Time To Abandon The Terms "Left" And "Right"

[phildwyer]

Following on from the French Revolution thread: why do people continue to use its antiquated spatial metaphor to describe their political allegiances?

Surely these terms have become misleading and inaccurate obstacles to independent or original political ideas. Is it time to replace them?

And if so, with what should they be replaced? How about "pro-" or "anti-capitalist" for example?

 

[ernestolynch]

Unrepentant hard left.

 

[Spion]

You're just a bit slow

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm anti-pro-neoliberal.

 

[phildwyer]

hard

An even more telling trope, iydmmss.

 

[Spion]

What a thread. Bloke who witters on about god complains about supposedly antiquated political terms LOL

 

[phildwyer]

What a thread. Bloke who witters on about god complains about supposedly antiquated political terms LOL

The ignorance and stupidity of people like you is precisely the reason why the terms need revision.

You are among the finest examples here of the obsolete ideology that has prevented the so-called "Left" from coming close to power for the last three decades. And that's really saying something.

You have constructed your personal identity around your puerile political views, and as a result you find any challenge to them personally threatening.

You filter any and all data you receive through the medium of your anachronistic political spectrum. The "left/right" dichotomy relieves you of the necessity for independent thought.

Which is just as well, for you have made it abundantly clear that independent thought is well beyond your capacities.

You adhere fearfully to the futile, dogmatic materialism that has disgraced anti-capitalism for over a century. You adhere in terror to the equally daft dichotomy between "progressive" and "conservative" politics. In your quavering cowardice you adhere to the Victorian conception of the "opiate of the people."

If I were you, I would not exhibit my stupidity in public to the degree that you seem to enjoy.

Now leave this thread to those who have something useful to say.

 

[Spion]

You're mental, Dwyer. A tiny little yank fo your chain and all that nonsense pours out of your stupid head. You really need to roll with the punches a bit more.

FWIW, I tend to agree with you, left and right are very vague terms, but as long as we realise that and don't imagine they provide any more than a broad brush stroke description they're servicable enough. Thinking we'll create a political silver bullet around a few one or two word terms is a fool's errand, but it doesn't surprise me you're happy to run it.

I'd stick to the does-god-exist parlour games if I were you

 

[Crispy]

agree with first post

 

[rioted]

There is no left wing and right wing. There is only up wing and down wing.

 

[danny la rouge]

There is no left wing and right wing. There is only up wing and down wing.

Well, Phil's in a flap.

 

[fractionMan]

There is no left wing and right wing. There is only up wing and down wing.

don't forget your brown wings.

 

[phildwyer]

FWIW, I tend to agree with you, left and right are very vague terms, but as long as we realise that and don't imagine they provide any more than a broad brush stroke description they're servicable enough.

No they're not. They are a substitute for independent thought.

Take for example.... oh I don't know... the issue of God. As we see here on a regular basis, when this issue comes up, most people on the Left simply think to themselves: "God = right wing: Me = left wing: Ergo God = Bad."

And this occurs with regard to a huge range of issues, thus effectively preventing people from thinking "outside the box."

 

[fractionMan]

 

[phildwyer]

Also, this metaphor suggests that political opinions can be either "extreme" or "moderate." Well of course few people want to consider their views "extreme," so a whole range of opinion is automatically off-limits to many people.

The sitting arrangements of the eighteenth-century frog Constituent Assembly are an inadequate basis on which to conceive of politics in the C21st.

 

[toblerone3]

In economic terms concern with income inequality is a concern with a negative externality. Where being much richer than most of your reference group may make an individual feel like a winner in their own reference group, but the large mass of people all feel slightly worse.

This sort of thinking is explored in happiness economics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness_economics

So following that thinking free market economists are concerned with internalities. Why should one be considered internal and the other external?

 

[belboid]

Take for example.... oh I don't know... the issue of God.

what a fucking surprise

As we see here on a regular basis, when this issue comes up, most people on the Left simply think to themselves: "God = right wing: Me = left wing: Ergo God = Bad."

what a load of fucking bollocks.

yay, yet another of phils 'ooh look at me wank' threads

 

[The Groke]

Would make giving directions really tricky.

 

[danny la rouge]

No they're not. They are a substitute for independent thought.

Take for example.... oh I don't know... the issue of God. As we see here on a regular basis, when this issue comes up, most people on the Left simply think to themselves: "God = right wing: Me = left wing: Ergo God = Bad."

And this occurs with regard to a huge range of issues, thus effectively preventing people from thinking "outside the box."

Get God to do the Political Compass for us:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/test

Cheers.

 

[phildwyer]

Would make giving directions really tricky.

Only for men. Women use landmarks instead.

In fact, I've known several women who couldn't tell left from right. It's more common than you might think.

 

[phildwyer]

what a load of fucking bollocks.

Another fine exhibit of the Dinosaur Left.

There's no arguing with these people because their personalities have become intertwined with their politics.

If Belboid didn't have the "Leftist" label to stick on his lapel, there would basically be nothing remaining. Which would be a damn good thing. Let's take it away from him.

 

[belboid]

c'mon phil, just proclaim that you've already proven your point and be done with it. Or you'll be left having to make up sillier and sillier statements that contradict each other. Again.

 

[danny la rouge]

Only for men. Women use landmarks instead.

Turn at the chemist's shop. What do you mean which way?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The sitting arrangements of the eighteenth-century frog Constituent Assembly are an inadequate basis on which to conceive of politics in the C21st.

I think rather the opposite, that the terms that grew out of said seating arrangement have a remarkably enduring descriptive power. The terms left/right-wing still have considerable emotional weight – I can feel what they mean before I even start to rationalise them.

 

[phildwyer]

The terms left/right-wing still have considerable emotional weight – I can feel what they mean before I even start to rationalise them.

Me too. But surely that's the problem?

 

[krtek a houby]

I don't like either term because I don't subscribe to the typical example of right or left.

I don't think they are defunct, however. Maybe my tolerance of either set is, though.

 

[danny la rouge]

Get God to do the Political Compass for us:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/test

Cheers.

God's too busy, then, is he? I thought he was more hands off these days.

 

[gorski]

Only for men. Women use landmarks instead.

In fact, I've known several women who couldn't tell left from right. It's more common than you might think.

Most of my partners were perplexed with L/R... Relative notions are unsettling for the meek, after all, so they need absolutes...

 

[gorski]

Following on from the French Revolution thread: why do people continue to use its antiquated spatial metaphor to describe their political allegiances?

Surely these terms have become misleading and inaccurate obstacles to independent or original political ideas. Is it time to replace them?

And if so, with what should they be replaced? How about "pro-" or "anti-capitalist" for example?

In a way, I would say that thread follows posts 20, 21 and 25 by yours truly here: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=323227

Phil, what's "God" for you?!?

 

[ViolentPanda]

What a thread. Bloke who witters on about god complains about supposedly antiquated political terms LOL

Not that "left" and "right" have ever been anything but a very broad description of a location on a political spectrum, but they're a good "shorthand" to point people to which part of the spectrum to inspect.