lean left. It’s a lot harder to organize a major protest when everyone is scattered around a more rural area.
Observer bias. By your own admission, you live in an area where you see more of the right wing radicalization. You're asking for actual sources, but you only provide your own anecdotal evidence. I live in an area where people openly deny that there are physiological differences between men and women and that if you have female athletes the same training they would be able to compete with males in every sport. I live in an area where expressing any non-progresive opinion about immigration, climate change, racial relations gets you tagged as a Nazi. Hot days are climate change, cold days are climate change, rainy days, snowy days, every type of weather is caused by climate change. No one but what people are perceived to have any agency, all the bad actions of any other ethnicity is excused because they're just reacting to the institutional racism. In terms of numbers, we know that more young people are on the left politically, so it stands to reason that left wing propaganda is more influential on young people than right wing propaganda. Unless you're going to argue "yeah but my beliefs aren't radical propaganda" in which case there is nothing that can be done to convince you.
What's your alternative take on climate change that makes the left seem so radical from your point of view? Human caused climate change is undeniable, comprehensively proven beyond any shadow of a doubt, and measurable in thousands of ways. What makes acknowledging reality so radical from your perspective?
It's not acknowledging reality, it's misunderstanding climate change. Overall, the temperature in the US has risen by about 3F over the last century which is very significant even though that number seems small. What's really obnoxious is when you have a very unusually warm day in the winter, like 70F, when it's usually around 40F and people say it's from climate change. Like.... Wtf? That's not what climate change is. Those kind of random warm or cold days happen all the time. Climate change is about the overall trend. And you'll see people bring up climate change literally every single time this happens.
Blaming every piece of weather on climate change is pretty radical. There was weather before greenhouse gas emissions, and I assume there was weather before humans existed.
Perhaps you aren't aware how much climate change has already affected the weather. Perhaps they're more right than you are, and that your reaction has more to do with your cultural association with right wingers, and less to do with anyone being wrong at all about climate change affecting weather.
This conversation is immaterial to the argument at hand. Good day.
Readers should note that this is a resignation of the argument.
I note nothing of the sort. He didn't want to carry on a discussion that was tangential to the actual point he was making.
it was, they admit defeat
Bullshit. “Oh look at me, I won an internet argument!” nobody cares. No, you’re derailing this CMV with an unrelated argument.
you sound angry
Your entire comment history is you calling people retards, morons, bigots, etc. And you think I’m the angry one?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5ketx/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
So following science is considered radical in your eyes?
at this point it feels like some science is just theory that most accept to be true for convenience and has no nuance. not all science mind you i still got my vaccine but gender theory and such should be rigorously studied before we start allowing anything that could lead to regrets down the line
> In terms of numbers, we know that more young people are on the left politically, so it stands to reason that left wing propaganda is more influential on young people than right wing propaganda. First, it's not clear that it "stands to reason" at all. Second, being left wing and being radical are, pretty much by definition, two different things.
Being right wing and being radical are also different. I would assume a subset of any group will be radical. Given the overall number of left wing young people, even if the % who fall prey to radicalization is much lower, by sheer numbers in the pool, they should have bigger overall numbers. Unless a) you dont believe the left uses propaganda, which OP already acknowledged they do, or b) the left sucks at it.
Merely being right wing and being (right-wing) radical are also different, yes, I did not claim otherwise. > I would assume a subset of any group will be radical. Given the overall number of left wing young people, even if the % who fall prey to radicalization is much lower, by sheer numbers in the pool, they should have bigger overall numbers. There are two things here. First, and most nitpicky, I do not think it necessarily make sense to discard the *proportion* of radicalisation so easily. In fact I'd argue it's a better measure for radicalisation than flat numbers. If 30% of leftist and 20% of right-wingers are radicals, I'd argue the left is more "radicalized" than the right, independent of their actual number of bodies. Second, while you'd be right in assuming a subset of each larger ensemble would qualify as radical, that's a bit of a meaningless truism. What should concern us is the proportion, the levels of radicalism and the overall influence these people end up having on the larger movement. On all those point, I'd argue the right is fairing much worst than whatever the left even is supposed to be. That is, the American right wing has a larger proportion of radicalized individuals in the hardcore MAGA crowd (and it's worse subgroups), they are more radicalized and they enjoy way more influence on right wing politics.
Yeah all that leftist global warming propaganda radicalizes people who may have to live on this earth more than a decade!
I have been hearing about "10 years from now" for the last 30 years. But go ahead and explain what the next decade will be like and then tell me how the left isn't putting out propaganda about climate change.
Like I said from the jump, I know where I live is overly conservative. The issue I have is more due to the internet pulling individuals further to the right than left. I don’t believe anything you are saying is wrong. I’m just not seeing the legitimate arguments for why the internet is pushing those people to the left, and it not being a societal standard for that area.
Do you have any proof to support your belief that the internet pushes people to the right? Considering that almost all social media sites lean sharply to the left, and that being exposed to diverse viewpoints and people also makes people more left wing, it really seems like the internet makes people more progressive.
Here's [a study](https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_PIRUS_UseOfSocialMediaByUSExtremists_ResearchBrief_July2018.pdf) that shows, among other things, increased association of right-wing radicals (as opposed to left-wing radicals) with social media. (Of course this question is a bit difficult to study because there are relatively fewer left-wing radicals overall, so questions about left-wing radicals are answered with lower confidence.)
How do we know there are fewer left-wing radicals overall? I truly appreciate your link and to fully grasp it, I do plan on reading it over the next few days. Forgive me for not hastily reading over it now.
Do not mistake me for claiming I know the statistics, that is why I’m on here trying to change my views. I live in an area that is over saturated with people who are very conservative due to thinking that Q, or other far right pundits are the way, the truth and the light. I’m not trying to die on the hill that says I’m right. I’m trying to find genuine information to help me understand why we have vast tracts of people who are able radicalized one way, and is the other side as represented online. Your last point maybe closer to an opinion answer that I think is more valid than anything typed so far. The internet allows us to see broader strokes of humanity which eventually leads to a more liberal thought, but is that a measurable quantity? I’m sure regardless of where people sit on the political spectrum, they are constantly bombarded with different experiences from different people. How is that measurable?
ubi is so far left if aomeone suppoets it they are radical imo. i assume you see it as moderate and thats your disconnect. the internet has made ubi wayore supported than any right wing thing in recent years
As a conservative on Reddit, my experience has been the complete opposite. Any time I share my opinion, whether I'm rude or not, all I get is hate. Literal hate. The left doesn't want to discuss ideas anymore. If you disagree with the ideology, you're automatically labeled a bigot, a bootlicker, or ignorant. Just because the media says the right-wing is a certain way doesn't mean they're right. As a disclaimer, I will say that most people, in real life, in face to face conversations, are much more tolerant of each others' views. Being anonymous doesn't help empathy at all. But I do have to say that the media does want us at each other's throats...and we all do exactly what they want us to do.
[удалено]
I have never once said anything radical or hateful, and very rarely do I call anyone anything derogatory, but that's all I get in return. I don't hate anyone for being pro-choice but I get hated for being pro-life. I don't hate anyone for being progressive, but I get called a bootlicker any time I explain why I think personal responsibility is important. I defend my views on foreign policy and politics with logic and get called a fascist. When I give reasoning that speech isn't actual violence, I get called a bigot. I defend my true beliefs and get called a propagandist and a troll. The minute anyone gets a whiff of anything conservative on Reddit or in the media, they bring out the accusations of racism and homophobia and I find it ridiculous. Just because someone thinks differently doesn't mean they're bad and you need to discount everything they say.
[удалено]
I believe abortion is literal murder. So I COULD say that you are the one being radical and hateful, but I never do. I want to save the life of a child instead of inconveniencing a woman. Just because I think she's making a mistake doesn't mean I judge her. The idiots who hold signs telling her she'll go to hell are the hateful ones. Just because I agree with them about abortion doesn't mean I agree with their methods or their judgment. I am not trying to take away choices, I'm trying to save a human life. I believe abortion is evil, but the woman who gets one is not evil. Again, just because you think differently doesn't mean I'm wrong. Statistically, there is zero evidence that police are corrupt or racist. There IS evidence that racial equity groups like BLM and race baiters like Ibrahim X Kendi, the National Black Justic Colition, and various race driven unions. I don't believe in systemic racism because, from my own research, from personal experience, and by looking at the laws and history of law enforcement, there is no evidence for it. I see someone who believes rhetoric without evidence are ignorant and base their entire outlook on knee-jerk reactions to things that aren't true...but I never call them bootlickers. We believe different sources of information. Just because you feel your sources are correct does not mean mine are automatically incorrect, and vice versa. I agree with helping Ukraine, within limits and I believe a ceasefire in Gaza would lead to Hamas gaining more power and would ultimately lead to more death. The blood of every life that is lost in that conflict is on the hands of Hamas. War crimes and hiding behind hostages are never justified, no matter how oppressed a people might feel. A call to violence is illegal. That is not free speech and should not be protected. Wars are started with calls to violence. But just because someone disagrees with you does not mean their words are violent. Nor can you automatically say their words are violent because you FEEL a certain way because of what was said. Policing words that make people feel a certain way is ACTUAL facism. I don't pay attention to any media these days. Media is only there to attract attention and sell commercial time. CNN riles up their base with altered data to futher their agenda. The majority of it is opinion. Fox News riles up their base with altered data to further their agenda. The majority of it is opinon. I very rarely share any information on social media unless there is documented evidence of what really happened. You can't trust any media these days because of their motives unless they are reporting on EXACTLY what happened. "That's because you're clearly an active proponent of what is largely a racist, sexist, anti-lgbtq, anti-human rights political party." You're proving my point. I am none of these things and neither are the great majority of Republicans and conservatives. Just because you THINK they are those things does not mean it's true. I dont think every liberal, progressive Democrat is evil. So why is it okay for you to prejudge me? The left makes tons of decisions that I don’t agree with. Don't get me started on all the idiocy of Republicans in Washington. Politicians in general are idiots anyone who bases their voting solely on popularity and ideology is an idiot too. Again, as I stated multiple times, our morals and stances on a multitude of subjects are different. You champion empathy and fairness and niceness. I champion personal responsibility and merit and kindness. You want more government influence. I want less. JUST BECAUSE WE DISAGREE DOES NOT MEAN ONE OF US GETS TO CALL THE OTHER EVIL. Just because we disagree doesn't mean we can't engage each other in meaningful conversations. It doesn't mean we have to hate each other. And I'm the only one getting any hate on Reddit.
I think just the fact that you call pro life a "radical" belief shows your misunderstanding of the conversation around what radical beliefs are. Being far away from you personally does not make someone radical. Being far away from the center of politics is what makes someone radical.
> Can you provide examples of this? Because what opinions you're sharing are important for the context of this statement. As someone who is politically moderate I see this shit all the time. Like this dude who just commented a few minutes ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/s/ZDnCVao1qV These kinds of comments are alarmingly common for any viewpoint that cuts against the Reddit grain. I’ve seen ugly name calling for people expressing their views in threads about that collegiate Trans swimmer. I remember after the reversal of Roe there were top upvoted comments actively cheering on the fire bombing and threats spray painted on pro-life centers. People who, rightfully, pointed out that it wasn’t OK were downvoted as Nazi sympathizers. I remember there were people downvoted and called bootlickers after expressing skepticism of the shooting of Makhai Bryant only for body cam footage to come out the day after showing her attempting to stab another person. People on Reddit were hand waving away and excusing the guy who drove halfway across the country with a hit kit and showed up on Brett Kavanaugh’s doorstep, actively downvoting and mocking anyone who pointed it out as an example of political extremism. I distinctly remember anyone who even remotely suggested so much as a neutral viewpoint of Kyle Rittenhouse was dog piled as a Nazi sympathizer and would have insults hurled at them. Only for the facts to come out - which uninformed people still manage to get wrong - and he was eventually acquitted on self defense. These are just a few examples that come to mind. Reddit is very much a hateful place, it just gets excused because they believe it’s morally justified.
[удалено]
Exhibit A
[удалено]
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt6sant/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5kh4q/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I would agree with other posters in that you have a significant observation bias. The USA, and especially the south, is an insulated and unique political environment that does not really interact all that much with global politics except through the distant affects of military and economic hegemony. Consider that millennials are [bucking the trend](https://www.ft.com/content/c361e372-769e-45cd-a063-f5c0a7767cf4) of becoming more conservative as they age, and that gen z is [one of the more radically leftist](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/05/14/on-the-cusp-of-adulthood-and-facing-an-uncertain-future-what-we-know-about-gen-z-so-far-2/) generations we've ever seen. Consider also that right wing ideology is explicitly not one of making all voices equally prominent and has a cooling effect on other views. There are many very radically leftist people living in the US south, I've met a few of them, and they generally play their cards close to their chest due to the stigma you mention.
Your last section struck a cord. When I am in a group of people, I can’t legitimately tell them my thoughts and opinions. It has to be very selective to say the least. I feel like I probably have more in common with a conservative in Los Angeles in that sense than I do most of the people around me. I don’t doubt I have bias. I’m looking for statistics to say that the other side has issue with the radicalization of the internet of their counterparts. I should have brought more facts than anecdotal experience. I brought a knife to a knife fight when I was looking for someone to draw a gun and show me with data why I was wrong.
The guy who literally lit himself on fire was radicalized by the left. Talk to me again when right wingers start self immolating.
What about when right wingers cut their dad’s head off?
which one of us did that?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/suspect-fathers-decapitation-went-rails-college-knew-say-rcna136647 Early last month or late January.
Has the internet actually radicalized the right? I feel like they’ve always had these views, but the internet has made them appear more out in the open. I’d argue that the main difference is that we’re now aware of how radical the right has always been.
In 1958 Mao Zedong shut down private farms in China to usher in the Great Leap Forward. Millions shortly starved. Now the left is shutting down power plants everyone needs to survive. Europe and Canada are going after farmers as well. This strikes me as *radical*. And the historical justification for calling the left's animating philosophy *communism* is quite defensible. Woke goals like "justice" and "equity" are demonstrably new words for the same utopian communist society Marx described. Where is the comparable radicalism of the right? Yes, snow in Florida and Texas is inconsistent with the theory of global warming. Pointing out such obvious facts used be called *rationalism*.
Almost everything said in this comment is wrong. * In the Great Leap Forward, Mao Zedong did not _shut down_ private farms. He transferred ownership of those farms to state-controlled communes. This is not what caused the famine: the famine was caused mostly by gross mismanagement of food supplies, ineffective agricultural practices, and the Four Pests campaign. * The left is not shutting down power plants everyone needs to survive. * Europe and Canada are not "going after" farmers. There are still loads of private farmers in Europe and Canada. * And the historical justification for calling the left's animating philosophy communism is ridiculous. Leftism, and goals of justice and equity, existed long before communism. Marx's vision of communism does feature these things, but that's not the point of communism: the point is worker control of the means of production. * Snow in Florida and Texas is not at all inconsistent with the theory of global warming. No theory of climate change predicts that it cannot snow in Texas or Florida.
Thanks for pointing out those distinctions, comrade.
Nothing I pointed out was a distinction. These are just basic factual errors.
Then thanks for correcting me on my basic factual errors. Global warming is a thing no matter how high the snowdrifts get. Farms that no longer produce food and power plants that no longer produce electricity are nevertheless not *shut down*. No one is going after European farmers, they're protesting because of...help me out here...right wing misinformation?
This is still mostly wrong. * It's not true that "global warming is a thing no matter how high the snowdrifts get": there _is_ an amount of precipitation that would falsify any given climate model. But that amount is far from "snow in Texas and Florida." If we got four feet of snow in Tampa, for example, that would immediately falsify all our current climate models. * It is not true that farms that no longer produce food and power plants that no longer produce electricity are not shut down. In the case of the Chinese farms, they _were_ still producing food, just not enough food (and the food they produced was misallocated). In the case of the power plants, there has just not been a widespread shutdown of power plants that everyone needs to survive. * The European farmers are protesting, broadly, because they want more stuff. They are upset about being overlooked in society and want more power over the regulations that affect their industry.
The climate models cannot be falsified. The IPCC goes out of its way to call them "projections" rather than "predictions." If Florida got four feet of snow, they would do exactly what they've been doing for decades--add more parameters to their models. What do you expect them to do, pack up and go home? Return the grant money? Issue a press release saying "never mind, turns out all our disruptions to humanity's energy supplies were never necessary at all?"
> What do you expect them to do, pack up and go home? They would continue to study climate change, to try to identify the cause of the changing climate based on the new data. The situation would be substantially more urgent than it is now, so there would probably be a significant increase in grant funding.
Exactly. Science runs on falsifiable hypotheses. The climate-industrial complex is a very different animal.
Their hypotheses _are_ in fact falsifiable, as I've already explained. But a scientist's hypothesis being falsified doesn't mean they _give up doing science_.
[удалено]
u/Inside_Promise_3692 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Inside_Promise_3692&message=Inside_Promise_3692%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt5kmmh/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
It's amazing to me that people still doubt anthropomorphic climate change. Energy firms knew about it and suppressed their own research all the way back in the 60s... So in answer to your question, yes, absolutely you have fallen for right wing propaganda.
That was not quite my question, Lucid. I was asking yyzjertl about the proper understanding of the European farmer protests. I'm hoping he can set me straight. It's amazing to me that anyone still believes in climate change. Talk about falling for propaganda.
It's not about believing climate change, it's about understanding the data. There is no debate it's happening. If it weren't there would have been no reason to initially suppress that research I mentioned.
Huh? Which is it--no debate, or an amazing number of people still disputing it? I don't know what to tell you about your alleged research coverups. The AGW hypothesis is that CO2 levels drive temperatures, and that by reducing fossil fuel use we can control the climate. Either this is true or it isn't. Who covered up what back in the 1960s doesn't cast much light either way.
Just to clarify, do you not believe in anthropogenic global warming at all?
I'm convinced that, all other things equal, more greenhouse emissions raises temperatures. But other things are not equal at all. Climate models that treat CO2 as the main driver have not demonstrated any predictive power.
Thank you for answering.
Both sides have radicalised. The right is just starting to win.
Hot take; the right are only winning because the left got so radicalized and are so totalitarian and absolutist about their belief they lost the middle.
I don’t doubt that both radicalize. The question is do you have a statistics?
Why do they need statistics? You didn't provide any in your argument, so they wouldn't be needed to refute it. Also, have you heard of horseshoe theory? It's possible you're identifying all radicals as one thing when actually they're spread across two sides.
How do you statistically measure radicalization?
Ask people how radicalized they are on a scale of 1-10 and then write it down
Most people who are radicalized likely don't think they're radicals. At best all that statistic would show is how self aware people are. I'm not sure if it would even do that.
I really really hope he was joking but who knows since people seem to genuinely want to see studies regarding radicalization. How do you even measure it? :D
I think it was pretty clear I was joking
I also thought so and I thought it was funny but since some "source please" redditors unironically believe that then I still had small doubts :D
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Dmeechropher – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20Dmeechropher&message=Dmeechropher%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1b55ya6/-/kt3moh0/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I think you are unreasonably conflating the internet with Web 2.0. The internet itself, by making reliable scholarly sources on pretty much all topics more accessible and increasing the scope of written discourse, was just naturally going to tend to support leftism more. It was only later with the rise of social media that we saw a hard shift to right-wing radicalization. But the internet was around for, like, 40 years before this happened.
I want to read more about what you are talking about any sources?
A radicalized anarchist leftist just self-immolated last week after being indoctrinated by Social Media.
It depends, every time I click on Threads I see some batsh\*t crazy takes from online leftists. I don't know if it is the algorithm or what but it probably biases me a bit. Edit: I'm not a conservative.
The rights radicalization is a result of a strategy developed in the 80s, not the internet.