3 ms·

I think that the left/right distinction is silly myself. A typical red vs blue flag waving exercise rather than solving anything. Both labour and conservatives

by csmuk 13y ago

I think that the left/right distinction is silly myself. A typical red vs blue flag waving exercise rather than solving anything. Both labour and conservatives seem to mix the tenets of the two freely based on whim rather than manifesto. On one hand we have Big Society and smash socialism. On the other hand we have Big Society and smash socialism. Same turds, different coloured glitter. All parties have sold out to their corporate sponsors and are as bent as anything.

jackgavigan 13y ago
Whilst I don't agree 100%, I don't disagree strongly enough to make an argument of it. :-)
mindcrime 13y ago
I think that the left/right distinction is silly myself. You're right, it's totally ridiculous. The whole thing is rooted in shit that dates back to before the French Revolution[1], and there's no real connection whatsoever between the "left" and "right" of the French Assembly and modern political views. How absurd is it? Just read this: There is general consensus that the Left includes progressives, communists, social-liberals, greens, social-democrats, socialists, democratic-socialists, civil-libertarians (as in "social-libertarians"; not to be confused with the right's "economic-libertarians"), secularists, and anarchists, and that the Right includes conservatives, reactionaries, neoconservatives, capitalists, neoliberals, economic-libertarians (not to be confused with the left's "civil-libertarians"), social-authoritarians, monarchists, theocrats, nationalists, Nazis (including neo-Nazis) and fascists. It takes anybody with even half a brain about .0002 seconds to realize that any sort of ontology that lumps "neoconservatives" and "economic libertarians" (which basically corresponds with "US style libertarianism") in the same bin, or that lumps "anarchists" with "democratic socialists", or that lumps pretty much any kind of "libertarian" along with "monarchists" and "theocrats", is totally useless. In modern terms, there is no "right" and there is no "left". There are just people haphazardly throwing around archaic labels because they either A. have a vague notion that the label confers some sort of appealing "vibe" and want to leverage it to advance their cause, or B. have a vague notion that the label will be seen as a pejorative and want to use it to put their opposition in a bad light. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics

by csmuk 13y ago

jackgavigan 13y ago

Whilst I don't agree 100%, I don't disagree strongly enough to make an argument of it. :-)

mindcrime 13y ago

I think that the left/right distinction is silly myself. You're right, it's totally ridiculous. The whole thing is rooted in shit that dates back to before the French Revolution[1], and there's no real connection whatsoever between the "left" and "right" of the French Assembly and modern political views. How absurd is it? Just read this: There is general consensus that the Left includes progressives, communists, social-liberals, greens, social-democrats, socialists, democratic-socialists, civil-libertarians (as in "social-libertarians"; not to be confused with the right's "economic-libertarians"), secularists, and anarchists, and that the Right includes conservatives, reactionaries, neoconservatives, capitalists, neoliberals, economic-libertarians (not to be confused with the left's "civil-libertarians"), social-authoritarians, monarchists, theocrats, nationalists, Nazis (including neo-Nazis) and fascists. It takes anybody with even half a brain about .0002 seconds to realize that any sort of ontology that lumps "neoconservatives" and "economic libertarians" (which basically corresponds with "US style libertarianism") in the same bin, or that lumps "anarchists" with "democratic socialists", or that lumps pretty much any kind of "libertarian" along with "monarchists" and "theocrats", is totally useless. In modern terms, there is no "right" and there is no "left". There are just people haphazardly throwing around archaic labels because they either A. have a vague notion that the label confers some sort of appealing "vibe" and want to leverage it to advance their cause, or B. have a vague notion that the label will be seen as a pejorative and want to use it to put their opposition in a bad light. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics