I read the article on Wikipedia. It seemed largely accurate, with only a few obvious errors.
The biggest error was where they defined the original right (French who supported the Ancien Regime and monarchy) as a reaction to the left, which defies all common sense, as how can the defenders of the old regime possibly be a reaction to the people who formed to oppose the old regime. It's like claiming eggs were formed as a reaction to omelletes.
Other than that bit of marxist party-line idiocy, the article was mostly accurate.
[–] WarTracker1776 ago
Then what is a racist democrat? Lol.
[–] lord_nougat 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
A stereotype?
They demonstrate their disdain for other races by giving them handouts, as if to strongly imply their inherent helpless weakness! They're the worst racists there are.
[citation needed]
Or not, all thats needed is left wing dominance over editing (wars).
"The Free Encyclopedia that anyone can edit" really doesnt mean anything, like the D in DPRK supposedly means Democratic.
[–] HuggableBear 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
right-wing movements with anti-capitalist sentiments including conservatives and fascists who opposed what they saw as the selfishness and excessive materialism inherent in contemporary capitalism.
wut
[–] performance 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
What is wrong with racism? Redpill me. I'll wait.
[–] inductive ago (edited ago)
I guess you have to start with a multiracial society and define racism as the non-meritocratic treatment of minorites in that society. Here you have a "wrong" experience from the perspective of the minority. This is true equally in societies where you are the minority.
If there is no multiracial society there is nothing wrong with racism in any sense.
Edited
[–] HarlandKornfeld14 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
That site is pozzed.