It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Left and right are hollow, meaningless constructs

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
If you examine the planks that make up "leftist" and "rightist" opinions carefully, you will see they generally have little if no inherent connectivity. For example, what, logically, does the conservative emphasis on the right to bear arms have to do with, say, opposition to the healthcare bill or anti-abortion? One could believe in any of these three alone without necessarily beliving in either of the others. The same is equally true on the left: what does environmentalism inherently have to do with labor relations or diversity issues? Yet all three are considered "leftist." One could actually find many instances where the issues actually clash with each other rather than work harmoniously as part of an ideology.

When you go to the extremes of the political spectrum a funny thing starts to happen: left and right become indistinguishable. Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia resembled each other -- hyperpatriotism, blind leader worship, fusion of political and economic power, survalience state, collectivity, and so on.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...


The fact of the matter is that the ideologies people on ATS and elsewhere debate so vigorously are shams. They are distractions, which (very effectively) keep the "little people" divided against themselves while their various masters chuckle and pick their pockets. Its a distraction and should be recognized as such.




posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Sane people are Centrist, thats either center-left or center-right. The insanity coming from the mouths of self-proclaimed "liberals" and "conservatives" in the Internet proves there is some kind of divisive and propagandistic effort going on from behind the scenes. We cant see it, but we can sense it right behind the curtain.

"Conservative": We gotta Nuke Iran!

(yeah right, like a real conservative would say that)

"Liberal": We gotta disown and shoot anyone who has property

(yeah right, like a real liberal would say that)

These two supposed "sides" are hogging the attention, hogging the media, taking control of the mass-mind.

Thats why we need a third force, we need for Centrists, Libertarians and Independents to Unite and maybe even form a party of the sane that will take this nation back to an agenda based on Vision rather than Vilification of the "other side".



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Ah, the old left/right analogy... What a lot of tripe that is.

It was a clever tool when it was invented to disctract, confuse and obfuscate.

Just like the OP suggests, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by dampnickers
Ah, the old left/right analogy... What a lot of tripe that is.

It was a clever tool when it was invented to disctract, confuse and obfuscate.

Just like the OP suggests, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.


Unfortunately 95% of the political Debate revolves around either of the sides.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   
There are no two sides.

Only total governance (Nazism/Communism), and no governance (anarchy).

The rubbish that is espoused about "left" and "right", is just that. Rubbish.

Anarchists - in this day and age are nazis in disguise. They don't want freedom from government, they tend to be all in favour of THEIR idea of government being in control. Pinkos, as I like to call them.

95% of the debate rages around a false idea, perpetuated by mentally unstable nutters. That's right, I called them mentally unstable.

The very idea that we need a government in order to "tell us" what to do, is preposterous. It is psychotic, and wrong.

We are each able to determine our own destinies, and we do not need some suit in an office to dictate to us.

The debate should rage around one thing, and one thing only... when are we all going to grow up, and determine our own fates instead of letting some far off moron do it for us????

Peace.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by dampnickers]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dampnickers
 


No disagreement from me. The belief that politics are even required for the individual to live a happy life is psychotic.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


While I agree that there are forces out there to divide people we cannot deny there are differences in view and naturally people tend to click with others of similar views. It is a human inevitability and you cannot complain about it when it will occur regardless. To deny the existence of left and rightwing beliefs would be to deny that all people are without agreement, without consensus. Conservatism and Liberalism exists and they exist people members hold similar beliefs and views. The problem with politics in this nation is not necessarily left wing and right wing. Those differences will always exist regardless and if its not left wing or right wing, its something else. Its a matter of human nature. The problem with this nation is the idea of the perfect politician, the perfect political party, which simply is not true. We have people often voting against their beliefs for somebody purely because they represent this group or claim to represent that people. The problem is when people stray from their true ideals to pick a side in the political play.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
It seems so self-evident, doesn't it? Crystal clear. And yet look at the way the left-right divide is tearing at the decency and dignity of public debate itself. For whatever reason, millions seem to be able to grasp the simple fact and wander off into partisan delusions. I suppose its a short-cut to thinking, but a little thinking would save a lot of wasted energy, anger, frustration, and hot air.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
It seems so self-evident, doesn't it? Crystal clear. And yet look at the way the left-right divide is tearing at the decency and dignity of public debate itself.


Again you fail to understand. There will always be a divide amongst people and there will be a gathering of a consensus among a group. It is just human nature and to insist that its some construct, to insist its meaningless would be like claiming the idea of nationalities, religions, Chevy enthusiast clubs, painting clubs, all these are 'false constructs'. Its a really flawed assumption.

Your real problem with politics is how it is played out for publicity and how there are groups exploiting legit political beliefs between people, not necessarily the existence of ideologies. Your looking at it the wrong way.

And let me just say there is no such thing as a truly 'centrist' person, your going to be inevitably slanted either way.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
double post sorry.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I don't deny that left and right exist on a "phenomenological" level -- that is, they are "phenonenon" that can be identified and that motivate people, shape opinions, form the basis of shared ideals, and so on. However, what I do take issue with is the fact that these ideologies seem internally inconsistent. In other words, they "feel" like coherent ideologies but logically the sub-themes that make up the ideology are shifting, ill-defined, and often at odds with one another. This suggests the ultimate futility and shallowness of a worldview rooted in either one of these, because they ultimately have no "core" or self-consistancy. That way lies danger.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Left and Right do exist as clearly identifiable views. All the voices especially on ATS saying "Both are the same" are wrong.

But they are hogging 95% of airtime, especially in the Internet although most people are actually Centrists at heart. The problem is that in the current day USA too much time is wasted talking about the wrongs of "the other side" instead of the correctness of ones own.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by Skyfloating]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   
As hinted at in the OP, the positions are hysterically stereotype...

If Im pro-healthcare do I also have to be anti-guns?

Of course not.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by Skyfloating]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Here is a quick easy breakdown of what the true left right was supposed to mean and where your party fits into it.




Sorry, what totalitarian do you want? The fascist/socialist Repubs or the socialist/fascist Dems?

I think you know my position. Way over their on THE TRUE RIGHT.




Let me see, do I want the Dem Socialist dictatorship or the Repub Fascist dictatorship.

Who has the fancier gun to my head? Is that what you are asking?



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Most of the divide between left and right has come about due to the federal government overstepping its constitutional limits and injecting itself into areas the fed has no business being involved in. Its time for the states to come together and assert their tenth amendment rights. That is why we have states united as a republic; a republic based upon a set of principles that promoted the free man. The states were the great experiments of our republic. Each could go its own way (within the basic framework of the constitution) to find solutions to problems inherent in any society.

We have passed the point when the Federal government can be reined in by elections. It is time for the States to call a constitution convention and return the federal government back to its constitutionally defined role.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
"Conservative": We gotta Nuke Iran!

(yeah right, like a real conservative would say that)

"Liberal": We gotta disown and shoot anyone who has property

(yeah right, like a real liberal would say that)

These two supposed "sides" are hogging the attention, hogging the media, taking control of the mass-mind.


I would argue the easiest way to illustrate your point is the Obama presidency...

far right "Conservatives" proclaim him a "Socialist" hell bent on dismanteling capitalism.

far left "Liberals" proclaim he is a "Sell-out" to big business and corporate interests..

I am convinced that he has sufficiently dissapointed both extremes where history will remember him as a centrist.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I don't deny that left and right exist on a "phenomenological" level -- that is, they are "phenonenon" that can be identified and that motivate people, shape opinions, form the basis of shared ideals, and so on. However, what I do take issue with is the fact that these ideologies seem internally inconsistent. In other words, they "feel" like coherent ideologies but logically the sub-themes that make up the ideology are shifting, ill-defined, and often at odds with one another. This suggests the ultimate futility and shallowness of a worldview rooted in either one of these, because they ultimately have no "core" or self-consistancy. That way lies danger.


I usually argue on Southern Guardian's side with respect to this issue, but I think you have revealed a valid point here.

Quick example form my head: Katie is hog wild over access-on-demand abortion, loves her gays and wants them to have every right everybody else does, supports decriminalization of "softer" drugs. Katie also totally digs on capitalism and believes in the "invisible hand" much like a god. Regulation is a curse word to her.

Clearly, in the first part Katie is a flaming Liberal. In the second part, she is a psycho Conservative. The interesting thing is that on each side of these issues, she's solid in her views, not wavering. If you only knew her view on abortion, gays and drugs, you would likely think she was the Queen of the Liberals. If you knew only her economic views, you would think she was an Ayn Rand disciple.

But when somebody can not only represent something, but represent it to an extreme and then simultaneously represent the opposing side with equal zeal, it gets weird. How can Katie be a model Liberal and a model Conservative, at the same time?

This has nothing to do with these specific issues (abortions, gays, drugs, fascism) or whether people exist that share views like Katie's. The point is that it is possible, intrinsically, to be simultaneously identified with two opposing extremes. It seems to me, that might render your measuring device faulty because when something weighs -150 pounds and 150 pounds at the same time, it doesn't seem capable of being accurate.

On a scale that measures from Left to Right, when you try to plot Katie, your scale fails and you have to question the validity of the scale to begin with.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join