in my world, that’s called same shit different pile.

also,while i am no right wing supporter, i constantly run into leftist who wouldn’t hesitate to brand me a phobe of their convenience ,none of the right leaning people i interacted with does this… anecdotal i know.

what happens when you go far left??

my last interaction with them convinced me they aren’t any different from the alt right.

Lol

The Democrats would be the conservative party in my country. The Republicans would be watched by law enforcement for fascistic tendencies, or already outright illegal.

It’s really as simple as this. The left in countries like the UK and Ireland would be radical to the US.

As a proud American wingnut, I vehemently denounce these so-called “benefits” that you claim are merely considered middle-of-the-road in other parts of the world. Let us break it down for the sake of argument.

First off, Universal Health Care is nothing more than a government-controlled monopoly on healthcare services. This is the first step toward socialized medicine, which has proven to be detrimental to the medical industry worldwide. In the name of equality, doctors will no longer strive to excel in their fields, as their paychecks will not reflect their efforts. The result? A decline in quality of care, longer wait times, and diminishing innovation in the field. This is how the slippery slope begins!

Next on your list is ‘helping the poor.’ While this sounds like a noble cause, it must be understood that government intervention is neither necessary nor effective when it comes to uplifting individuals out of poverty. It’s time we stop enabling dependence on handouts. Instead, we should promote personal responsibility and self-reliance—core American values, after all. Only by standing on one’s own two feet can a person truly gain an appreciation for life’s hardships, and ultimately, its rewards.

Moving onto school lunches, let us examine our Founding Fathers’ vision for the country. They cherished individual freedom above all else. By providing free meals to students, we’re essentially stifling entrepreneurship by removing the incentive for young people to start businesses that could potentially provide lunch services to schools. Additionally, such measures only serve to deepen the divide between the haves and have-nots. Why should children who are fortunate enough to receive these free lunches continue working hard if they know they’ll always be provided for?

Last but not least, affordable education is nothing more than a clever Trojan horse for communist brainwashing. When the cost of higher education is reduced, the barriers to entry for subversive ideologies also decrease. We cannot sit idly by while our youth are corrupted with socialist propaganda. In fact, the price tag of college tuition serves as a natural selection process that ensures only those who value their education will pursue it, consequently maintaining the quality of graduates entering the workforce.

In conclusion, I implore you to reconsider your support for these so-called “middle of the road” concepts. These policies may sound pleasant in theory, but make no mistake; they’re merely disguised stepping stones toward a godless society where individuals cease to think or act independently. The American Dream would die a slow and painful death under this system. First, free lunches, next COMMUNISM!

Even the historical, biggest right wing party in Denmark would not remove any of the things you mentioned, except school lunches.

Oberton I think

Which party is that?

Leftism is about being egalitarian. Everyone is equal, power is shared equally, and that equality is protected. There many very different paths and approaches to this conceptually. @stembolts@programming.dev gave a great overview of some basic specific policies below.

Rightism is about consolidation of power. Since power and wealth are inextricably linked (two sides of the same coin, as it were), the defining feature of Rightism is hoarding of wealth and entrenchment of power.

Looking at our two major parties, their platforms, their policies, and their behavior as organizations, it’s easy to tell that neither meets the definition of Leftist.

It is not difficult to infer the intent behind what they mean and answer the question, but that would require some effort.
It is much easier to pedantically critique word choice. That requires no effort.

I will help you. When an object X is “true X”, that usually means the same base item X, with greater magnitude, so “true X” would be a X-leaning political philosophy with a greater magnitude. So taking left-wing policies for example, it could be paid maternity and paternity leave, worker’s rights, a social safety net, yearly vacation days, and such. In this limited example, the united states has none of these policies enforced on a national level. These are policies that would be included in even center-left politics. So it could be said that the united states has no “true left” because the policies enacted most frequently represent mostly right or far-right ideology. Tax cuts for corporations, slashing of retirement funds, removal of protection for the environment, etc.

The use of this “true left” terms in american politics is especially prescient because the liberal party, if removed from the united states and placed into any other political environment, would be a right-wing party. Basically, the liberal party in the united states isn’t left-leaning if we look at global standards. It is a center-right or right-wing neoliberalism at best. Thus folks in the united states often say that there is no “true-left” party.

Hope this helps.

What leftist party is there in the US that is centered around some form of Socialism that controls any meaningful amount of the State?

For 30 years it was the same way as the UK, based on the system. It wasn’t until Gore v Dubya that the NYT printed it in colour with red being republican. The reason? Both red and republican start with R… They really knew their audience!

I guess because they switched positions a long while ago.