Left or Right?

[Aerion Brightflame]

One of the most interesting discussion I have with a friend of mine is how we allign certain traits and behavoirs with one side of the political spectrum or another. How a seemingly binary classification system can be so complex and intertwinning with every facet of ours lives, how we can split the system into different groups with wildly different approaches and public perception.

 

So, I want to hear what YCM thinks:

 

• How do you define the Left-wing and the right-wing political spectrums in your mind? What viewpoints or ideas do you distinctly believe are left or right?
• How do you seperate the conflicting elements of the wings? Do you group the economic left and social left under the same banner, standing for the same ideals? Do you think there is merit to being to the right on one of these groups, and to the left on the others?
• Which do you feel is more dangerous, and why? Do you feel they are dangerous at all? If so, why? If not, why not?
• What aspect of the opposing ideology do you find most foriegn? Most relatable?

The bullet points are just talking points, answer the brief in whatever manner you see fit.

 

EDIT: I also want to say, I don't care if you don't think you really know, I'd rather see people throw ideas out, get involved with the discussion and think about it than worry about being 'right'. The political spectrum is complex, and I don't think any of us will really be 'right' in our interperation of it. So just, get involved :D

[BANZAI!!!!]

Oddly enough, i'd be much more interested to hear winter's thoughts on the subject.

 

Won't post my personal thoughts just yet, mostly because I have other things I should be doing, but this looks like a stimulating conversation and so I will stick around.

[~British Soul~]

How do you define the Left-wing and the right-wing political spectrums in your mind? What viewpoints or ideas do you distinctly believe are left or right?

For me; I can't really tell the difference between the left/right-wing spectrums because quite frankly, it confuzzles me.

[Icy]

Maybe its the fact that I live a very cloistered lifestyle¹, but Ive never understood the whole left and right and center and top and bottom political thing. I understand that its a name to a general belief and it has its uses but its destructive to me. I never formally care to learn it and forget it as soon as. People are far more complex than any title could suggest. To treat them as such may as well be on a different dimensional plane. All it does for all its uses is give cause to divide.

 

By those tables I'm very Left with hints of strong right in certain issues and that's fine. But as I get older, I begin to see the world as less of a case of Black and White moralities and more of a series of Blue and Orange Moralities². If a person believes themselves to be right then they are right, informational things not withstanding. If you believe you are right then you are right. While it might be easier to see things in a divisional manner, people and issues are far more complicated than that and they deserve treatment as such.

 

Thus my opinion on this whole Left and Right thing is: It is a tool to be used to alleviate stress but not a measure for which to guide your opinion and judgement. People are complicated.

 

---

1. Willfully to be honest, the outside world is showing its signs on the world I grew up in but I remain blind to a lot of it on purpose. I fear sour).
2. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlueAndOrangeMorality

[Dad]

 

Maybe its the fact that I live a very cloistered lifestyle¹, but Ive never understood the whole left and right and center and top and bottom political thing. I understand that its a name to a general belief and it has its uses but its destructive to me. I never formally care to learn it and forget it as soon as. People are far more complex than any title could suggest. To treat them as such may as well be on a different dimensional plane. All it does for all its uses is give cause to divide.

 

By those tables I'm very Left with hints of strong right in certain issues and that's fine. But as I get older, I begin to see the world as less of a case of Black and White moralities and more of a series of Blue and Orange Moralities². If a person believes themselves to be right then they are right, informational things not withstanding. If you believe you are right then you are right. While it might be easier to see things in a divisional manner, people and issues are far more complicated than that and they deserve treatment as such.

 

Thus my opinion on this whole Left and Right thing is: It is a tool to be used to alleviate stress but not a measure for which to guide your opinion and judgement. People are complicated.

 

---

1. Willfully to be honest, the outside world is showing its signs on the world I grew up in but I remain blind to a lot of it on purpose. I fear sour).
2. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlueAndOrangeMorality

 

 

For clarity.  When you say

 

 

 

If a person believes themselves to be right then they are right, informational things not withstanding.

 

Do you mean "right" as in right leaning on the political spectrum, or right as in "correct"?

[Icy]

Do you mean "right" as in right leaning on the political spectrum, or right as in "correct"?

 

"Right" as in "correct".

[Dad]

"Right" as in "correct".

 

You said "informational things not withstanding".  Can you be more clear?  Are you saying, omitting facts, people should believe whatever they want, or that they have a right to believe whatever they want?

[Icy]

You said "informational things not withstanding".  Can you be more clear?  Are you saying, omitting facts, people should believe whatever they want, or that they have a right to believe whatever they want?

 

Both. 2.0 + 2.0 = 4.0, Water boils with heat, etc is informational/factual. Factual things without any subjective basis no matter the argument. These things we are neither right nor wrong on. They are facts and are outside opinion.

 

Everything else people should and have the right to believe whatever they want no matter the social ramifications. This does not necessarily mean they can do what they want because they believe it, society does not and should not work that way, but it does mean they are just as right on those issues as you and I on ours.

[BLASTERZ]

• There’s an economic and authoritarian measure for this (easier to separate the two, although there is some overlap) 
  Authoritarian axis measures freedoms delegated to the people
  Examples: Do you have a right to an abortion over the state’s views? Is Homosexuality legal and not persecuted against. Can the feds monitor your activities (for a wide range of reasons)? 
  A leftist view on this would be to reduce government involvement as much as possible in non-essential. A right wing view would be to embrace utilitarianism. 
  ie. Sometimes individual freedoms must be infringed upon for the collective aggregate good.
  Economics axis measures material delegations to the people as well as the means of production & demand
  Examples: Should the government be protectionist to bolster its internal labor market? Higher taxes on the wealthy to support public goods? Is it more important to control inflation or unemployment? And for something that might overlap, can the government seize public property (if public property exists)
  I do think there are merits to both sides. 
  Right wing economics will make 3 groups. A few very successful, and the majority moderately more successful, and a larger few deplorably poor. Given how right wing economics work, overtime you will see the three groups split into 2. The wealthy and the poor. This leads to revolution. It’s dope in the short run though. 
  Left Wing Authoritarianism will create a “feel good state”- individualism is prized. Your quirks, however disruptive, should be tolerated and treasured. I suppose in theory it makes for a happier population. Problem is when you start edging towards the fringes, people with less fringe views than you start questioning the quo. At this point you need government involvement.
  Left Wing Economics is basically the art of preserving the middle class. It doesn’t have to be full out communism, something as simple as a border adjustment tax with revenue being used to subsidize manufacturers would suffice. A simple left wing economic policy (IMO) would be the following. 
  Start with pure Rightwing Free Trade, mathematically, a nation will always be better off trading. So say consumer and producer surpluses were both = 100 before trade, but after trade, Producer dropped to 80, and consumer rose to 140. A leftist economic move here would be to internally redistribute to produces and consumers such that they both were at welfare = 110. Everyone is better off, but nobody is adversely being made into a “loser”
  Right Wing Economics is simply increasing total welfare gains at any cost to scarcity. Fewer costs you care about, the more rightwing economically you are. Collectively (aggregate) everyone will be better off, but certain individuals will get really left behind.
  Do they stand for the same thing? Maybe, at some point you’ll notice overlaps. Right Wing economics favoring the collective will start to seem like right wing authoritarianism favoring utilitarianism. Something similar on the left should happen too. This might be because of how deeply economics has embedded itself in our politics.

• Yup, I don’t think that 4 of our quadrants are sustainable. Economically left, authoritarian left – eventually you run out of other people money to fund ever more obscure projects with decreasing marginal value
  Authoritarian Right, Economically Right - at some point the poor largely outnumber the wealthy. Two options here. Poor overthrow the rich French revolution style. Rich eradicate the poor purge style. Both options prune part of the population off, and start over in a smaller subgroup. 
  Neither of these are stable IMO
  The most dangerous, IMO, is libertarianism (subsect of AL/ER). This is trusting the market (mathematics) to be your government. Could work in theory, but there’s no fall back. Math doesn’t have compassion. Once someone seizes the mode and means of production, they’ll be able to warp the market. In theory, the markets will be able cater to the wishes of the people. In reality, Humans are too greedy for that to work out. But since you’ve tolerated social liberalism, people think they’re happy even if they’re being economically raped. This is a stable equilibrium point with the masses being placed at the willful servitude of the powerful.

I admire libertarians, largely because they’ve been more successful at creating a lasting empire unlike AR/EL people like me. 

Sidenote: Problem with AR/EL, is economic right shifts. Look at the USSR. Stalin died poor. Later blokes were coating their houses in gold. Government needs to be kept accountable to utilitarianism. It’s a gentle paradox, the government should have as much authority as it needs, but it should serve the people. Best idea to maintain that is having free elections that cannot be infringed upon; the one authority the government cannot absorb. 

Anyway back to libertarians, it’s a honey trap you cannot escape from. It’ll make you enjoy being ravaged. There’s something cynically beautiful about that.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

A government only has power so long as it means something to the governed, so long as it adheres to the fundamental principles involved in its foundation and so long as those principles are still relevant to the times. 

 

The right-wing seeks to uphold fundamental laws. 

The left-wing seeks to change them and adapt them to changing times. 

 

Both have their place, both are capable of atrocities and monopolies. Neither are intrinsically better than the other and maintaining a healthy balance between the two is what keeps stable nations stable. 

 

 

• Anyway back to libertarians, it’s a honey trap you cannot escape from. It’ll make you enjoy being ravaged. There’s something cynically beautiful about that.

 

Libertarianism is a nihilistic pipedream that eschews historical context and meaning. You'd just have piratical drug dealers with semiautomatics and pitbulls running everything. There'd be very little enjoyable or beautiful about it.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

It's evolved for me

 

Right now I see the left as globalist and multi-cultural and the right as nationalist 

 

Kind flips the economic axis though since I agree more with the AFL-CIO peeps rather than the Chamber of Commerce types

[SkaterTheDJWolf]

I really couldn't care less about the left or the right.

 

People are people, and all that matters is what you believe. Left and right are too simple. 

 

However, as you can see from some of my previous threads, I do not stand for the SJWism that some of the self-identifying left thinks they are entitled to. Extremism is never a good thing.

 

As for top and bottom, I've never heard of those. After the raging debates about left/right, I'm too afraid to ask.