4 ms·

> Now democracy is a distinctly leftist concept This one dimensional left vs. right can't accurately describe anything. Even the subject of wealth redistribut

by Canada 11y ago

> Now democracy is a distinctly leftist concept This one dimensional left vs. right can't accurately describe anything. Even the subject of wealth redistribution is too nuanced to be properly described or debated with this oversimplified left/right paradigm.

js8 11y ago
They are broad categories, I agree, but my definition is consistent with the historical usage. Left/right originated in the French parliament, where on the left were proponents of political equality (you could perhaps, with a stretch, call them democrats), while on the right were proponents of keeping the hereditary privileges of the nobility. The definition of left/right I gave describes a very general moral principle. Of course there are many flavours of left and right, depending on the exact interpretation, and they don't agree in many things. However, you didn't give any argument why is democracy not leftist, according to the above, historically accurate, definition. GP asked if he is left or right, I gave an answer.
- Canada 11y ago
  > my definition is consistent with the historical usage Like with the historical usage of the term "hacker" I think we have to accept that the real world usage is now so muddled that on a general forum such as this you can't fall back on that anymore. Left is whatever they say on MSNBC and right is whatever they say on FOX NEWS (or your local equivalents) And I hope we can agree that whatever those they is completely partisan. Totally disconnected from any political, social, or economic philosophy. Utterly devoid of intellectual honesty. > The definition of left/right I gave describes a very general moral principle. I don't know that it does. For example, compare the modern American libertarians (see Murray Rothbard) vs the left libertarians who predate them. (see Mikhail Bakunin) Both see the state as evil. Their morals are pretty much the same. Their only difference is in how to structure government to protect the interests of the individual. One is right while the other is left. And whether or not the state itself is inherently evil is not a left/right debate either. There's obvious examples of authoritarians on both sides.
  - js8 11y ago
    > I think we have to accept that the real world usage is now so muddled that on a general forum such as this you can't fall back on that anymore I don't want to accept it. I don't accept it with respect to other words either, such as hackers or democracy (despite GDR calling itself democratic). > Both see the state as evil. Their morals are pretty much the same. Their only difference is in how to structure government to protect the interests of the individual. One is right while the other is left. I am not really all that familiar with them to be the judge here, but if their morals are pretty much the same, then one can hardly be left and the other hardly right according to my definition. I think this may be a case of misapplied labels, but I am not sure. > There's obvious examples of authoritarians on both sides. That doesn't mean anything. Just my opinion - left/right moral distinction is used within your ingroup, but authoritarianism resolves to what the ingroup is.
- walshemj 11y ago
  erm Democracy Is wider than that and wasn't developed during the French revolution. You could reasonably say that modern Democracy is an enlightenment project.

by Canada 11y ago

js8 11y ago

They are broad categories, I agree, but my definition is consistent with the historical usage. Left/right originated in the French parliament, where on the left were proponents of political equality (you could perhaps, with a stretch, call them democrats), while on the right were proponents of keeping the hereditary privileges of the nobility. The definition of left/right I gave describes a very general moral principle. Of course there are many flavours of left and right, depending on the exact interpretation, and they don't agree in many things. However, you didn't give any argument why is democracy not leftist, according to the above, historically accurate, definition. GP asked if he is left or right, I gave an answer.

Canada 11y ago
> my definition is consistent with the historical usage Like with the historical usage of the term "hacker" I think we have to accept that the real world usage is now so muddled that on a general forum such as this you can't fall back on that anymore. Left is whatever they say on MSNBC and right is whatever they say on FOX NEWS (or your local equivalents) And I hope we can agree that whatever those they is completely partisan. Totally disconnected from any political, social, or economic philosophy. Utterly devoid of intellectual honesty. > The definition of left/right I gave describes a very general moral principle. I don't know that it does. For example, compare the modern American libertarians (see Murray Rothbard) vs the left libertarians who predate them. (see Mikhail Bakunin) Both see the state as evil. Their morals are pretty much the same. Their only difference is in how to structure government to protect the interests of the individual. One is right while the other is left. And whether or not the state itself is inherently evil is not a left/right debate either. There's obvious examples of authoritarians on both sides.
- js8 11y ago
  > I think we have to accept that the real world usage is now so muddled that on a general forum such as this you can't fall back on that anymore I don't want to accept it. I don't accept it with respect to other words either, such as hackers or democracy (despite GDR calling itself democratic). > Both see the state as evil. Their morals are pretty much the same. Their only difference is in how to structure government to protect the interests of the individual. One is right while the other is left. I am not really all that familiar with them to be the judge here, but if their morals are pretty much the same, then one can hardly be left and the other hardly right according to my definition. I think this may be a case of misapplied labels, but I am not sure. > There's obvious examples of authoritarians on both sides. That doesn't mean anything. Just my opinion - left/right moral distinction is used within your ingroup, but authoritarianism resolves to what the ingroup is.
walshemj 11y ago
erm Democracy Is wider than that and wasn't developed during the French revolution. You could reasonably say that modern Democracy is an enlightenment project.