4 ms·

(If we ignore the fact that both sides benefit from the free trade) The central tenet of the rightist ideology is free market and free trade. That one is obvio

(If we ignore the fact that both sides benefit from the free trade) The central tenet of the rightist ideology is free market and free trade. That one is obvious. The central tenet of the leftist ideology is wealth redistribution, that the rich should compensate for the poor. Thus, given that the Americans are orders of magnitude richer than Chinese, it is only fair that some of the wealth of Americans be redistributed to the Chinese. The international trade involve altruism for the same reason that the aristocrats altruistically share their (previous) privilege with the plebeians.

dragonwriter 11y ago
I don't think you've accurately identified the central tenet of either right-wing or left-wing ideology (though you've correctly identified how much of the current propaganda of the American Right portrays right vs. left ideology as if it were the central tenet of each.)
jokoon 11y ago
When one argues about income redistribution, he does so it can be done in its own country. Also, I don't think shifting labor on poorer country can really be described as income redistribution. Labor isn't income.
- netheril96 11y ago
  > When one argues about income redistribution, he does so it can be done in its own country. Why should wealth redistribution be scoped by country, but not less, not more? The rich class in the United States want to limit the redistribution within themselves, and they are called greedy and evil. Yet when the lower class of the US want to limit the redistribution within the US, and refuse the share with the even poorer, they call themselves the paragons of virtue. Isn't it double standards? And I'm not talking about income redistribution, but wealth redistribution. The opportunity to work is important in that.
  - jokoon 11y ago
    As I said in another comment, one should focus on politics of its own country, not the politics and the complexities of international politics. I don't think you can really argue that politics should cover what is beyond the grasp of the US. Since when will people vote and decide on the well being of non-americans ? It's non sense.

dragonwriter 11y ago

I don't think you've accurately identified the central tenet of either right-wing or left-wing ideology (though you've correctly identified how much of the current propaganda of the American Right portrays right vs. left ideology as if it were the central tenet of each.)

jokoon 11y ago

When one argues about income redistribution, he does so it can be done in its own country. Also, I don't think shifting labor on poorer country can really be described as income redistribution. Labor isn't income.

netheril96 11y ago
> When one argues about income redistribution, he does so it can be done in its own country. Why should wealth redistribution be scoped by country, but not less, not more? The rich class in the United States want to limit the redistribution within themselves, and they are called greedy and evil. Yet when the lower class of the US want to limit the redistribution within the US, and refuse the share with the even poorer, they call themselves the paragons of virtue. Isn't it double standards? And I'm not talking about income redistribution, but wealth redistribution. The opportunity to work is important in that.
- jokoon 11y ago
  As I said in another comment, one should focus on politics of its own country, not the politics and the complexities of international politics. I don't think you can really argue that politics should cover what is beyond the grasp of the US. Since when will people vote and decide on the well being of non-americans ? It's non sense.