Not to "achtually" but there is a big difference between overhauling the constitution and imposing significant changes to the U.S. government, which I interpret to mean legislative changes. Making any change to the constitution is exceedingly rare largely because of how difficult it is to do so. This is why we can only ask for the bare minimum of gun reform instead of the repealing of the second amendment, which would likely never happen.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Headlines “Politics” [read the OP before posting]
- Thread starter vonFiedler
- Start date
- Status
Not my place to talk about politics so I'll ask a question instead
Why is the left called the left and the right called the right?
Is it because they just one day decided, "Fuck it, we're going to base politics on directions,"?
And then (follow-up question) why is it referred to as the Left wing and the Right wing?
we aren't birbs
i'm pretty sure
right?
Why is the left called the left and the right called the right?
Is it because they just one day decided, "Fuck it, we're going to base politics on directions,"?
And then (follow-up question) why is it referred to as the Left wing and the Right wing?
we aren't birbs
i'm pretty sure
right?
We are indeed not birds, which are Archosaurs, in the Sauropsids. We Synapsids diverged quite a while ago, and it did take quuuiiiiiiiiiite a few million years for our faction to seize planetary control from their party. (literally skull shape politics there)
Last edited:
The origin of the term actually dates back to the French Revolution, specifically during the French National Assembly of 1789. Supporters of the regime stood quite literally on the right side of the room, while supporters of the revolution stood on the left. From there on out, political philosophies that tend to be more traditionalist and pro-hierarchy, like the Ancien Regime, are referred to as being 'on the right', while political philosophies that tend to be more progressive and seek to upset social hierarchies, like the French revolutionaries, are referred to as being 'on the left'.
In reality, though, these terms are muddy and not really all that useful except in the most general sense. There are thousands of different stripes of left and right and not everyone is what they say they are, or even what they think they are. You can't represent the entirety of socio-politics on a single axis. The terms are also very relative to the political environment they're being used in. Politics in America, for example, are skewed heavily towards the right when looked at through a broader lens, so someone who is in the center or even slightly on the left by American standards might be slightly on the right by the standards of a more left-leaning country, such as the Nordic countries.
a friend group irl got upset(disagreed) at me when i added my thoughts towards a conversation we were having in the car while driving to our destination, it was in regards to surrogacy. I have the opinion that I don't think it should really be legal, I didn't ever really think about it before until I was listening to the three of them talk about a teacher one of the friends had and now their little brother has where she is now a surrogate to a couple she met at one of those businesses for it. I find it really sad I guess, I think its rather selfish and wrong to not just accept the uncomfortable or hard truth regarding their own inability to conceive or sometimes just the desire to not and pay a woman and use her body to do so. The amount of youth in desperate need for adoption into a family that desire a child to look after and raise is really saddening, more so when people are choosing to ignore them and even paying to ignore them. I have the belief that its mainly an unfortunate situation the people seeking a surrogate find themselves in but I don't think that makes it right. I'm posting this as, I was confused in the moment listening to them react to my thoughts on the subject, afterwards things went on normally but I thought about it later n still kinda confused on me being an outlier in the group of 4. I was wondering if im missing something or I guess if this is something that's been spoken about politically or culturally, im not really in touch with contemporary or the average i have issues with head and mostly detached from a lot of things.
Yeah, I feel like we should prioritize adoption. Those children need homes with loving families, and childbirth is very expensive nowadays.
responding to this from a US person's POV on why there is nothing wrong with surrogacy:
- you can be pro-adoption and still want children of your own, even if you may not be capable of carrying them yourself.
- "accepting your reality" would imply you don't care for the desires of people in non-heterosexual relationships.
- the surrogate mother is not being used in any way and there are a huge amount of protections in place to ensure the carrier is compatible. just because they receive payment for carrying the baby doesn't delegitimize that they had a say in this situation too. you don't just accidentally become a surrogate mother. my body my choice applies to every party in a surrogate pregnancy.
- adoption is not an easy process. while it is easier for a couple to successfully adopt, you can't argue that someone should adopt solely because it's an option while disregarding all of the hardships that come alongside it and how unlikely certain groups are from successfully adopting in general.
there are probably more but these are the ones that immediately came to mind.
Theres also the issue that adoption is not a perfect solution. Many adoptees have spoken out about the trauma of being adopted and how it is an industry first and foremost, and one that preys on marginalized groups like poor people and people of color.
Not only that, adopting a child is not the same as having a baby, many children will have development, behavioral and mental issues from the loss/separation, lack of support and being expected to behave like "normal" kids. They're put in families that are not aware or do not care about this context and try to insert them into a new family without their consent or care for their feelings, or forced to uphold a standard to be "desirable" until they grow too old for the foster system and instead have to face adulthood with no support system.
Adoption centers itself on the feelings of parents and adults, and lets the children bear the following abuse
Not only that, adopting a child is not the same as having a baby, many children will have development, behavioral and mental issues from the loss/separation, lack of support and being expected to behave like "normal" kids. They're put in families that are not aware or do not care about this context and try to insert them into a new family without their consent or care for their feelings, or forced to uphold a standard to be "desirable" until they grow too old for the foster system and instead have to face adulthood with no support system.
Adoption centers itself on the feelings of parents and adults, and lets the children bear the following abuse
can you help me understand why to your 2nd point i have this ill reaction towards it ? A feeling like the air has been knocked out of my gut and my boat is quickly sinking in a sea of selfishness suddenly surrounding me. My own understanding of i guess life as a human is the realization that there's uncontrolled circumstances in ur individual time on earth that require sacrifice to be made on ur part to hopefully help others without ever knowing them. To say a point i made before in a different way mayb? The people who are actively seeking this are of a level of intelligence, privilege and wealth where they can afford to purchase this luxury as well they can understand the significance of bringing a completely new life into existence, but they continue to ignore the already here in search of what they say they are ready and willing to offer so they can have what they want ? idk its hard for me to understand ur points specially when you try to like say stuff like it implies i dont care for the desires of a huge amount of people... hard for me to start talking to the rest of stuff you mentioned. i dont think im going to respond to anything towards this topic but i will read it.
Fuck the Constitution burn the slave owner's shit to the ground
I don't know about others but there is fundamentally nothing that will change in this system
Fuck the Supreme Court, fuck your 2A Gun Rights, being a Nazi should be illegal, etc.
Amending the Constitution is so extremely hard and is basically not tenable, it's an outdated institution, it should be gone.
i didn't intend for it to come off in a condescending manner but instead to imply you're stuck in a loop based on your stance against surrogacy. absolutely, as adults we have to accept there are things out of our control that we can't do much about, but i don't understand how this applies in this situation when there is a solution (surrogacy) to said problem.
gay people didn't choose to be gay in the same way women that can't carry a child chose that outcome. if someone wants to spend money to have someone else carry their child, i don't understand the problem. it is the choice of both the parents and the surrogate parent to be involved in this. i feel like you're put off by the monetary aspect here which while i can understand doesn't really carry any weight in an argument. people can spend their money how they please. sometimes, that means it's coming from a place of privilege based on the amount of money spent, but by that logic people would be ridiculed for the amount of money they spend on a house, or buying a house in general, when there is a alternative method in rent, which carries less "privilege."
I don't mind surrogacy but also I find your argument about money to be pretty weird.
Yes, you can ridicule people for how they spend money. People do it all the time, even in casual conversation. I will do it and keep doing it, and keep making fun of rich people for doing rich people things. That being said, being a surrogate parent is not the same as "buying a house", because you aren't fucking "buying a person". You are buying the right to be a parent when otherwise you could not.
That being said, I would still prefer that you adopt a child, because that actually helps people who need it; and if you say "well what if the parent is abusive", then I hope they aren't also gonna have a surrogate child!!!!!!!!!
Ultimately, society should reconsider how we deal with parenting as a whole because most people are terribly ill-equipped and social norms around it is stupid. Parents basically own their children and are often terrible parents, sometimes out of malice, most of the time out of neglect or failure to understand their role, or be a good parent. I do not think everyone should have the right to be the guardian of their child just because they will it and are an adult, because I don't think most people can be trusted with giving their children the right to decide their own destiny, or have the education they deserve, and more. In my ideal society, schools are funded and take a much greater role in raising young kids than parents.
As long as we as a society say that you should be able to do that though, then sure, fuck it, you can do surrogacy, I guess.
Last edited:
you should reread the post i was responding to and my response to it if this was your takeaway from my post. you seem to have a tendency to callously post with no real understanding of what is being said instead of taking a breath and applying the most basic form of reading comprehension.
No, I read it, I just hate your tone when it comes to money. I will make fun of people for making stupid spending purchases all I want, and you are based if you do that too. If you say you shouldn't, you are wrong.
If you think I'm supposed to read your "conclusion" and just agree with you completely even if the way you got there was silly, then you need to rethink how nuance works.
i never said you can't make fun of people for how they spend their money. i said people are free to spend their money how they want. i argued that his emphasis on privilege can be applied to housing as there is an alternative in renting, which is inherently less privileged than buying. responding to me using proper capitalization doesn't indicate you have any more of an idea what you're talking about than your usual low effort posts.
No this is absolutely what you said
Also, making fun of my posting means nothing coming from you
I don't think I saw faint ever complain about gender in pokemon.
Surrogacy to me is neutral. Normal pregnancy is also extremely expensive due to the cost of care, lack of parental leave etc, in the us and more privileged parts of society can afford it. This just means you need to apply your standard marxist criticism onto the capitalist society and class struggles, not exactly on pregnancy itself. Surrogacy is kinda the same.
but also its a discussion I don't tend to think as much about because to me, the nuclear family needs to be abolished as a system that takes away agency and consent from children, promoting various kinds of abuse, especially under a capitalist system
but also its a discussion I don't tend to think as much about because to me, the nuclear family needs to be abolished as a system that takes away agency and consent from children, promoting various kinds of abuse, especially under a capitalist system
D
Don't really care to have a badge, doesn't mean much
That's unbased, actually, thanks
surrogacy is imo usually bad, like the death penalty, you might easily think it's ethically fine but at the end of the day it's more exploitation of non-white ppl's bodies by white ppl. how many rich european women do you hear about becoming surrogates?<- I don't hear abt this myself too often, but maybe im just tragically out of touch. IMO it's a function of a the market driving people to sell their bodies in desperate ways. you may say 'lol there is no ethical consumption under capitalism so who cares if surrogacy is no different' but you are wrong just as in so far as one doesn't need to purchase another person's body for sex, one does not need to purchase a body for the purposes of giving birth, so there is indeed an ethical obligation to abstain from the purchase of surrogates and the surrogate buyer tends to be just as condemnable as the sex buyer imo.
on the other hand ppl who really bring adoption into it are also usually weirdos in the present discoursive-milieu, it's like when a straight person has a podcast u know theyre likely on that reactionary grifter grind; if someone is talking about adoption vis-a-vis an attack on surrogacy it's usually some 'i will adopt your babies'-type dead-eyed white christian person, same energy to me. the adoption system is super ethically ambiguous and has many problems but i will not go further as ppl tend to get rly weird about it if they aren't already in the know about how messed up it rly is.
on the other hand ppl who really bring adoption into it are also usually weirdos in the present discoursive-milieu, it's like when a straight person has a podcast u know theyre likely on that reactionary grifter grind; if someone is talking about adoption vis-a-vis an attack on surrogacy it's usually some 'i will adopt your babies'-type dead-eyed white christian person, same energy to me. the adoption system is super ethically ambiguous and has many problems but i will not go further as ppl tend to get rly weird about it if they aren't already in the know about how messed up it rly is.
I havent heard of that actually, do you recommend any articles/research to know more abt exploitation in surrogacy?
idk, this is not my area but i remember this being interesting
Resisting the Stigma of Commercial Surrogacy in India- amrita pande
http://claradoc.gpa.free.fr/doc/420.pdf - follow at your own risk
So what's the alternative? Letting children without parents die on the streets?
Yeah the current adoption system is pretty fucked up but the concept of adoption by itself isn't unethical in any way. If adoption wasn't privatized and run by for-profit companies and if child protective services around the globe weren't underfunded, it would be a system that enables children without parental figures to have a chance of life
Do you have any proof of this or are just making this up out of nothing because it fits in with your preconceived beliefs?
- Status