General Discussion

Dyedinthewoolliberal

(16,199 posts)

27. I don't disagree with your position or post;

Fri May 24, 2013, 11:21 PM

May 2013

what I would offer is the idea that 'radicals' are people advocating making change happen. As opposed to waiting for the Powers That Be to change what they do.
They will never do that and truth be told, if I was one of them I probably wouldn't either. I think Chairman Mao was correct when he said 'political power springs from the barrel of a gun '
Of course we know what that represents, and that is the fly in the ointment.
Therefore when people are labeled 'radical', left or right, it is implied there will be violence and destruction. And who wants that?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why Liberals Need Radicals [View all] xchrom May 2013 OP

society needs effective radicals. nt geek tragedy May 2013 #1

That is right. Without Malcom, Martin would've been more widely ignored, and more easily leveymg May 2013 #2

The Soviet Union was an industrial disaster and hemorraged money until it's last dying day. Gravitycollapse May 2013 #3

That's not the point -- it was a counterweight to capitalism starroute May 2013 #9

The Soviet Union was never a real counterweight and never functioned well at all. Gravitycollapse May 2013 #10

But the extreme capitalists THOUGHT it was......... lastlib May 2013 #11

The extreme capitalist thought about and did what suited his economic interests. Gravitycollapse May 2013 #12

That's exactly right. laundry_queen May 2013 #25

I tend to agree with his premise... kentuck May 2013 #4

I would posit that the problem is that what pass for geek tragedy May 2013 #6

Actually, the shift was to the radicals of identity politics cprise May 2013 #13

If they co-operated on the left the "identity" politicians... socialist_n_TN May 2013 #20

Its a checkered thing, actually cprise May 2013 #24

The degenerated revolution of Stalin's USSR and the Chinese....... socialist_n_TN May 2013 #32

Good Point and Good Read...K&R KoKo May 2013 #5

That mutually beneficial alliance is what the authoritarian DLC/3rd way turncoats Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #7

I Think Radical Is The Wrong Term On The Left colsohlibgal May 2013 #8

It is radical, that's the point. It's the correct word that has had the meaning distorted Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #14

You seem to think western Europe lacks radicals cprise May 2013 #16

RE: your second paragraph.......... socialist_n_TN May 2013 #22

And here I am with my reformist tagline cprise May 2013 #26

Well in my view, the problem with liberalism is not a new thing..... socialist_n_TN May 2013 #33

LOL cprise May 2013 #36

Whew! I get enough grief there...... socialist_n_TN May 2013 #37

K&R marmar May 2013 #15

The labels have become meaningless. bvar22 May 2013 #17

Radical and mainstream are not mutually exclusive cprise May 2013 #29

Kick and Rec! Fuddnik May 2013 #18

here's the big problem. BobbyBoring May 2013 #19

Having a radical movement that is viable Politicub May 2013 #21

The labels have become meaningless. bvar22 May 2013 #23

I don't disagree with your position or post; Dyedinthewoolliberal May 2013 #27

It's deeper than radicals here in the US. Some people think that during the cold war craigmatic May 2013 #28

... RainDog May 2013 #30

Assuming the radicals are not armed militants cprise May 2013 #31

"The American left remained strong into the mid-20th century..." ProSense May 2013 #34

So Communism is the reason Liberals exist according Progressive dog May 2013 #35

I don't think that's what the article is saying......... socialist_n_TN May 2013 #38

I exaggerated the silly claim made in the OP Progressive dog May 2013 #39