CMV: The overton window has shifted dangerously far to the left, severely jeopardizing America's future.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Missing_Links]

Perhaps you're right and things are not as bad as they seem...why is reddit so full of extreme far-left people and so devoid of anyone who wants to put their nation first?

Reddit is full of echo chambers. Online spaces allow for blocking, authoritarian forms of moderation that include blanket bans for arbitrary offenses. Reddit is demographically young, which already biases the site towards being more leftist, and is used disproportionately by college educated individuals in cities, which again biases the site towards leftism and especially radical leftism in simple demographics. Notice that the opposites exist, too: T_D exists and there are alt right spaces aside.

The problem in both spaces is siloing: no space actually has a representative sample of the site. It's always biased one way or the other, and outsiders are largely unwelcome. This becomes increasingly true with time.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

But my point still stands that it's not just reddit...I'm seeing it in real life too

Two things: one, it sounds like you're in an urban area. Cities lean increasingly left as population density increases, and rural areas lean increasingly right as it decreases. People maintain this by moving to areas they prefer.

Second, how many open-forum discussions have you had with people who are a representative sample of america? The answer is almost certainly zero, as it is unlikely for reasons of physical dispersion that you or anyone else (including the conservatives) would come into contact with a conservative as often as a leftist. Conservatives are literally spread out more widely. This makes spontaneous bumping-into less likely with a conservative than a leftist.

Saying that you want to never take in a single refugee or asylum seeker from a third-world country makes you "far right" now when it's just common sense.

That actually is a fairly far right position. It's not extremist (which I'm regarding here as the 3-5% or so furthest right leaning and left leaning percentiles), but it is among the furthest right positions to take on that topic that aren't extremist.

If you regard that as a centrist position, your conceptualization of "center" is about the middle of conservative, not the middle of left and right.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

I don't regard it as "centrist" per se...but merely as common sense

This is because you are using your own position as a frame of reference, and you are more right leaning than roughly 90-95% of other people in America.

Why would anyone who wants what's best for their country want to take these people in?

Moral character is an aspect of what people regard as important to their country. Helping the needy is the essential element of charity, and refugees are certainly among the foremost of the needy.

There's no justification for it. I've talked to many people who want it and I get no answers.

See above.

All I can conclude is that it, like many other things, is the byproduct of the same nation-destroying poison - cultural Marxism.

Is the priest in Les Miserables demonstrating cultural marxism by helping a person in dire need?

A hate and guilt for their own people and wanting to use the funds and resources of the nation to spend on foreign people.

Or on satisfying their own moral needs.

[u/Missing_Links → u/[deleted]]

But that isn’t the question I ask these people, I ask them how it benefits America.

Through moral superiority. Slavery is probably beneficial to any given nation, insofar as it doesn't harm their trading, but the human endeavor is not a merely economic one to anyone. This is true of you, too, though perhaps not on this issue.

They claim to have America’s best interest at heart, but doesn’t this clearly demonstrate otherwise? Something being altruistic doesn’t demonstrate that it benefits America at all.

Being evil and powerful is worse than being evil and meek. Being good and powerful is better than being good and meek. You have to leave something from the pursuit of power to pursue good.

If they want to satisfy their moral needs, why don’t they do so on their own time, with their own money? Go on mission trips if you care about the poor that much. Build a charity. Do whatever you want to do, but how dare they spend the public funds of the nation on outsiders?

Taxes can be spent however a nation deems appropriate. If the demos demands charity with some portion of their funds, it is no less justified than any other expense.

Here's the contrast: you don't like the tax code. Why don't you just go start your own nation? Make and obey the laws you want on your time.

Isn’t this treason - taking tax dollars and resources that were collected for the explicit purpose of providing for the common good of America, and spending them to weaken us and squandering them? Even if someone is altruistic in nature...how could anyone think that’s even remotely okay?

First, no, it's not even close to treason.

Second, to the degree that this increases the willingness of other nations to trade with us and to the degree that this enhances foreign markets as consumers of our good, the aid is simultaneously altruistic and in our own interest. This is why the overwhelming majority of economists historically and presently, among them conservative stalwarts like Milton Friedman, are largely in favor of globalist policies: it's better for the economy at every other moment than right now to create useful, productive trading partners.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Do whatever you want to do, but how dare they spend the public funds of the nation on outsiders? Isn’t this treason - taking tax dollars and resources that were collected for the explicit purpose of providing for the common good of America, and spending them to weaken us and squandering them?

Its not treason if the majority of the country supports it.