4 ms·

well pick any American politician right of center and check their wikipedia page.

by andyxor 5y ago

michaelsbradley 5y ago
please give an example with quote/s, link/s, and your summary analysis.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
krageon 5y ago
Every US politician that anyone would actually know is extreme right, so this is a very big group. Not a very useful classification, you may as well have said "any US politician". Then we get to the point where it is unclear what your actual problem is with their wikipedia pages. The only thing that can be concluded is that you apparently believe the wikipedia page of every US politician is somehow anomalous. It tells us nothing.
- andyxor 5y ago
  I mean, most of Republicans on wikipedia are vilified as "far-right conspiracy theorists" and all shades of evil, with links to fake news as source of information (Washington Post for example) one can argue, that if MSM spreads disinfo what can you expect from wikipedians, but the problem is their "power editors" and admins are a small clique with very particular political bias, it's just another echo chamber
  - Omnitaus 5y ago
    Wikipedia absolutely has a conservative bent, I wouldn't call the editing body "liberal" for using a newspaper owned by a union-busting multibillionaire as a source You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. We have a "blood and soil" far right party and a "diverse corporate oligopoly" center-right party.
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      > You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. "Two people repeating it on HN comments" != "it's true". It really boils down to: What's your standard of reference? You seem to want to use Europe (I assume) as the standard for defining left and right in US politics. Why do you consider that a reasonable thing to do? And even if you consider it a reasonable thing, why Europe? Why not Asia? Or the Middle East? Or Africa? Or the world as a whole? Or why not, you know, use the US as the standard for judging what left and right are in US politics?
      - krageon 5y ago
        Are you under the impression that if the hypothetical scope were moved off of Europe (why even assume it is on there?), US political parties would seem less unilaterally right-wing? I don't think you could make a coherent (and truthful) case for that, but I might be interested to read it.
        AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Well, if you put the focus on the Middle East, I'm pretty sure every US party would be extremely left-wing. Now, I agree that the Middle East is not where the standard of reference should be, but it's the area that I'm pretty sure of how we compare. Others are more tricky. Central and South America? There are countries there that we are clearly to the right of, but also some that we align somewhat with. I don't recall whether there are currently any right-wing dictatorships there. Asia? We could be to the left of some countries there. I don't have a good idea of how to describe where China is right now - are they right or left? They kind of have elements of both. At least some parties in India are to the right of the US. I don't have a good feel for Africa, though I'd bet that in at least some countries, some parties are to the right of the US. So... it's complicated. I think I can make a... a "case" might be overstating it, but at least a handwaving argument that if you move the focus off of Europe, then US political parties are less clearly right-wing. But an actual case? That would take something like a worldwide ranking of political parties on a left-right axis, which is data that I freely admit that I do not have.
  - krageon 5y ago
    > vilified When it is just the truth, you don't need to spin it to have a certain kind of impact. The impact exists even when you view things impassively, without much care one way or the other.

well pick any American politician right of center and check their wikipedia page.

michaelsbradley 5y ago

please give an example with quote/s, link/s, and your summary analysis.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

krageon 5y ago

Every US politician that anyone would actually know is extreme right, so this is a very big group. Not a very useful classification, you may as well have said "any US politician". Then we get to the point where it is unclear what your actual problem is with their wikipedia pages. The only thing that can be concluded is that you apparently believe the wikipedia page of every US politician is somehow anomalous. It tells us nothing.

andyxor 5y ago
I mean, most of Republicans on wikipedia are vilified as "far-right conspiracy theorists" and all shades of evil, with links to fake news as source of information (Washington Post for example) one can argue, that if MSM spreads disinfo what can you expect from wikipedians, but the problem is their "power editors" and admins are a small clique with very particular political bias, it's just another echo chamber
- Omnitaus 5y ago
  Wikipedia absolutely has a conservative bent, I wouldn't call the editing body "liberal" for using a newspaper owned by a union-busting multibillionaire as a source You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. We have a "blood and soil" far right party and a "diverse corporate oligopoly" center-right party.
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    > You didn't really respond to the assertion that all American politicians are right-wing, but it's true. "Two people repeating it on HN comments" != "it's true". It really boils down to: What's your standard of reference? You seem to want to use Europe (I assume) as the standard for defining left and right in US politics. Why do you consider that a reasonable thing to do? And even if you consider it a reasonable thing, why Europe? Why not Asia? Or the Middle East? Or Africa? Or the world as a whole? Or why not, you know, use the US as the standard for judging what left and right are in US politics?
    - krageon 5y ago
      Are you under the impression that if the hypothetical scope were moved off of Europe (why even assume it is on there?), US political parties would seem less unilaterally right-wing? I don't think you could make a coherent (and truthful) case for that, but I might be interested to read it.
      - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Well, if you put the focus on the Middle East, I'm pretty sure every US party would be extremely left-wing. Now, I agree that the Middle East is not where the standard of reference should be, but it's the area that I'm pretty sure of how we compare. Others are more tricky. Central and South America? There are countries there that we are clearly to the right of, but also some that we align somewhat with. I don't recall whether there are currently any right-wing dictatorships there. Asia? We could be to the left of some countries there. I don't have a good idea of how to describe where China is right now - are they right or left? They kind of have elements of both. At least some parties in India are to the right of the US. I don't have a good feel for Africa, though I'd bet that in at least some countries, some parties are to the right of the US. So... it's complicated. I think I can make a... a "case" might be overstating it, but at least a handwaving argument that if you move the focus off of Europe, then US political parties are less clearly right-wing. But an actual case? That would take something like a worldwide ranking of political parties on a left-right axis, which is data that I freely admit that I do not have.
- krageon 5y ago
  > vilified When it is just the truth, you don't need to spin it to have a certain kind of impact. The impact exists even when you view things impassively, without much care one way or the other.