It's interesting to see your statement about "left-wits" and then your clarification.
If you want a society where freedom of association and freedom of choice exists, you have to allow some level of discrimination to exist. Something many "left-wits" have lost the plot on as they start trying to make micro-aggression and micro-discrimination the next great crusade for stamping out.
This sounds like a somewhat general condemnation of so-called lefties who practice cultural derogations of others. But your clarification (from Pete) says,
Leftwits are the sanctimonious hooligans that run through with baseball bats.
Surely that refers to the tiny percentage of extremists (who may or may not even exist) who use violence to denounce people they don't like. Am I right? That would correspond to conservatives who threaten women at abortion clinics or who protest at mosques or kill blacks openly admitting they are hoping to start a race war. Then you further clarify what Pete meant,
I think the definition is a bit more broad, which is why I dug around for the later post for a broader usage. I find the first use to be consistent with the second, even if the second may not entirely in line with the first. You can pick up anecdotal support for this by going through the forum and seeing it used, vs the very rare occasion where an attempt to define it happened(I only found the two, well three if you include my own post from Feb 2017 but I'm not Pete).
Leftwits are the sanctimonious hooligans that run through with baseball bats.
I don't think anyone on this board meets the criteria for that, but there are plenty of activists and other idiots out there that are certainly trying to feed that dragon.
The more clear usage, that I suspect Pete would agree with, is the Leftwits aren't just the ones literally holding the baseball bat, but the ones knowingly prodding those baseball bat wielders along by distorting facts and information to make it as inflammatory as possible.
As demonstrated here:
I disagree often with Fenring, LR, RightLeft, and others here without giving them “insulting names.” And when I point out that Crunch repeatedly uses Leftwit obfuscation and demonization tactics in defense of Deplorabilly icons and Rightwad memes, I haven’t called him a leftwit or a Deplorabilly. He didn’t come up with the tactic or the idea. He just replicated it from elsewhere, which is all I’ve seen you do. Why take it personally when I’ve insulted the originator of what you merely parroted?
To answer Kasandras question and distinguish leftists from left-wits, a leftist at this point should be able to state what they hope Trump will do in response, whereas a left-wit would feel compelled to wait to see what Trump does before saying he should have done differently.
That means that a left-wit is someone who criticizes actions that Trump has taken. Really? There's something wrong with criticizing Trump for doing something stupid after he does it? The same applies to him for lying, attacking those who challenge or even just disagree with him with deeply personal attacks.
No it does not. He was very clear on that, and I do not know how someone could be more clear on that matter. A
genuine leftist would already have a preferred solution
even if they know it is one Trump will never carry out, they can tell you how they would approach the issue and why/how.
A leftwit in contrast doesn't have any kind of solution they can or will elucidate. Instead they will wait for Trump to act first, so they can then go about dismantling what Trump did without needing to worry about defending any potential common ground they may actually have.
If that's what you mean by a "left-wit", why call it by such an insulting name? To me that sort of person is judging Trump using common sense and simple common decency. Since you use it as a pejorative, that may be something mainstream Republicans and conservatives simply lack and are proud of.
A person judging Trump using common sense and common decency isn't a leftwit. For that matter, someone who is simply anti-Trump isn't by definition a leftwit.
A leftwit is someone who actively pursues a leftist agenda(Socialist/Communist, not the more generic Liberal one) and will use every tool at their disposal to generate rhetoric to do so. The said, more generally, I think he would also agree that leftwit and halfwit have a lot in common in each other. While some some leftwits are quite intelligent and exceedingly clever. Most of them are functionally behaving like they are half-wits, they simply parrot and spew forth whatever talking points their leftist luminaries have disseminated, and don't bother to actively process what it is they're sharing, or check for either logical consistency or coherency.
The right-wing has its own cadre of idiots in its ranks, particularly among the religious side, but the leftwits take it to an entirely different level.
