NationStates Jolt Archive

Some thing that really bothers me is the incorrect use of "leftist" or "far right wing" on this forum. Being a liberal doesn't mean you are a leftist on the political spectrum any more then being a conservative makes you the far right on the political spectrum. I'm sure I could go find a pretty graph for you all, but I'll keep it simple.

Communism-----------------------Center------------------------Fascism

Above is the political spectrum. A "leftist" would equal a communist. A far right winger would equal a Fascist. Every one else lays some where in between. For example, the Democratic party in the United States is no where even close to the left of the political spectrum. In fact a political analysis would actually suggest that the Republican party of today does tend to lean more right of the political spectrum then the Democratic party leans to the left of it.

So, is it too much to ask that people stop using these labels incorrectly? if you must use them, please, at least know what you're talking about.

hear hear

Steph, I'm afraid it is too much to ask. After all, their prepackaged criticisms just don't trip easily off the tongue if "leftist" isn't in there. :D

Noble sentiments and a very good idea. Unfortunately, hardly anyone on this board will follow it. When people take up unyielding positions, especially political ones, the finer distinctions of polite communication tend to go out the window. Sad, but true.

I think the graphs with two axes are better - one for economics, one for social issues

It is actually stupid to be in a party.
Voting for the lesser of two evils makes sense, but arguing along the line of a party is clearly a clown's job. Oops sorry, I mean a politician's job.

It is actually stupid to be in a party.
Voting for the lesser of two evils makes sense, but arguing along the line of a party is clearly a clown's job. Oops sorry, I mean a politician's job.

unless they have lots of free booze

Pffft, Left Wing, Right Wing, it's all chicken to me. When it comes to white meat I'm a breast man myself. :D :p

I think the graphs with two axes are better - one for economics, one for social issues

Good point.. I myself lean to the left on social issues, while I tend to be around the center on economic issues. I was trying to make a point though more then any thing.

unless they have lots of free booze
Indeed, sorry I forgot about the free booze.
Actually, if there is free booze, it makes a lot of sense. Best is to be a member of both parties then.

BTW Bush and Kerry are the same. Kerry is just a little more articulate.

I think the graphs with two axes are better - one for economics, one for social issues

I would perhaps add one more for individual freedoms. A bit complicated, though.

The US Democratic party, although to the left of the Republican, is still right of centre. Not many choices for the US, I think.

Actually, some would claim that certain ideologies just don't fit on the scale. Personally, I think that the scale itself is flawed (as are the definitions of leftist and rightist).

Above is the political spectrum. A "leftist" would equal a communist. A far right winger would equal a Fascist. Every one else lays some where in between. For example, the Democratic party in the United States is no where even close to the left of the political spectrum. In fact a political analysis would actually suggest that the Republican party of today does tend to lean more right of the political spectrum then the Democratic party leans to the left of it.

Um, 99.9% of those people are talking about American politics. America is a two party system. One side is to the left, one is to the right. Everybody knows what they mean when they say left or right....what I'm sick of is people who like to try to inflat their own sense of political superiority by attacking other peoples use of semantics.... :D

Actually, some would claim that certain ideologies just don't fit on the scale. Personally, I think that the scale itself is flawed (as are the definitions of leftist and rightist).

Yes, but these terms are wrong and flawed. The time honored and trusted political compass has always been the political spectrum. It is what is used in every respectable poli-sci course I have ever taken or heard of.

Um, 99.9% of those people are talking about American politics. America is a two party system. One side is to the left, one is to the right. Everybody knows what they mean when they say left or right....what I'm sick of is people who like to try to inflat their own sense of political superiority by attacking other peoples use of semantics.... :D

Yes, but it would help the US people to discuss international politics by contextualizing their own system and placing it inside the bigger global picture. It also allows people from outside the US to follow the discussions on US politics.

I agree that attacking others over semantics is not smart, but we should at least try to agree on certain definitions to have a nice base for discussion.

Um, 99.9% of those people are talking about American politics. America is a two party system. One side is to the left, one is to the right. Everybody knows what they mean when they say left or right....what I'm sick of is people who like to try to inflat their own sense of political superiority by attacking other peoples use of semantics.... :D

But face it, the US democrat party is itself a center-right or at best, a centrist party.

how true

The problem is that politics is about just everything. There should be a dimension for each issue in the spectrum. The spectrum is multidimentional but the number of dimensions is huge.

The problem is that politics is about just everything. There should be a dimension for each issue in the spectrum. The spectrum is multidimentional but the number of dimensions is huge.

Actually there is more then one tier of axis' to the spectrum. I, as stated said I would keep it simple .. ;)

So, is it too much to ask that people stop using these labels incorrectly? if you must use them, please, at least know what you're talking about.
Okay, so avoid using "Left" and "Right". What about other directions? Perhaps "Up" and "Down"? How about if I call you an "Uppity Know-It-All"? Would that work? :p :D

--The Jovial States of Cogitation
"Laugh about it for a moment."
NationStates Self-Proclaimed Court Jester

How about if I call you an "Uppity Know-It-All"? Would that work? :p :D

Wow, coming from you Cog it would be the joke of the century.. LMAO :D :cool:

But face it, the US democrat party is itself a center-right or at best, a centrist party.

Hehe, let's face it, describing somebody's political view as a direction is kind of silly to begin with.

Mud fight!

...err....

Mod fight? :confused:

Mud fight!

...err....

Mod fight? :confused:

Nah, Cog and I get along just fine. It's a joke because no one is more shall we say "all knowing" then our Coggster! ;)

Hehe, let's face it, describing somebody's political view as a direction is kind of silly to begin with.

True. I've got a much better idea. I'll call them right (meaning, left) or wrong. (meaning, anything else.) :D

The problem is that politics is about just everything. There should be a dimension for each issue in the spectrum. The spectrum is multidimentional but the number of dimensions is huge.
Well, why not use the scales NationStates uses? Personal (or Civil) Freedoms, Economic Freedoms, and Political Freedoms.

Personal Freedoms describe how regulated someones personal life is. Restrictions on sex, recreational drugs, youth activities, nudity, religion, and so on.

Economic Freedoms describe how controlled commerce is. This can range from Communism to Laissez-Faire Capitalism.

Okay, there seems to be a dispute over semantics, here.

I had previously understood "laissez-faire capitalism" to refer to an economy where property is primarily privately-owned (and not state-owned) and where commerce and industry are not required to meet any standards of health, safety, fair trade, or any other sorts of standards or regulations. Call that whatever you want.

Political Freedoms describe who has a say in government. This can range from dictatorships to direct democracies.

What other kinds of freedoms would you suggest?

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder and Delegate of The Realm of Ambrosia

...

Wow, coming from you Cog it would be the joke of the century.. LMAO :D :cool:
Yeah, well, that's why I'm the Self-Proclaimed Court Jester. ;)

--The Jovial States of Cogitation
"Laugh about it for a moment."
NationStates Self-Proclaimed Court Jester

Keruvalia ----- Hippies ----- Communism ----- Center ----- Fascism



Works for me! :D

Here's a nice compass rose for you to play with. Add the ideology of your choice.


. . . . . | . . . . .
. . . . . | . . . . .
. . . . . | . . . . .
. . . . \ | / . . . .
. . . . .\|/. . . . .
- - - - - + - - - - -
. . . . ./|\. . . . .
. . . . / | \ . . . .
. . . . . | . . . . .
. . . . . | . . . . .
. . . . . | . . . . .

I am a hardcore leftist, and an anarchist. Meaning I don't believe in statist philosophies like (stalinist, maoist) communism. Whoever says Kerry is a communist is a moron. He has more in common with Bush than with the communists

How about if I call you an "Uppity Know-It-All"? Would that work? :p :D

I think "High and Mighty" sounds better... :rolleyes:

But as far as I can tell, there are three basical political axes: Tight government control vs. Loose government control, Local vs. Widespread (this encompasses both city vs. state and state vs. federal if your government has those levels), and Rapid change vs. Gradual change. Each of these can be applied to any category of activity (such as economics) or even any particular issue.

Unfortunately, in a lot of forums I've seen, people wind up using the same words to mean different things. So, not only might they disagree about the issues at hand, but they also misunderstand what the other is saying. Which results into a rapid escalation into a flame war, a semantics debate, or both...

I think this is the first time I've seen someone jump straight to the semantics debate.

[Stephistan #1]
Some thing that really bothers me is the incorrect use of "leftist" or "far right wing" on this forum. Being a liberal doesn't mean you are a leftist on the political spectrum any more then being a conservative makes you the far right on the political spectrum. I'm sure I could go find a pretty graph for you all, but I'll keep it simple.

Communism-----------------------Center------------------------Fascism

Above is the political spectrum. A "leftist" would equal a communist. A far right winger would equal a Fascist. Every one else lays some where in between. For example, the Democratic party in the United States is no where even close to the left of the political spectrum. In fact a political analysis would actually suggest that the Republican party of today does tend to lean more right of the political spectrum then the Democratic party leans to the left of it.

So, is it too much to ask that people stop using these labels incorrectly? if you must use them, please, at least know what you're talking about.

Hmmm....

I'd like to know your definition of "fascism"..

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist , it sounds very much like a "non-communist" version of communism.

I would prefer the
"collectivistic-------center-------individualistic"
spectrum as a description of political polarity, but what do I know.

I don't think fascist has a well enough "common" meaning to be useful.

Other than in phrases such as "eco-fascists", "femin-nazis" and "islamo-fascists", of course. :)

Well, why not use the scales NationStates uses? Personal (or Civil) Freedoms, Economic Freedoms, and Political Freedoms.

Personal Freedoms describe how regulated someones personal life is. Restrictions on sex, recreational drugs, youth activities, nudity, religion, and so on.

Economic Freedoms describe how controlled commerce is. This can range from Communism to Laissez-Faire Capitalism.

Political Freedoms describe who has a say in government. This can range from dictatorships to direct democracies.

What other kinds of freedoms would you suggest?1st off, economic freedom and laissez-faire capitalism is not the same thing. But anyway...
let say one party does allow recreational drugs and restricts nudity, while another does allow nudity and restricts recreational drugs. Which one has the more civil freedom?
There should be one scale for recreational drugs and one for nudity, shouldn't there?
I think the simple fact that we are arguing about scales shows that we have rare political freedoms. In the absolute, it is pointless. It does only make sense in a representative democracy to argue that.

I think this is one of the best charts for looking at it

http://img48.exs.cx/img48/4254/enParties.gif

I think the NationStates' way is good enough, right-left or bidimentional (like above) is too little. Three axis is just right for me: Civil/Social (Personal liberties), Economical and Political.

I think this is one of the best charts for looking at it

http://img48.exs.cx/img48/4254/enParties.gif

Except it ought to put the Greens far more into the 'authoritarian' axis.

I didn't know that the BNP were economically socialist. Mind you, I suppose that's socialist as in National Socialist. Nasty little racist gits.

I think the NationStates' way is good enough, right-left or bidimentional (like above) is too little. Three axis is just right for me.

Ah yes, but just think of all the really intelligent debate we could have if we could do away with the "You're a leftist, your opinion doesn't matter" "You're a right winger your opinion doesn't matter" and actually argue on point. I guess a girl can dream.

The US Democratic party, although to the left of the Republican, is still right of centre. Not many choices for the US, I think.

On whose scale? Sweden's?

As far as I'm concerned, the Democratic part is fairly left of center, whereas the Republicans barely lean to the right. But, of course, I'm just a stupid conservative American.

On whose scale? Sweden's?

As far as I'm concerned, the Democratic part is fairly left of center, whereas the Republicans barely lean to the right. But, of course, I'm just a stupid conservative American.

Nah, don't be so hard on yourself, you just don't know how the spectrum works.

On whose scale? Sweden's?

As far as I'm concerned, the Democratic part is fairly left of center, whereas the Republicans barely lean to the right. But, of course, I'm just a stupid conservative American.

Compared to damn near everybody in the world you're right wing. I hate to post two images so similar so close, but-
http://img12.exs.cx/img12/829/USelection2004.gif

Steph responded to a post of mine?! Woooow! [FAN ALERT] :eek: <Throws himself to the ground and kisses Steph feet> :p

The day a true 'leftist' (damn) appears in US politics, and by appearing I mean getting into a freaking election and getting more than two votes (his/her own and his/her mother's hehe), I'll believe the USA is closer to a democracy. For now, I couldn't care less who wins or losses in any election.

economic freedom and laissez-faire capitalism are the same thing


republicans are in the center, conservatives are right of center ;)

economic freedom and laissez-faire capitalism are the same thing

Next time you prepare a flame bait Eli, try not to be so unconspicuous, or the mods will think you did it for real and not for kidding around.

I would never use the word freedom associated with economy, you could talk about the possibility of free enterprising as equal to capitalism, but that doesn't have anything to do with freedom. ;)

I didn't know that the BNP were economically socialist. Mind you, I suppose that's socialist as in National Socialist. Nasty little racist gits.

I don't think the BNP are economic socialists. But they're certainly nasty little racist gits.

economic freedom and laissez-faire capitalism are the same thing
Ouch. Hearing this hurts my ears.
This show how biased you are.

Next time you prepare a flame bait Eli, try not to be so unconspicuous, or the mods will think you did it for real and not for kidding around.

I would never use the word freedom associated with economy, you could talk about the possibility of free enterprising as equal to capitalism, but that doesn't have anything to do with freedom. ;)

Economic freedom just is laissez faire capitalism, the more laissez faire, the more freedom. Who can argue with this?

If you don't think that freedom can be economic as well as political, social, vehicular, technological, or even tentacular, you are just plain wrong.

Economic freedom just is laissez faire capitalism, the more laissez faire, the more freedom. Who can argue with this?

If you don't think that freedom can be economic as well as political, social, vehicular, technological, or even tentacular, you are just plain wrong.
Laissez-faire is freedom.
Laissez-faire dictatorship is not freedom. Laissez-faire dictatorship is actually good propaganda practice but not freedom. I call that a McCarthyism.

Laissez-faire is freedom.
Laissez-faire dictatorship is not freedom.

Er, ok.

So anyway, laissez-faire capitalism is economic freedom. This is what "Laissez-faire capitalism" means. It means "A capitalism where the governing authority does not interfere in economic affairs". I think you aren't a native english speaker. You may even be french, and then you would be confused by the literal french meaning of laissez-faire.

In english, "laissez-faire capitalism" is a specific kind of thing, and it means what I just said it means. You can have a social dictatorship with a laissez-faire capitalist economy. There would be economic freedom but no social freedom. Like in Texas, where taxes are low, regulations are small, and you get hanged if you're gay.

Compared to damn near everybody in the world you're right wing.

The COUNTRY may be conservative overall, but that doesn't mean that John Kerry is actually right of center.

I hate to post two images so similar so close, but-
http://img12.exs.cx/img12/829/USelection2004.gif

And what does this prove? That someone thinks that John Kerry is on the right on the basis of a quiz that was created by libertarians.

Er, ok.

So anyway, laissez-faire capitalism is economic freedom. This is what "Laissez-faire capitalism" means. It means "A capitalism where the governing authority does not interfere in economic affairs". I think you aren't a native english speaker. You may even be french, and then you would be confused by the literal french meaning of laissez-faire.

In english, "laissez-faire capitalism" is a specific kind of thing, and it means what I just said it means. You can have a social dictatorship with a laissez-faire capitalist economy. There would be economic freedom but no social freedom. Like in Texas, where taxes are low, regulations are small, and you get hanged if you're gay.
I don't agree. I call that a McCarthyism, as I've said in my edited post.
A McCarthyism is associating different concepts and presenting the two as the same thing. Like Capitalism = democracy for instance.
Associating capitalism with economic freedom is a McCarthyism.
Capitalism is the rule of the capital.
The economic freedom is the freedom to "entreprendre".
The two are not the same thing.
In that I object to the NS classification.

Actually, in a capitalist economy, the government guarantees the value of the capital and therefore interferes in the economy.

I don't agree. I call that a McCarthyism, as I've said in my edited post.
A McCarthyism is associating different concepts and presenting the two as the same thing. Like Capitalism = democracy for instance.
Associating capitalism with economic freedom is a McCarthyism.
Capitalism is the rule of the capital.
The economic freedom is the freedom to "entreprendre".
The two are not the same thing.

nobody has suggested that capital = democracy, only that "laissez-faire capitalism" is and english phrase commonly used to indicate "economic freedom", which is just a simple fact. Economic Freedom is when you can do whatever you like with your money. This is called "laissez-faire capitalism".

It doesn't mean that you can do whatever you like with your penis, or with your motor vehicle if you have one. But it does mean that you can do what you like with your money.

Hear, hear! I never thought of calling it McCarthyism, but it's good.

nobody has suggested that capital = democracy, only that "laissez-faire capitalism" is and english phrase commonly used to indicate "economic freedom", which is just a simple fact. Economic Freedom is when you can do whatever you like with your money. This is called "laissez-faire capitalism".

It doesn't mean that you can do whatever you like with your penis, or with your motor vehicle if you have one. But it does mean that you can do what you like with your money.
You confuse enonomy and finance.
The english phrase commonly used to indicate "economic freedom" is cold war propaganda.

nobody has suggested that capital = democracy, only that "laissez-faire capitalism" is and english phrase commonly used to indicate "economic freedom", which is just a simple fact.

He didn't say you said that, it was just an example.

Economic Freedom is when you can do whatever you like with your money. This is called "laissez-faire capitalism".

If you can get any, if not, you're free to starve to death, because hunting and collecting is impossible since everyone owns the land and the animals, even if it's private persons and not the state.

You confuse enonomy and finance.

no i don't. you take me literally when I say money. Of course I include "exchange of goods and services" and all other forms of trade you care to mention. That is "economy". Ability to do what you like is "freedom" so when you get the ability to do what you like with your exchange of goods and services, you have "economic" "freedom".


The english phrase commonly used to indicate "economic freedom" is cold war propaganda.

?

If you can get any, if not, you're free to starve to death, because hunting and collecting is impossible since everyone owns the land and the animals, even if it's private persons and not the state.

yes, you are free to do what you want with your economic power. If you have no economic power you can still use what you have in any way you like, it's just that you have none.

Of course the greatest freedom will be the freedom from economy rather than the freedom of economy, but people don't generally mean that when they say economic freedom.

All right, I don't have the time to read up on "laissez-faire capitalism" in great detail. I'll just amend my earlier statement to say that a totally unregulated economy is an extreme end of the spectrum of economic freedoms.

I had previously understood "laissez-faire capitalism" to refer to an economy where property is primarily privately-owned (and not state-owned) and where commerce and industry are not required to meet any standards of health, safety, fair trade, or any other sorts of standards or regulations. The creation of the US Food and Drug Administration (establishing health standards) was a move away from such an economy. The creation of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (establishing standards of fair trade and prohibiting "insider trading") was a move away from such an economy. The creation of the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (establishing standards of workplace safety) was a move away from such an economy.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

no i don't. you take me literally when I say money. Of course I include "exchange of goods and services" and all other forms of trade you care to mention. That is "economy". Ability to do what you like is "freedom" so when you get the ability to do what you like with your exchange of goods and services, you have "economic" "freedom".
Indeed, it is what it is.
And that is not capitalism.
In capitalism, you are not free to do what you like, only the few with the capital are, the masses aren't. Capitalism is one kind of economic oligarchy.

?It associates capitalism with economic freedom.

Some thing that really bothers me is the incorrect use of "leftist" or "far right wing" on this forum. Being a liberal doesn't mean you are a leftist on the political spectrum any more then being a conservative makes you the far right on the political spectrum. I'm sure I could go find a pretty graph for you all, but I'll keep it simple.

Communism-----------------------Center------------------------Fascism

Above is the political spectrum. A "leftist" would equal a communist. A far right winger would equal a Fascist. Every one else lays some where in between. For example, the Democratic party in the United States is no where even close to the left of the political spectrum. In fact a political analysis would actually suggest that the Republican party of today does tend to lean more right of the political spectrum then the Democratic party leans to the left of it.

So, is it too much to ask that people stop using these labels incorrectly? if you must use them, please, at least know what you're talking about.

The nationstates General forum political spectrum:

Letila-----Incertonia------Kwangistar-----BAAWA

I don't think of myself as a left wing or right wing person. I'm more of a fusalage kind of person.

Communism-----------------------Center------------------------Fascism

Wrong, Steph. Why do you put an economic system (Communism) at one end and a socio-political system (Fascism) at the other end.

These two are correct:

Anarchism-----------------------Center------------------------Fascism

Communism-----------------------Center------------------------Capitalism

One scale really does not suffice. You need at least two.

Steph responded to a post of mine?! Woooow! [FAN ALERT] <Throws himself to the ground and kisses Steph feet>

The day a true 'leftist' (damn) appears in US politics, and by appearing I mean getting into a freaking election and getting more than two votes (his/her own and his/her mother's hehe), I'll believe the USA is closer to a democracy. For now, I couldn't care less who wins or losses in any election.
__________________
Nationalism is an infantile sickness. It is the measles of the human race.
- Albert Einstein

[B]If a person offends you, and you are in doubt as to whether it was intentional
or not, do not resort to extreme measures, simply watch your chance and hit him
with a brick.
- Mark Twain


If a person offends you, and you are in doubt as to whether it was intentional or not, do not resort to extreme measures, simply watch your chance and hit him with a brick.
- Mark Twain

Good ol' Samuel...!

Gotta love him..! :D

yes, you are free to do what you want with your economic power. If you have no economic power you can still use what you have in any way you like, it's just that you have none.

Of course the greatest freedom will be the freedom from economy rather than the freedom of economy, but people don't generally mean that when they say economic freedom.But that would be like saying that a tyrany is freedom because the Tyran can do whatever he wants.
I think the freedom of a society can only be measured by the freedom of the mass.

I don't think of myself as a left wing or right wing person. I'm more of a fusalodge kind of person.

Fuselage. Sorry, but I have this need to correct others. It's my way of expressing my delusions of power over others. ;)

All right, I don't have the time to read up on "laissez-faire capitalism" in great detail. I'll just amend my earlier statement to say that a totally unregulated economy is an extreme end of the spectrum of economic freedoms.

I had previously understood "laissez-faire capitalism" to refer to an economy where property is primarily privately-owned (and not state-owned) and where commerce and industry are not required to meet any standards of health, safety, fair trade, or any other sorts of standards or regulations. The creation of the US Food and Drug Administration (establishing health standards) was a move away from such an economy. The creation of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (establishing standards of fair trade and prohibiting "insider trading") was a move away from such an economy. The creation of the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (establishing standards of workplace safety) was a move away from such an economy.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
Anything done by the state does not necessarily restrict freedom.
Patents and private property laws are a move away from economic freedom.
Capitalism is about patents and private property.
Therefore, capitalism is not total economic freedom.

Fuselage. Sorry, but I have this need to correct others. It's my way of expressing my delusions of power over others. ;)


whoops

Primary dimensional axes:

Individualism----------Collectivism
Compassionism----------Productionism
Decisivism----------Quandaryism

I personally don't like the "left/right" axis, as it's so severely overloaded that it's virtually meaningless.

Except as a "provocation",... which is where it gets it greatest usage (by me at least).