slug.com slug.com

10 8

Are You Right Wing or Left Wing?
Keep track of your disposition on the issues below and you will find out if your political philosophy is right wing or left wing. As used here the terms have the news media created meanings that left wing is a blend of socialism and liberalism and right wing is everything else.

Basic philosophy
Left- Every person is born into a club. The club is called society and it has rules.
Right- A person is born as a free agent into a situation. He/she belongs to any club by volition only.
Political philosophy
Left- a democratic government is an historical organization that has unlimited power to control every thing and everybody in the jurisdiction. It takes direction from the will of the majority.
Right- a democratic government is a creation of the people, so the government is accountable to them and its power is limited by fundamental rights and possibly a written constitution.
Economic philosophy
Left- an economy provides the means for everyone to obtain a minimum standard of living.
Right- an economy provides everyone with their subsistence needs and the opportunity for more, based on merit.
Social philosophy
Left- there are no differences between persons that justify discriminating selection.
Right- there are some important differences between persons that justify discriminating selection.
Fundamental rights
Left- there are no ‘a priori’ rights, only the rights granted by government or espoused by the United Nations.
Need begets a right to have the needs provided by everyone else.
Right- there are ‘a priori’ rights and they come before governments and their laws and before the UN. Governments are at fault if they are violated.
Need does not beget a right.
Immigration policy
Left- our borders should be open, not barring anyone but criminals.
Right- the people of a country must control who crosses the borders or else there is no real country.
Justice
Left- everyone should get about the same because he/she is a human being. It is called “social justice” and is measured on a basis.
Right- justice means that a person should get what he/she deserves. It is therefore meaningful on the basis of the individual, not the .
Crime and punishment
Left- crime is, for the most part, the result of living conditions. Punishment should be based on social values.
Right- crime is the manifestation of personal morality. Punishment should accord with what the convicted person deserves.
Science
Left- science should be corrected to include the latest liberal thinking.
Right- science must remain objective and protected as a believable store of knowledge.
Gender orientation
Left- gender is a spectrum from extreme male to extreme female and one’s position in this spectrum is by personal inclination, not necessarily by anatomy.
Homosexuality has the same value to society as heterosexuality.
Right- gender is related to anatomy and a person is typical to his/her sex or atypical. Male-female coupling is the obvious pattern in nature and is necessary to procreate the species.
Homosexuality does not have that value but is allowable by fundamental rights.
Education system
Left- all students, from university down to kindergarten, should be indoctrinated in left wing ideology because it is undeniably true.
Right- education should not include indoctrination of any kind, particularly in an optional political ideology. Left wing indoctrination has become a serious matter.
Free Speech
Left- when speech and writing seriously challenges left wing ideology it has gone too far and should be banned.
Right- there should be no censoring of ideas. It is how we find the truth.
Abortion
Left- a woman may choose to abort a baby in her womb at any time up to birth and this choice should be protected by law.
Right- the baby in the womb is a new human being and therefore has the fundamental rights that all human beings have. The first is security of his/her life and this should be protected by law.
Desired future society
Left- a steady, completely undifferentiated society of people with all having approximately the same standard of living and access to all institutions. A new Garden of Eden.
Right- a dynamic society of people with opportunity and justice, and many projects underway, driven by the twenty percent who take responsibility, risk their assets in business, and do eighty percent of the work.

Tell me if this is a good approach for facing the division between left and right wing people. If you like it please pass it on. Probably, there are better ways to present the list of categories and positions but I am not good with word processors.

Robert Stephen Higgins

BobHiggins 4 Jan 11
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

10 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Right and left are far too simplistic.

0

My view is that right wing and left wing are meaningless terms. Also Socialist and capitalist. If you have a bank account you are capitalist. If you believe in a social safety net you are a socialist. the reality is that we are all both. The real debate should be central planning and control versus handing back power to individuals and society (personal responsibility).

That is oversimplification. There is a philosophic base under the terms socialist and capitalist altho the former is more ideological and the latter about an economic system.

0

Your description of the left is OK, the right, not so much.

How would you improve it? I am looking for constructive criticism.

@BobHiggins The description of both is too simplified. Both the left and the right are far more complex than described. The right especially so. The right is composed, for instance, of conservatives (those who like the status quo), those like me who would like a return to the original Constitution, and also libertarians. The right is a very disparate group.

@lawrenceblair Right an Left, as well as being vague meaningless terms, is also speak that is being use to create division. How often do we see media labeling those they are at odds with as extreme right. This creates an immediate comparison with Facisim.

0

Hello. Is this your own descriptions of the left and the right? It must've taken you ages to compose the post, and i appreciate it. I observe that your descriptions show your own bias - you're definitely right wing, no?

Yes, I am right wing (by the list of issues). However, I tried to represent each side accurately and I would not be surprised if my treatment could be improved. Remember tho, that an accurate representation of a side may not be favorable to it.

@BobHiggins If this post is meant to serve as a survey or the like (I'm assuming so because of the question you pose 'Are You Right Wing or Left Wing?'😉, the descriptions of each side need to be more objective IMO. Still, your post provoked a few thoughts, and I thank you for it. 🙂

0

False dichotomy.

0

"Right- there should be no censoring of ideas. It is how we find the truth."

Would you not censor ISIS recruiters?

"Left- all students, from university down to kindergarten, should be indoctrinated in left wing ideology because it is undeniably true.
Right- education should not include indoctrination of any kind, particularly in an optional political ideology. Left wing indoctrination has become a serious matter."

This isn't true and shows your bias and how indoctrinated you actually are.

The article is for the whole Western World. What I said is certainly true in Canada where I live.

The existing curbs on free speech are incitement of violence or libel/slander. So, no, I wouldn’t censor an ISIS member, or a Fascist or a communist for discussing ideas. That’s why it’s legal for a Communist Party to exist in America, or for the US Supreme Court to allow a Nazi march outside Chicago.

The extreme left is exactly like the extreme right in its quest to shut down the speech of the other side. In many ways, society is becoming far too immature for the gift of free speech.

On the other hand, if an ISIS recruiter or a Marxist or a President is inciting violence, then that must to shut down.

Free speech isn’t about ideology, it’s about intent.

@BobHiggins "Left- all students, from university down to kindergarten, should be indoctrinated in left wing ideology because it is undeniably true.
Right- education should not include indoctrination of any kind, particularly in an optional political ideology. Left wing indoctrination has become a serious matter."

this just shows your right wing bias and faux-victimhood i'm afraid.

0

Left wing people engage in border control. North korea kills people trying to leave/escape communism

1

I think the terms left and right have been misunderstood and generalized to the point of being meaningless.

Thugs are thugs, whether attacking the Capitol or declaring an independent zone in Seattle. Both are more and more confrontational. Both are now seeking to overturn the power structure. Both are resisting authority. Both feel under-represented and cheated by the voting system. Both know how to play the victim.

In addition the goal posts are constantly moving. A Kennedy Democrat in the 1960’s would appear right of centre in 2021. What’s considered “right wing” in Canada may look socialist in America.

Opinion is always a mix of ideas, and there will always be big business Democrats and even, on certain issues, left leaning Republicans. Better points of reference might be more specific: globalist/nationalist, elitist/populist, urban/rural, educated/uneducated, interventionist/isolationist.

The left vs right labels fit the prevailing narrative, but are useful only in creating false division.

Hello GeeMc, "What’s considered “right wing” in Canada may look socialist in America." What is considered 'right wing' in England would also look socialist to Americans. Also, the word 'liberal' has different meanings between America and Britain/Europe.

1

I find some issues with your identication of differentiations and descriptions between the left and the right.
1 Immigration policy
Left- our borders should be open, not barring anyone but criminals. The lefy do not tend to discrimnate criminal status with illegal immigration much lest deportation due to crimes committed after entering the country.
2 Justice
Left- everyone should get about the same because he/she is a human being. It is called
“social justice” and is measured on a basis. The left does not apply social justice to
whites as they are considered priviledged offspring of the colonialist patriarchy. Therefore their basis of applied justice is discriminatory and racist.
3 Desired future
The left purport a belief in the poltential of some future but not the garden of eden which is the crestion of the white mans god whose follwers systemically racsit and subjucate the blacks and the POC. Interesting that Malcolm X clarified he was a Muslim with a profound belief in his creator/religionand tut his fundamental politics was black nationalism straight up. He appreciated his black christian brothers but identified himself as a warrior. The left is revising American history or at minimum is actively distorting the history being taught in school since the sixtysnd seventys. I'll keep thinking anout this and let you know if I see other issuies.
Be well
Dee

One person's truth is anothers propaganda. Any argument from either side that contains pejorative adjectives to make a moral judgement is propaganda. Only factual statements can work toward reality.

@Pand0ro what?

@dd54 Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the house. That is fact. That Communist, BLM loving Nancy Pelosi somehow got to be speaker of the house. That is propaganda.

@Pand0ro I agree, I just didn't see the relationship to my post. Thx

4

I think you need a strong left wing intellectual to write the sections on the left.
The sections on the right looks Ok, however the sections on the left looks a bit like a right winger wrote them.

I 100% agree.

For example the left position of free speech uses the negative word bannned while the right position uses the positive word truth...the right position of education makes a commentary that the left position has become a serious matter...that on science the left position is to change it to adopt to its liberal mindset while the right position is for it to be objective.

I think this is a good summary of your personal viewpoints of what the right and the left are from, presumably, a right perspective. But is Hannah says, you'll need the left perspective as input if you want such a categorization to be objectively representative of both sides.

@TheMiddleWay @Hanno agree with both of you

@tracycoyle Thank you for your input. It is what I was looking for. I tried to treat each side fairly and accurately but you are suggesting improvement.

@TheMiddleWay If we were tasked to replace the word 'banned', what word would you replace it with? Silenced? Ignored? Strickened? They all kind of mean the same thing, don't they? Please give us your example of a positive way to say 'you're not welcome here and furthermore you may no longer communicate with us either..' Perhaps, go on a permanent vacation on a deserted island? At best, that's neutral.
What a bubble wrapped world it would be if we were only allowed to communicate in positive terms. Fortunately that isn't the case. More often than not, the truth is negative. Even in a Styrofoam and bubble wrapped world.

@gotsteam

f we were tasked to replace the word 'banned', what word would you replace it with?

I would replace it with less hyperbolic language regarding the left's position on free speech.
As I said, the fact that you want to use 'banned Silenced? Ignored? Strickened? " is a reflection of your view of the left and not how the left sees themselves nor an objective accounting of who they are.

Please give us your example of a positive way to say 'you're not welcome here and furthermore you may no longer communicate with us either..'

As that is not how I see the left's position on free speech, I can't. As I lean left but consider myself moderate, I can't. You need to find and ask a self-avowed person on the left if you want an objective view of their views.

@TheMiddleWay Thanks for your comment, I appreciate it. About the less hyperbolic language, I still haven't come up with one. The big Tech companies banned the current president of the United States from speaking on their platforms. That is a fact and not hyperbole. I can't think of a better word to use..

@gotsteam @TheMiddleWay The most objective way I view free speech as espoused by the Left falls around the idea that speech can be harmful and that harm needs to be mitigated in such a way as to be preventable. This leads to speech codes that define 'harm' as outside liberty, ie speech that causes harm is not free and can and should be restricted or banned. But from my point of view, that 'harm' is not only subjective, relying on the 'victim' to define it ensures everyone becomes a victim in most circumstances.

Free speech is about protecting speech that people don't like or feel is offensive.

@tracycoyle
That is a more moderate analysis. Though I maintain, unless you get a fully self-avowed leftist to comment, this is merely "outside looking in" commentary.

@gotsteam

The big Tech companies banned the current president of the United States from speaking on their platforms.

Did they give a reason why? I bet you it's more in line with Tracy's analysis above re: harmful speech than a attempt to silence or ignore them. Consider they've been able to say what they want for years now with little to no censuring. The events at the capitol however brought to a head exactly what effect what is said can have on people, regardless of intent. As such, their stated decision was not to silence them... they could have done that years ago... but to prevent future harm and violence.

@TheMiddleWay You can not, or at least should not, hold people accountable for other people's actions when there is no objective correlation. In other words, if I say you are a bad person and someone reads that and attacks you, it is NOT my responsibility in any shape or form.

If there is no objective intent, there can be no foul regardless of the actions of others.

@tracycoyle

In other words, if I say you are a bad person and someone reads that and attacks you, it is NOT my responsibility in any shape or form.

Correct. Saying that Trump is a fascist or Biden a communist doesn't carry any active voice to it, doesn't call on anyone to do anything about it that is violent.

But that is not what this hub-ub is about.
This hub-ub is about active voice posts like:

"The time for peaceful protests has past they're stealing this election," the post reads. "...#CallToArms take back our country."

"I hope the cop gets doxxxed and murdered"

"Federal swine most definitely. Dozens of them need to be eliminated"

(quotes taken from link below)

Such that if these events do happen, I do think that you bear some responsibility for having espoused views that may or may not have been read by those doing the action but you still put it out there for someone to read and act upon, emboldened by the support you give his violent actions though your violent words.

Saying "hypothetically" " or "I was only joking" or "I didn't think anyone would take me up on it" when promoting murder or violence is no excuse for the responsability one bears in promoting said violence IMO.

[cbsnews.com]

Spot on, Hanno. That's the impression I get, too.

@BobHiggins Kudos to you for your approach. The hubris of many posts that claim absolute truth with no room for discussion is what is causing the sharp divisiveness today. For what it's worth you have my admiration.

@TheMiddleWay
The use of the term 'indoctrination' to describe the left bothers me a little, too.

@Naomi
The language is loaded to portray the left as bad and the right as good.
That is the basis of my saying that this is less an objective view of Right v. Left and more the opinion of a person on the Right of what Right v. Left entails.

@TheMiddleWay Cannot be an objective indicator to describe the left or the right.

@TheMiddleWay I think the difference is accountability vs responsibility. We hold people responsible for the consequences of their ACTS. We can hold people accountable for their intents.

There are places where we have made that distinction - bullies of people that commit suicide. Saying 'Kill all lawyers' might earn you a rebuke or even some minor penalty. KILLING lawyers is going to get you long jail time (or the death penalty).

Telling people to march and let your voices be heard is not a call to riot, even if a riot happens.

@tracycoyle
If people had only marched on January 6th, none of this political or big tech issues would have come to bear.

But as it turns out many of these people were calling to do exactly this and they did it. Much like people were calling to kidnap the Wisconsin governor and they did that.

so we have increasing number of examples of people saying that they are going to commit violent acts against politicians and then acting upon them. This is encounter distinction to a lack of organized actions against lawyers

@TheMiddleWay I don't know about your commentary on the massive riots that happened during the summer, but I will use my daughter as an example when I talked about the destruction, riots and looting: "That was just a small couple of people - you can't condemn everyone that supported the reasons for the 'marches'"

That was the refrain from most 'responsible' people during the summer - a small number of rioters that had nothing to do with the reason for the marches.

Less than a couple hundred of the estimated MILLION marchers entered the Capitol and far fewer actually did any damage...no fires. Oh, and apparently one unarmed protester shot climbing through a window....during the riots, police didn't use lethal rounds, or even abandoned the area to the rioters and looters.

Sorry. I don't see any grounds for complaints about the events in DC against Trump or even the 99% that didn't do anything wrong GIVEN the lack of complaints and even justifications heard from the media and politicians (on both sides) during hundreds of riots/marches over the summer.

Even if we want to discuss the idea of accountability vs responsibility.

@tracycoyle

I don't see any grounds for complaints about the events in DC against Trump

Trump supporters act in their perceived best interests of Trump. When Trump single-handedly beats the drum of widespread election fraud prior to the 2016 election... then lays dormant on that issue until it becomes convenient to beat again prior to the 2020 election... and then his followers act on it on jan 6 2021... then that, to me, is good grounds for complaint against Trump

even the 99% that didn't do anything wrong GIVEN the lack of complaints and even justifications heard from the media and politicians (on both sides) during hundreds of riots/marches over the summer.

What you just said here is that because there was no complaint and justifications from the media and politicians about the riots last summer (which in point of fact there were, plenty,) then we should not have any complaint or justification over the people that didn't storm the capital but supported the events that led to it, including misinformation on election fraud and the government response to the pandemic. This is pure whataboutism.

Regardless of what the media or the press did or did not say, we can both personally condone the riots and the looting last year and the riots and the looting this year. change starts with ourselves not by looking at others to excuse justification for that which we support and condemnation for that which we don't. We can do this on a personal level. If we choose not to then we should examine why we justify riots and looting for one set of people but then condone it for a different set.

@TheMiddleWay I attended no "protests" last summer, nor did I attend the DC rally. My daughter attended a BLM protest last summer - despite her pleas that I follow the covid restrictions in place at the time.

It wasn't just media, but individual politicians that justified the riots - specifically noting the destruction as part of a protest's character. I suggest looking at AOC.

The 'evidence' or the suggestion of evidence being grounds for going after Trump are far less than the 'evidence' of election fraud. The claims of 'disinformation' are disingenuous coming from the Dem Party and media over the last 4 years.

And as for 'whataboutism', goose, gander.

@tracycoyle

goose, gander

Vicious cycles are broken by people willing to recognize the evil within themselves as well as the evil in others.

As long as "he did it so I get to do it too" is the way that we rationalize our own peoples violence, then we have absolutely no hope at preventing the violence of the other people.

@TheMiddleWay You are making an argument against jail/prison....

@tracycoyle
Exactly the opposite. If you think that the rioters and looters last year should go to jail then the consistent attitude is to think that the rioters and looters this year should also go to jail.

If you think that the actions of the Democrats and not calling out the rioters and the looters last year puts responsibility on them, then the consistent attitude is to think that the actions of trump and not calling out the rioters and the looters this year puts responsibility on him.

So what about is I'm comes about when you justify the rioters and the looters this year by pointing at the opposing side justifying the rioters and the looters last year.

Surely you've heardd the expression of "being the bigger person". Well you know your opponent is not going to be that bigger person. So who does that leave to exemplify a higher moral standard, to call out riding and looting on both sides and to not justify on either side? The only person left is ourselves.

@TheMiddleWay I personally don't hold those politicans that supported the rioters last summer responsible for the acts of the rioters. I hold people personally responsible for their actions. I don't try to offload responsibility to others. I am pointing out those that seek to blame others for their actions.

@tracycoyle
And right there we have the difference between the left and the right.
Personal responsibility vs it is someone’s else’s fault.

@Hanno @tracycoyle

Which showcases how to be not left nor right but middle: I hold the rioters and looters responsible for their personal actions AND the politicians responsible for their support of the rioting and looting.

@TheMiddleWay There are too many examples of right wing (conservative) views being censored. The present example of Pres. Trump being permanently banned by Twitter and facebook & others demonstrates my point.

@BobHiggins
There are plenty of examples of left wingers being censored as well. So there is no reason for the right to paint theirselves as a victim when both left and right are being censored when they act against the rules set forth in the terms of agreement of the social platforms that they join

@TheMiddleWay It's a matter of degree and the degrees are not equal. I have seen cases where conservative views have been cancelled out but can't remember a case of socialist liberal views being cancelled. The case of Donald Trump is an example of arbitrariness. Another is my "Short Course in Human Rights" on youtube. Put in the title in quots and you still won't find it on youtube because it doesn't follow the narrative on human rights.

@BobHiggins
Our Middleway friend here really seem to struggle with degrees, scale and context.

@BobHiggins

It's a matter of degree and the degrees are not equal

What law or logic determines that they need be exactly equal?

Twitter has purged left-wing accounts with no explanation
[wired.co.uk]

@BobHiggins, @Hanno

About as much as you struggle to avoid talking about me instead of focusing about the topic at hand.

Write Comment More

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

Share this post

Similar Posts

Categories

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:171437
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.