Sociopath Community

This is tough on a technical level but I am going to default to bias and follow my heart. 

Ancient Rome obsessed corporate authoritarianism >> soulless atheistic grey authoritarianism where I can't own anything at all

BohemianRhapsody said: 

Ancient Rome obsessed corporate authoritarianism >> soulless atheistic grey authoritarianism where I can't own anything at all

 Oh Marius, save us!

Shoot me. I pick liberty over either authoritarian system.

Turncoat said: 

Both sides, left and right, are accused of being the precursor to these two extreme views,

'Extreme' is obviously relative and subjective but I don't think it's fair to paint both philosophies as equivalent:

"Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production."

"Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy"

Socialism isn't inherently violent or repressive while fascism is.

you clearly have no idea what facism actually is if you think that the republican party extreme is facism, either that or you don't know shit about the republican party 

Left for sure.

I say I'm not a socialist, but a gun in my face and a seat of power within the new order are very persuasive tools when we're only talking about a political ideology that's just a few steps removed from my own. Fewer people would die in the formation of this new socialist order than the last, right? I wouldn't be expected to kill or torture anybody?

Inquirer said:

'Extreme' is obviously relative and subjective but I don't think it's fair to paint both philosophies as equivalent:

I effectively say "extreme" to refer to it's believed conclusion when it comes to the political relativism found in debates these days. When each side is compared for it's current practices, these are the perspectives they fall back on as the assumed regressive endgame to the point of becoming a bipartisan insult, one where the other side either accepts it, ignores it, or defends how they're not versus a strawman of history.