Right/Left wing ?
Discussion
I would suspect that it is grossly misunderstood by many.
As I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
As I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
I'd always assumed
Right - give me the money and charge me
Left - take my money and give me it free
However I think the reality is more
Upper Class - f
k you all I'll do what I want
Middle Class - please don't tax me too much more, I have a BMW to pay for you know
Lower Class - fk you all I'll do what I want
Right - give me the money and charge me
Left - take my money and give me it free
However I think the reality is more
Upper Class - f
k you all I'll do what I wantMiddle Class - please don't tax me too much more, I have a BMW to pay for you know
Lower Class - f
k you all I'll do what I wantAnd, no, there is no solid definition. Left tends to mean supports labour over capital, so redistributive taxation, strong labour law to protect employees, support for unions, fairly generous welfare state. Right wing more individualistic, so more responsibility on the the individual to look after themselves and contribute to society; lower tax, lower government spending, an assumption that market forces are more effective at producing a fair and optimal outcome than micro-managing legislation, so weaker employment protection.
Nationalism, social conservatism, even libertarianism have nothing much to do with left versus right.
Nationalism, social conservatism, even libertarianism have nothing much to do with left versus right.
I have posted this before on a Trump thread (I think) but at school in the early eighties a teacher drew out politics as a big circle on the board
Liberal at the very top and SDP (told you it was a long time ago) just over to the left. Labour a way over to the left and Conservative the same distance over to the right. As you got to the bottom of the circle you had communism bottom left and facism bottom right but by that point the ideology and routes to their desired outcome weren't all that far apart
Liberal at the very top and SDP (told you it was a long time ago) just over to the left. Labour a way over to the left and Conservative the same distance over to the right. As you got to the bottom of the circle you had communism bottom left and facism bottom right but by that point the ideology and routes to their desired outcome weren't all that far apart
The origins are literally where two groups of people stood in relation to the President -
"The modern usage of the political terms left and right comes from the French Revolution of 1789 when supporters of the king stood to the president’s right, and supporters of the revolution to his left."
http://factmyth.com/the-origin-of-the-political-te...
These days it is sometimes used to refer to purely economic axis of someone's stance. Often it is simply used as a tribal group or a meaningless slur for some other tribe.
"The modern usage of the political terms left and right comes from the French Revolution of 1789 when supporters of the king stood to the president’s right, and supporters of the revolution to his left."
http://factmyth.com/the-origin-of-the-political-te...
These days it is sometimes used to refer to purely economic axis of someone's stance. Often it is simply used as a tribal group or a meaningless slur for some other tribe.
Apologies for the repost but...
I have been pondering the ever more binary nature of our society and have come to the conclusion right and left are outdated flags of convenience with which to wrap your opponents thoughts in in order not to have to analyse them....I'm afraid I think the labelling of 'types' of thinking as 'right wing' and 'left wing' lazy, derivative and divisive. Our cultural and social landscapes are a veritable movable feast and politics must evolve to meet the needs of this ever changing society, a rather Hegelian idea of thesis, synthesis and antithesis later bastadised to an extent by Marx and Hegel in their desire to label history and thus the present as an unstoppable dialectical juggernaut that will do its own thing and ultimately adapt to itself , the input of the individual working as a disjointed but cohesive unit being strangely overlooked by our avuncular bavarian duo (a theory I found rather strange for Marx to espouse as had the world adopted Marxism or a form of socialism there would have been an inevitable challenge to that and a reactionary implementation of an opposite system, and one which Marx could not criticise as his theory essentially predicts it, and so the circle would have continued with a fatalistic inevitability). Surely Marx was not as arrogant as Nietszche who suggested the snake that does not shed its skin must die whilst resolutely refusing to change much of his views!!- the inherent hypocrisy of the philosopher!?
The 'right' and the 'left' labels have such historic baggage that one cannot help applying ones historic experience of either, whether that be the dark days of 70s labour or thatcher's years, Blair's christian jihad, whatever. Our lived experiences put certain words in a box and enable us to continue indulging in comfortable stereotypes. Orwell's work, like that of Marx, Dickens, any writer or philosopher, artist, whatever, is anchored in and of his time and his own lived experiences. I am not suggesting that we ignore old ideas and texts, as Twain suggested, history doesn't repeat itself, but it certainly rhymes, so we need to be familiar with what has gone before.
A good idea is a good idea regardless from whence it comes, and labelling certain concepts right or left wing immediately puts them in a certain category of accept or ignore for many, sadly, such is the binary nature of today's-and previous?-society. I am an eternal optimist and a somewhat naive idealist, but I am an anomalous soul who has a healthy dollop of pragmatism thrown in. I honestly believe the majority will vote for convenience and self interest over anything else, but I don't believe it has to be that way forever. My mantra of being more informed, more thoughtful and a little kinder may not fit with today's society, but I don't see why it can't be an (idealistic?) goal for the future. And there we have it, another disjointed philosophical rant that answers no questions but questions some answers as is my wont. Open your minds, open your hearts, Stay safe..
I have been pondering the ever more binary nature of our society and have come to the conclusion right and left are outdated flags of convenience with which to wrap your opponents thoughts in in order not to have to analyse them....I'm afraid I think the labelling of 'types' of thinking as 'right wing' and 'left wing' lazy, derivative and divisive. Our cultural and social landscapes are a veritable movable feast and politics must evolve to meet the needs of this ever changing society, a rather Hegelian idea of thesis, synthesis and antithesis later bastadised to an extent by Marx and Hegel in their desire to label history and thus the present as an unstoppable dialectical juggernaut that will do its own thing and ultimately adapt to itself , the input of the individual working as a disjointed but cohesive unit being strangely overlooked by our avuncular bavarian duo (a theory I found rather strange for Marx to espouse as had the world adopted Marxism or a form of socialism there would have been an inevitable challenge to that and a reactionary implementation of an opposite system, and one which Marx could not criticise as his theory essentially predicts it, and so the circle would have continued with a fatalistic inevitability). Surely Marx was not as arrogant as Nietszche who suggested the snake that does not shed its skin must die whilst resolutely refusing to change much of his views!!- the inherent hypocrisy of the philosopher!?
The 'right' and the 'left' labels have such historic baggage that one cannot help applying ones historic experience of either, whether that be the dark days of 70s labour or thatcher's years, Blair's christian jihad, whatever. Our lived experiences put certain words in a box and enable us to continue indulging in comfortable stereotypes. Orwell's work, like that of Marx, Dickens, any writer or philosopher, artist, whatever, is anchored in and of his time and his own lived experiences. I am not suggesting that we ignore old ideas and texts, as Twain suggested, history doesn't repeat itself, but it certainly rhymes, so we need to be familiar with what has gone before.
A good idea is a good idea regardless from whence it comes, and labelling certain concepts right or left wing immediately puts them in a certain category of accept or ignore for many, sadly, such is the binary nature of today's-and previous?-society. I am an eternal optimist and a somewhat naive idealist, but I am an anomalous soul who has a healthy dollop of pragmatism thrown in. I honestly believe the majority will vote for convenience and self interest over anything else, but I don't believe it has to be that way forever. My mantra of being more informed, more thoughtful and a little kinder may not fit with today's society, but I don't see why it can't be an (idealistic?) goal for the future. And there we have it, another disjointed philosophical rant that answers no questions but questions some answers as is my wont. Open your minds, open your hearts, Stay safe..
MikeM6 said:
I would suspect that it is grossly misunderstood by many.
As I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
All together now: this is bAs I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
ks.The idea that the Nazis were socialists goes from the undeniable premise that the Nazis had “socialist” as part of their name to the conclusion that the Nazis were, in fact, socialists.
OK, that must mean that the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is, in reality, a republic. Which, again, is utter b
ks.longblackcoat said:
MikeM6 said:
I would suspect that it is grossly misunderstood by many.
As I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
All together now: this is bAs I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
ks.The idea that the Nazis were socialists goes from the undeniable premise that the Nazis had “socialist” as part of their name to the conclusion that the Nazis were, in fact, socialists.
OK, that must mean that the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is, in reality, a republic. Which, again, is utter b
ks.biggbn said:
longblackcoat said:
MikeM6 said:
I would suspect that it is grossly misunderstood by many.
As I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
All together now: this is bAs I mentioned in the French elections thread, is Socialism left wing? If so, does that make the National Socialist German Workers Party left wing, as they were an extreme example of socialism? But then where does fascism fit? Is that right wing? Can you be extremely left and right wing at the same time?
ks.The idea that the Nazis were socialists goes from the undeniable premise that the Nazis had “socialist” as part of their name to the conclusion that the Nazis were, in fact, socialists.
OK, that must mean that the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is, in reality, a republic. Which, again, is utter b
ks.Right wing = Unpopular ideas that are not a byproduct of reading Das Kapital.
Left wing = Unpopular ideas that are a byproduct of reading Das Kapital.
Progressive = Equality of outcome.
Free market = Equality of opportunity.
Left of centre = Muddy trying to please everyone all the time while feeling morally justified.
Right of centre = Muddy trying to please everyone all the time while feeling morally outraged.
Left wing = Unpopular ideas that are a byproduct of reading Das Kapital.
Progressive = Equality of outcome.
Free market = Equality of opportunity.
Left of centre = Muddy trying to please everyone all the time while feeling morally justified.
Right of centre = Muddy trying to please everyone all the time while feeling morally outraged.
Jasey_ said:
This is the closest I've seen to a good explanation of right v left whingers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
Horseshoe theory is, in my opinion, seriously flawed and - as detailed in various quotes on that wiki page - suffers from coming from a fundamentally liberal outlook where both far-left and far-right seek to change the status quo from liberal capitalism into something else that doesn't prioritise individualism and so they're not only 'just as bad as each other' but almost indistinguishable.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
Ideologically far-left and far-right couldn't really be more different - think about what each's idea of the perfect, frictionless, utopian 'wave a magic wand and bring it into existence' society would be like. One's a fully egalitarian, non-hierarchical, equitable world of mutual support, peace and love and the other is a perpetual grinding war between racial superpowers in which the strong crush the weak and a totalitarian state continually purges weakness and corruption from its people.
I know that in practice the DDR ended up virtually indistinguishable from the Third Reich (just to pick a country that went straight from one side of the spectrum to the other) but, like Stalin's USSR, Mao's China and all the other places that became oppressive, destructive hellholes in the name of communism, that's a matter of reality, not ideology.
If anything, there's a more tangible historical evidence for Fish Hook Theory where the centre and the far right end up close to each other. And that's only really a satire on how, time and again, liberals - the sort of people who say that both ends of the spectrum are as bad as each other - will choose fascism over socialism. Which rather implies that actually they're not the same and one is much more similar to the status quo than the other.
Right or Left Wing is very subjective and change down through history, and both are used pejoratively too....
My maternal grand-parents, by today's standards would be viewed as extremely left wing, yet weren't even remotely Marxist, and throughout 50s & 60s were labour party activists and councillors in Scotland, some of their views included, which weren't unpopular with their peers and would have made Corbyn look positively tory
They both despised Churchill, they viewed him as being extreme right-wing
They were in CND
They despised Tories under any disguise, although to be fair it isn't the individual they disliked
They supported NATO
The were both quite conservative ( with a small c) my grandad being an active freemason and grannie being an active Eastern Star member
I'd never heard them say anything racist ever, they embraced immigration, welcoming peel from all over the world into their home - as long as you weren't German that was, my grannie due to her experience during the local blitz never forgave them, she knew it was somewhat unreasonable to blame folks 20, 30, 40 years on, that is apart from Willi Brandt former chancellor as he was an anti-nazi and fought in German underground against the Nazis
My maternal grand-parents, by today's standards would be viewed as extremely left wing, yet weren't even remotely Marxist, and throughout 50s & 60s were labour party activists and councillors in Scotland, some of their views included, which weren't unpopular with their peers and would have made Corbyn look positively tory
They both despised Churchill, they viewed him as being extreme right-wing
They were in CND
They despised Tories under any disguise, although to be fair it isn't the individual they disliked
They supported NATO
The were both quite conservative ( with a small c) my grandad being an active freemason and grannie being an active Eastern Star member
I'd never heard them say anything racist ever, they embraced immigration, welcoming peel from all over the world into their home - as long as you weren't German that was, my grannie due to her experience during the local blitz never forgave them, she knew it was somewhat unreasonable to blame folks 20, 30, 40 years on, that is apart from Willi Brandt former chancellor as he was an anti-nazi and fought in German underground against the Nazis
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff