Journal Chacham's Journal: Verbiage: Rightists, Leftists, Centrists 36
In politics, many people are consider "rightists", "leftists", "right of center" or "left of center". Specifically, in the US, The Republicans are "conservatives" or "right of center" whereas the Democrats are "liberals" or "left of center". But, what is this "center" anyway?
There are two types of "centers". The first is the actual center, the second is the average. If US politics were moved to Canada or England, the Democrats would most likely be "right of centre" and the Republicans "ultra-conservative". If the US was a fascist state the Republicans would be "leftists". But being the US is where it is, the Republicans fall on the right side of the center, and the Democrats the left.
In actuality, however, the US itself is "left of center". The Republicans are actually "centrists", and the Democrats are "leftists". If the Libertarian party was run by mature people it'd be Rightist, and the National Taxpayers Party (or Constitution Party, or whatever they decide to call it today) would be fascist. The Socialist Party would be "supra-liberals" (it seems to be that "ultra" is never applied to liberals).
But, what is the definition of "left", "center", and "right"?
In my view, a centrist wants to keep the status quo. A rightist idealizes individual rights, that is, having a state only use its power where necessary. A leftist idealizes collective rights, that is, having a state use its power unless there is no benefit.
So, the Libertarians wants to have the State only do defense but leave the people alone, makes them rightists. The Socialists want the State everywhere, making them leftists. The Democrats want some individual rights, but high taxes and a great deal of regulation and welfare, makes them in between center and left. Republicans want to keep many regulations, taxes, and some welfare, but want to move towards less of it all, makes them centrists, leaning to to the right.
Or something like that.
Liberatarians (Score:2)
The one thing that communists, fascists, conservatives & liberals have in common is their desire to control government and thus weild the power needed for their cause.
The central facet of libertarianism is that of an emasculated government with no power. It makes for a marginally interesting debate and little else.
Re:Liberatarians (Score:2)
Hey, some libertarian cooks [amazon.com] are cool.
In US polotics (Score:2)
As for the liberal
Though trying to measure political view points on a two dimensional scale never really works in the real world .
Re:In US polotics (Score:2)
That may be due to the mix of financial and social views. The Republicans were always financially conservative but used to be socially liberal, thus falling more correctly under "individual rights". The Democrats were always financially liberal (see for example the fight over the gold standard) but were socially conservative. The social aspects have switched making it a bit peculiar, but the fina
Re:In US polotics (Score:2)
My views are socially liberal and my economics are liberally socialist
The old republicans in the days of Lincoln really were a very different party from the party of today
The conservatism in the days of Lincoln
Re:In US polotics (Score:2)
But there is usually a general core belief.
though I do believe in a strong free market in many sectors
Mayhap there is hope for you yet.
Re:In US polotics (Score:2)
Free markets can be great , though greater controls are required to keep them free and even (Im no laissez faire nor a communist) GPL economics
corrections... (Score:1)
This is not entirely true. There are conservative Democrats, and there are liberal Republicans. It's just that the tendency is for the GOP to be on the "right" and the Dems to be on the "left".
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
But a "conservative Democrat" is usually called that. Calling him a Democrat, although technically correct, without explanation can be somewhat misleading.
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
Behold an error of grammar.
Democrats and Republicans are in some ways the defining aspects of "right" and "left" in American politics. (My personal metric is to have the right be "righteousness over liberty" and the left be "liberty over righetousness", but that's just me.)
The words "conservative" and "liberal" are reflection to how ready eith
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
I prefer [slashdot.org] "logic over values" and "values over logic".
The words "conservative" and "liberal" are reflection to how ready either side is for change -- that is, how much they call for things that are not currently used to be implemented, or how much resistance they give to changes in the status quo.
Sounds good.
But i also think [slashdot.org] it has to do with how they view people as being c
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
That places too much weight on mere rationality. Two days listening to the media and leaders on both sides will show ample rationality (logic) and irrationality (illogic) on either side. And, of course, both a "pro-choice" advocate and a "pro-life" advocate have rather clear values.
(Both words also prejudge the discussion by substituting one's own political leaning to the discussion. If I agree with leftist assertions, it's logical for me to be a lefti
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
In a sense, yes. But, formality/empathy, in this case, are merely the extraverted application of logic/values. Which is why i prefer the non-projected terms logic/values.
Two days listening to the media and leaders on both sides will show ample rationality (logic) and irrationality (illogic) on either side.
Depends how you translate the words. To Jung, b
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
To get exactly back to my point--no, they don't. RIGHT WING folk want to "help less and expect more." But there's nothing "conservative" about this, especially when it means changing the status quo. In fact, w
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
This much is true, in that perspective. In which the conservative aspect appplies more to the person not being helped, than the government changing policies to get to that point.
(And, to be concise, I want to point out that the first line of your "liberal" and "conservative" contrasts betrays unnecessary bias.
Yeah, but i couldn't resist.
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
I'll readilly admit my bias. Although I was going off of the "help less and expect more" line for that "even".
Free speech is actually rightist in the US. The left only allows free speech that supports their views.
I'd be interested in the facts that you use to back up that argument. I'm guessing the throttling of anti-abortion protestors and the recurrant "hate crime" style laws, which I'll admit do co
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
Ah, i hear. Still though.
Do you have an example of a right-wing action in support of general free speech that isn't directly tied to one of their hot-button issues?
No. Certainly not off-hand. The right-wing most definitely doesn't *ask* more opposing opinions, i just don't see them stifling them (presidential vists may be a different story, unfortunately).
Just in my experience, i found it to be that way. Fox News talk shows whi
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
True. The ignorant left-wing base certainly seems to be more vocal than its right-wing counterpart. I've noticed the same thing in the (very small) cross-section of both political sides I've seen.
OTOH, I live in Upstate New York, so it might just be the majority effect.
Re:corrections... (Score:2)
I am tempted to make the remark that "ignorant left wing" is redundant, but i'd rather do it surreptitiously.
I do find that most left-wingers do that, "ignorant" or not. I only know of two otherwise. One is younger than me, but he knows why he believes what he does and is comfortable with them. IOW, he knows his political beliefs are not based on logic, which sets him *miles* above the rest. The second one, is ol
One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
If there is a deity, things will keep the same way.
If there is no deity, religion was made up based on people's beliefs.
Ultimately, i don't think it'll have too much persuasion to be called an "axis".
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Depends on the religion involved, and how authoritarian it is.
If there is a deity, things will keep the same way.
No, because human beings are finite, and the deity is infinite- so we'll all have our own narrow view (ob Ref:The Blind Men and the Elephant Zen Koan) of that deity.
If there is no deity, religion was made up based on people's beliefs.
Whether a deity exists or not has NOTHING to do with religion- Religion is alway
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
For instance, Pope Benedict was widely decried in the American Press as a Conservative- but internal to the church, we have the range from Liberation Theology to the Traditionalist Latin Mass- and on that scale, he's dead center. It's not
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
I just don't think the religiosity of a person will change his politics. I think attitude towards religion and attitude toward how to vote are the same attitude.
I mean, i hear what you are saying, i just don't see it being of any practical importance. While it may be an indicator of a person's views, the the other two seem to be complete.
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
Does it? In Roman Catholicism, the Love Of Money is the Root of All Evil- but 53% of Roman Catholics voted Republican last election. I pick on them because I am one- and also because they've got the greatest disconnect between what names are on the ballot and the political portion of their rel
Re:One axis is not enough (Score:2)
I have spoken to some church goers, and they simply either agree or disagree with the church's views mand vote their own way. IMO, the (overwhelming majority of) people who vote and say they listen to the church would have voted that way anyway.
Re:Politics is two dimensional...take the test (Score:2)
Economic Left/Right: -8.00(very left wing)(used to be -5 and -2)
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.87 (very Liberal).. I have a problem with them using the term libertarian as well
Though the test fails in many areas , I do agree with a free market outside of infrastructure and I should be -10 liberal though some of the questions which define liberal are loaded . I agree in peoples rights to choose always , but i do believe a parents pr
actually (Score:1)
Why US politics bothers with this left/right paradigm I don't understand. It hasn't the faintest thing to do with how politics actually works here. There basically are no more revolutionaries in the historic
Re:actually (Score:2)
Simply because the US is somewhat left-wing, it would be the right-wing that is revolutionary.
Re:actually (Score:1)
It's all back-asswards here, and nobody quite gets it. Even the "nuanced" troll in my journal almost certainly wouldn't get it
We need a new way of describing politicial affiliations in the US. Left/right is broken. What should we replace it with?