Left vs Right

Following US elections with a slight interest (because it's good TV), I came to an interesting realization. It has to do with Left/right political paradigm.

So this is how it goes in my country...

1. Ex communist party is now a socialist party following the break up of Yugoslavia...and they are labeled as "left". They are also pro choice, pro gay, pro transgender, pro immigration, pro EU, anti fascist, anti GMO, pro women's rights, and extremely anti Church...

2. The Democratic party was founded before the break up and is considered "right". Though proclaimed as center right...they often dabble in far right ideologies. They are anti abortion, not too crazy about immigration, pro big corps, strongly anti gay, strongly pro Christian/Catholic.

Just by looking at these definitions, the average US voter will notice big differences concerning their ideologies when compared to US.

The simple it down...The Democrats are the (far)right wing, and the socialists are the left with a tendency towards liberalism.

Isnt it weird ?

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
The simple it down...The Democrats are the (far)right wing, and the socialists are the left with a tendency towards liberalism.

Isnt it weird ?

Actually, no.

There are just 2 ways to live your life: service to self or service to others. Those that believe in service to others are mostly labeled 'left', those that believe in service to self are labeled 'right'. Political parties mostly support a mix of STS/STO philosophies and so, by merely analysing the number of their STO/STS opinions on their agenda's. you can place them on a scale from left to right.

It is not so that all socialist parties have the same agenda or opinions, e.g. in my country the socialist party is quit anti-EU, whereas in your country it is in favour of the Union. In principle, socialist parties have a lot of STO blood in their veins. E.g. allowing OTHERS to have the sexual orientation they want, providing for OTHERS if they are sick, allow OTHERS to go to school for free etc.

The STS movement tries to do as well as they can for themselves, and feel that if they do, the spills of their labour are sufficient to provide for others, if they care at all. They are concerned about others too, but mostly to scoff at them (why does he not get himself a job like I do, why does he not change his sexual behaviour into heterosexuality (really, they seem to think it's an illness that can be cured) etc.

If we simply all could learn to provide service to others, others would provide service to us by necessitiy. Alas, there are those greedy STS bastards that will think only of themselves, gladly accept your offer to provide for them and then start collecting stuff and power - after a while they will even say the "worked hard" for the gifts they received from others.

Good thing that even most die-hard STS folks have a STO aspect, vice versa. Hence the diversity in society.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Those that believe in service to others are mostly labeled 'left', those that believe in service to self are labeled 'right'.

So by your definition...the Democrats are left leaning...and yet I stated that on my end...democrats are right wingers...and you dont find that weird ?

That the term democrat can mean vastly differing opinions considering the origin of the said democrat.

Well...I find it confusing and weird. We have the same word in my language.."Demokracija"...meaning democracy...it means the same thing. The definition is the same...the tenets of democracy are the same. Yet...positions on various issues differ vastly.

I was taught many years ago that the Left - Right sides were started in France.
The left being anti establishment, anti Monarchy.
The right being the Monarch and the establishment.
The left won at that time.

This is still the case in many places, Corbyn - Leader of the opposition in the UK is well known as being a lefty,
in name and in relation to the above usage of the words.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Your opening paragraph is fundamentally correct, the far right position is simply the interests of the self and the common sense basis for any political perspective, we can begin to extend that towards concern for family, friends, tribe and nation, perhaps a general concern for other nations and peoples, and then to other species and life forms until we arrive at a far left perspective of caring for every atom in the Universe.

Were things go terribly wrong is say a far right perspective that loves ones own people and hates everyone else, or a so called far left perspective of say a self hating white liberal that despises family upbringing and own culture yet is greatly concerned for blacks, whales and narcotic herbs.

It is the case then that i consider self interest primary and that should be extended as far as possible with reservations in regards to conflict of interests, that ethnic and ideological differences often present a challenge and may be mutually incompatible, as well as certain types of insect, thus boundaries need to be established and maintained, build that wall.

Political theory isn't terribly complicated they just try to make it appear so, a mere question of subjectivity and objectivity.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

The American Right/Left paradigm has always been odd. It is odd because American exceptionalism has allowed those in the states to be led to believe that what is right wing thinking here, is in fact left wing thinking there. This is why there are those in the States who believe that Hitler was a lefty. Its bunkum of course, because the fact that the word "socialist" appearing in the name of his party, means largely nothing, since it was part of the propaganda, drawing in real socialists who soon cut ties with/were rounded up and shot by the Nazis.

Yes indeed, the American public, by and large, fail to correctly identify the difference between leftist ideology, and right wing ideology on a vast number of occasions. Because you and I were fortunate enough to grow up close to the geographical location where the right/left paradigm was first identified, which was in western Europe, we know the difference as a matter of having done our homework when we were youngsters. The American public however have been fooled into believing that left wing ideology allows for a xenophobic dictatorship, whereas that is something that no socialist worth being called such would ever get behind.

That does not, of course, apply to American folk who have managed to throw off the programming, but you only have to encounter some of the more foam mouthed right wing members from the states, right here on ATS, to get an impression of just what is wrong with the American definitions of right and left wing.

a reply to: TrueBrit

The American Left-Right paradigm makes no sense according to the accepted definitions everywhere else. Our line starts slightly left of center and goes all the way right. There's essentially no Left in America. It must be hilarious to read people whining about Leftists in America, as if we have vast Anarchist collectives and Communes on every corner. Our Left-wing party goes from slightly left of center to mid right ffs. Our two Presidential candidates this round are far right and mid right.

a reply to: TrueBrit

That's because the American left-right is a different axis than the European one.

We operate more on the idea of the paradigm being between totalitariansim (all forms) and anarchy as opposites. Or total government control and no government at all. The ideal on the right is as little government as possible to maintain just a think framework of control with the citizenry and local control filling in the rest. On the other end is all else: communism, fascism, monarchy, etc., all of which presuppose a big, central government that hordes all power and control to itself, leaving none for its people.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
Isnt it weird ?

Democrats is just a brand name.

I wouldn't read much more into it.

a reply to: TrueBrit

The American public however have been fooled into believing that left wing ideology allows for a xenophobic dictatorship, whereas that is something that no socialist worth being called such would ever get behind.

Thanks for the input my man.


What I find weird is that Republicans in the US are considered right wing as opposed to Europe (well, Croatia at least)...where democrats are right wing. So apparently...my democrats would not agree with the US democrats. In fact...they would most likely go to war...since my democrats are ultra nationalistic and extremely religious. Sort off something like the republicans in the US.

So if US ever decides to stage a coup in my country and bring in a puppet ruler to suit their own agenda...they might get really surprised if the go for the democrat.

a reply to: ketsuko

On the other end is all else: communism, fascism, monarchy, etc., all of which presuppose a big, central government that hordes all power and control to itself, leaving none for its people.

But the US is...well...stated as a democracy...doesnt it have a gigantic government ? Doesnt US govt "hordes all power and control to itself" ?

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Mario, two things to bear in mind...

First, the American axis on which these things are measured is, as Ketsuko correctly stated, different to the way most of Europe deals with the matter. But you must also be aware that the Liberal Democrats of Great Britain would find themselves at odds with Croatian Democrats as well. Why? Because hypernationalist politics is by definition RIGHT wing, not left wing. Democrats here believe in the freedom of everyone to do their thing unmolested by the prejudice of others.

Regardless of what the party you are talking about calls itself, it is a right wing organisation. They could call themselves the fluffy bunny party, and would still be a bunch of closet Nazi throwbacks with no legitimacy what so ever. Like the Nazis, they seem to have usurped a positive term, to legitimise negative positions and behaviour.

Also, back on the American system for a moment... there really is no good reason why there ought to be a difference between the way American politics measures a parties left or right status, but for some reason there is a difference. I personally believe, that the difference has been developed as a way to prevent United States citizens from drawing easily comprehended comparisons between themselves, and those living in the rest of the western world, the better to keep them guessing come election time, and operating on knee jerk, rather than rational thought.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly



They could call themselves the fluffy bunny party, and would still be a bunch of closet Nazi throwbacks with no legitimacy what so ever.
.

Like that purple/gold party over here? Oh I've said too much.

a reply to: Taggart

Purple and Gold... in Santa Carla?

Really? I would not know. I know of UKIP, and I have no love for them at all, despite being a leave voter in the EU referendum (did not vote leave because of immigration).

a reply to: TrueBrit

This is why there are those in the States who believe that Hitler was a lefty. Its bunkum of course, because the fact that the word "socialist" appearing in the name of his party, means largely nothing, since it was part of the propaganda, drawing in real socialists who soon cut ties with/were rounded up and shot by the Nazis.

This is how I have understood it True. The overthrow of the monarchy in Russia sent shock waves through the industrialists of Europe and the USA and that was the reason that so many of them backed him financially as they saw him as a bulwark against the continued rise of that spirit of rebellion emanating out of Russia. The use of the term 'socialist' in his National Socialist Party was exactly for the purpose that you point out. It was to confuse, like baiting a mouse trap with cheese.

And many in the US who now adhere to the rhetoric of the right have fallen for this switcheroo,

This switcheroo is not accidental. The more powerful in the corporate system have, through their popular media outlets, inundated the American public with left is right, up is down, black is white tomfoolery . I think of it like the old Tower of Babel story where God made the people to talk in different languages and hence the structure crumbled. It's just here, it was not God, it was those who feared the rising of future generations who screwed with the language.

Like you, I find that conversation across these issues here on ATS to be symptomatic of the wider spread of this linguistic dis-unity.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: TrueBrit

The American public however have been fooled into believing that left wing ideology allows for a xenophobic dictatorship, whereas that is something that no socialist worth being called such would ever get behind.

Thanks for the input my man.


What I find weird is that Republicans in the US are considered right wing as opposed to Europe (well, Croatia at least)...where democrats are right wing. So apparently...my democrats would not agree with the US democrats. In fact...they would most likely go to war...since my democrats are ultra nationalistic and extremely religious. Sort off something like the republicans in the US.

So if US ever decides to stage a coup in my country and bring in a puppet ruler to suit their own agenda...they might get really surprised if the go for the democrat.

And that is what we get for adhering to simple labels Mario. Many folks here in the US just follow labels. Branding. It has been beat into us for a century. Buy the name brand, so that we only look for the label of things. So if you are confused on how to label one political position in relation to another position you are not alone.

More confusing is that here in the US, the labels have also switched. It used to be that the more liberal party was called Democrat and the more conservative party, Republican . Just the opposite of how it is today and much more in line with your definitions.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The Babel analogy is perfect for this instance TerryMcGuire. Absolutely spot on!

Its all being done to ensure that there is a near subliminal influence on people in the US to only refer to one another, rather than the examples set by other nations, when deciding matters of policy, matters of party identification, and alignment.

By making everyone abroad appear to be somehow "other" than those in the states, by making the rest of the world seem confusing and backwards (even though, since the rules were first devised in Europe, it is those who still use the old system who get to say which way round is the correct way, not the bloody noobs!), the people who enjoy power in the States, can nearly guarantee the maintenance of that power ad infinitum.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

We are reversed as well, the Democrats are left and Repunblicans are right.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Taggart

Purple and Gold... in Santa Carla?

Really? I would not know. I know of UKIP, and I have no love for them at all, despite being a leave voter in the EU referendum (did not vote leave because of immigration).

I'm in the North of England. Also a leaver but not because of Farage and Co, if anything they made me think twice.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Let me try to explain American politics.

They use words like;
Progressive
Democratic
Republic
Freedom

The same way someone calling themselves a vegan, eats bacon.