LGBT community support for the RKBA?

[CoalTrain49]

People keep accepting some hijacked version of liberal.

Well, I think the left like to call themselves liberal but very few are. A more proper term would be leftist, radical left or socialist.

But many who call themselves “liberals” today are in fact leftists – i.e., the very antithesis of liberals. The modern Left – which traces its roots back to a faction of early-19th-century French liberals who proclaimed that capitalism and private property were agents of inevitable moral decay – is animated by a desire to topple the existing capitalist order and to replace it with a socialist regime where the utopian ideal of perfect equality will reign. Disingenuously portraying itself as an agent of enlightened commitment to “liberal” causes, today’s Left in fact rejects each of the liberal ideals enumerated in the preceding paragraph. We can readily observe, for instance, that the modern Left is the stalwart champion of:

group rights and collective identity, rather than of individual rights and responsibilities (e.g., racial preferences, notions of collective guilt and innocence, and a devotion to identity politics generally);

the circumvention of law rather than the rule of law (as exemplified by the flouting of immigration laws and nondiscrimination laws, and by a preference for judicial activism whereby judges co-opt the powers that rightfully belong to legislators);

the expansion of government rather than its diminution (favoring ever-escalating taxes to fund a bloated welfare state and a government that oversees — and intervenes in — virtually every aspect of human life);

and the redistribution of wealth (through punitive taxes and, again, a mushrooming welfare state), rather than its creation through free markets based on private property.

By calling themselves “liberals,” leftists have entirely redefined the terms of debate. The media and the general public have largely gone along with this fraudulent self-identification, as evidenced by the fact that few people nowadays draw any distinction between liberalism in its original and authentic sense, and leftism — or socialism posing as “liberalism.” Indeed the terms are generally used interchangeably by people at every point along the political spectrum.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/05/19/what-exactly-is-a-“leftist”-and-what-is-a-“liberal”/


I'm guilty of this mis-identification myself.

One of the things we can all do to promote our position is stop using the term in this context. When someone says they are liberal find out if they truly are liberal or just leftist or socialists.

 

[barnbwt]

Am I wrong for wondering whether the real question is "does it matter?" Pro-gun forces that undoubtedly exist in that community most certainly do not drive the zeitgeist so prominent in the various popular entertainment channels. So what difference does it make, other than the fact that gun owners as a whole can feel good knowing we welcome with open arms that sizable fraction of a tiny fraction of the population? The Pink Pistols is a fun anecdote to bring up to stymie the rantings of bigots, but their organization is a spec in the wind (and I thought essentially defunct in most places, last I checked ). Unprecedented numbers and new demographic groups showing up for various firearms functions nationwide is far more interesting, as are record sales that continue unabated despite (now) the lack of threat of gun control legislation.

LGBT, being often simply a subset of their particular identifying demographic group, are luckily not any more particularly anti-gun than anyone else (there is a massive selection bias in this perception, since areas LGBT prominence is greatest --large urban centers-- are also rabidly anti-gun politically, due to most non-LGBT residents' anti-gun leanings). But they are still a teeny, tiny portion of a massive bloc of brought-up anti-gun culture groups that exist in this country (and just like LGBT, also most concentrated in urban environments --starting to see a pattern yet?). It's a fact that seems to be perpetually forgotten due to an outsized influence/fondness of media reportage for LGBT issues over the last decade.

It will be interesting to track the LGBT group's progress on the issue now that they have more or less overcome most structural discrimination that had forced them to latch onto identity-politics machinery for representation (the activists have essentially worked themselves out of a job), but of far more consequence is the apparent growing popularity of firearms among women and racial minority groups that have historically (always?) been opposed to civilian firearms ownership.

There's something of an awakening going on this country with regards to firearms, much like the descending dark age in the wake of the Kennedy/etc. assassinations, and it appears to be influencing all demographic groups that are not structurally dependent upon gun control (that would be your urban political machines and D party). Between guns and weed, it sure looks like there may be a significant reshuffling of political alliances in the coming cycles, so we would do best to figure out who we should be spending our limited resources reaching out to.

"A more proper term would be leftist, radical left or socialist."
I know, right? When did 'radical' fall from favor, as it used to be a badge of honor ("radical republican" abolitionists come to mind) as well as an accurate descriptive term? I'm sure all the label changes have 'something' to do with the fact that Orwellian distortion of language to control the expression of political ideas & conflict in public is the foundation if not the entire purpose of leftist ideology. Redistribution and populism are merely means to the end of pitting one group against another, so they won't oppose those pulling the strings.

TCB

 

[SSN Vet]

"Socialist" is probably not the correct term to describe the political left in the U.S. either.

While it's true that most on the political left want more gub'ment control of the economy (a key tenant of socialism), it's not true at all that all socialist are on the political left. The National Socialist Party being the prime example.

Leftist is probably the best adjective to describe the hard core base of the Democratic party in the US these days.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Two dimensional (Left to Right) classification of people is far less descriptively accurate than something like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

As far as support for the RKBA goes it will plot in more than one quadrant. As would members of the LGBT community.

 

[SSN Vet]

That political compass test was quite interesting, and plotted me much differently than I would have guessed.

Some fatal flaws in the questions, but interesting still.

 

[Nom de Forum]

That political compass test was quite interesting, and plotted me much differently than I would have guessed.

Some fatal flaws in the questions, but interesting still.

No test instrument is perfectly precise. There are others out there you can use. A google search should find some. I suspect that even with the flaws in the test you took you will discover how you plotted is more accurate than you realize.

 

[SSN Vet]

I suspect that even with the flaws in the test you took you will discover how you plotted is more accurate than you realize.

I suspect that none of the people I know personally would ever guess that I plotted two tics left of center

Must keep this under wraps at all cost

 

[Nom de Forum]

I suspect that none of the people I know personally would ever guess that I plotted two tics left of center

Must keep this under wraps at all cost

Don't sweat it. My self-identified Liberal friends think I am a Conservative and the opposite is true of my self-identified Conservative friends. It all depends upon what topics are discussed and how much my opinion pushes their buttons.