NationStates Jolt Archive

The Terms left and right side of politics are used all the time, but are actually pretty hard to pin down. Check out wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_politics) for some examples.

So I was wondering what other peoples definitions were?

Mine is:
Left is: long term solutions at the expense of short term practicality

Right is: short term practicality at the expense of long term solutions

Obviously taken to an extreme both are gonna be bad.. I guess that's why democracy tends to work ok occasionally as it mashes things up enough till they all come out about middle of the road...

What's your definition?

Left Wing - Believes in limiting government spending to save funds, but acknowledges the need for government spending to fund necessary programs.

Believes in policy based on what will work and what is true.

Believes the purpose of the government is to solve problems.

Right Wing - Believes in limiting government spending as an end in itself, and if bankrupting the government is the only way to do it, so be it.

Believes in policies based on what one would like to be true.

Believes the purpose of government is to enrich the rich.

Left Wing - Believes in limiting government spending to save funds, but acknowledges the need for government spending to fund necessary programs.

Believes in policy based on what will work and what is true.

Believes the purpose of the government is to solve problems.

Right Wing - Believes in limiting government spending as an end in itself, and if bankrupting the government is the only way to do it, so be it.

Believes in policies based on what one would like to be true.

Believes the purpose of government is to enrich the rich.

Bias, much?

I think both Ideologies have their uses and the best way to put them in practice is to walk the middle ground

if we only had a bunch of pinko commies, our economy would stagnate and collapse

if we only had right-wing nutjobs 99% of the population would have 1% of the wealth whereas 1% of population would have the remaining 99% of all the capitol

Left wing: socially progressive, believes role of government is necessary as an agent to solve socioeconomic problems (such as that of inequality or lack of market provision of merit goods), limiting business practice benefits the consumer, money =/= happiness

Right wing: limiting government power as a result of distrust of government, individualist, believe all is fair if matters are conducted legaly (ie inequality is accpetable), often uncompassionate, believe in individuals bettering themselves over getting help from others (government), better business = better people


(a bit exteme-y but meh)

if we only had right-wing nutjobs 99% of the population would have 1% of the wealth whereas 1% of population would have the remaining 99% of all the capitol
We're actually not far from that scenario right now, and there's nowhere near a majority of right-wing nutjobs in the US--depending on how you define right-wing.

And the problem--okay, there are many, this is one--with this kind of discussion in general is that most people try to define the other as opposed to themselves. It makes it easier to set one's self up in opposition to the other. Secondly, there are multiple ways to define one's political standing--the political compass uses two sets of axes, but even then, it's only addressing part of the problem.

Right Wing; People should froth at the mouth for God, Country, and Self-Determination.

Left Wing; People should froth at the mouth collectively, to collect from the government.

Left Wing - Believes in limiting government spending to save funds, but acknowledges the need for government spending to fund necessary programs.

Believes in policy based on what will work and what is true.

Believes the purpose of the government is to solve problems.

Right Wing - Believes in limiting government spending as an end in itself, and if bankrupting the government is the only way to do it, so be it.

Believes in policies based on what one would like to be true.

Believes the purpose of government is to enrich the rich.
Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. The real difference is in their chosen buzzword as their ideal that they would like to achieve
Left=equality
right-liberty

Left wing...surrender monkeys that think appeasment is the best policy .
Right wing...peace through strength ..mess with us we kill you .

Thats all that matters to me .

Left wing...surrender monkeys that think appeasment is the best policy .
Right wing...peace through strength ..mess with us we kill you .

Thats all that matters to me .

Since when do left-wingers believe appeasement is the best policy? For example, many of the strongest voices against Appeasement in the late '30s were Labour and Socialist members. Hell, most conservatives accepted appeasement - even the much-vaunted Eden.

Left wing...surrender monkeys that think appeasment is the best policy .
Right wing...peace through strength ..mess with us we kill you .

Thats all that matters to me .

So you don't mind starving in a gutter while you suffer from typhoid because your nation has a strong military then.

I think rather more does matter to you - like food, shelter, health etc, whether you admit it or not.

I have to separate the economic and cultural aspects of left and right wing.

Economic
Left - collectivism and redistribution.
Right - individualism and laissez faire economics

Cultural
Left - internationalism and tolerance
Right - national pride and moral values.

(I am Right wing economically but Left wing culturally)

What's your definition?


Left-wing: collectivists in sandals.

Right-wing: collectivists in suit and tie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation).

Either way, bad news for anyone who values his individual liberty.

Left-wing: collectivists in sandals.

Right-wing: collectivists in suit and tie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation).

Either way, bad news for anyone who values his individual liberty.
that's actually pretty good and unbiased (you know unbiased=not as biased as others in the thred)

Left wing: socially progressive, believes role of government is necessary as an agent to solve socioeconomic problems (such as that of inequality or lack of market provision of merit goods), limiting business practice benefits the consumer, money =/= happiness

Right wing: limiting government power as a result of distrust of government, individualist, believe all is fair if matters are conducted legaly (ie inequality is accpetable), often uncompassionate, believe in individuals bettering themselves over getting help from others (government), better business = better people


(a bit exteme-y but meh)

Nah, let me fix that for ya...

Left wing: socially depraved and without direction or guidance, believes the role of government is necessary as an agent to strip all other social forms of socioeconomic guidance and social standards (such as that of forcing non-belief over belief in government practices and image), limiting business practices with the misguided idea of benefiting the employee or the consumer over the employer but end up creating a non-profitable corporation that loses money and becomes a ward of the state to keep their employees paid.

Right wing: limiting government power as a result of distrust of government, individualist, believe all is fair if matters are conducted legally (ie; inequality is inevitable to some degree, having learned in kindergarten grade from their teachers that “life is not fair” they attempt to create rules that will accommodate all but not favor one over another as much as possible), often compassionate to worldly matters desiring to extend their liberating ‘rules’ for one and all beyond national borders, believe in individuals being given the opportunity to better themselves over being handed their share of ‘slop’ from the public trough and being a drain on the rest of the society unless in an emergency or long term disability situation (government assistance), better business = better people = moral people = better governance by the people.

that's actually pretty good and unbiased (you know unbiased=not as biased as others in the thred)

Well, on the one hand I am supposed to let the commune tell me what to do because the commune, in the vast majority of historical examples, is in the habit of enforcing its edicts by coercive tactics; typically, via the state. On the other hand, I am supposed to let the corporations tell me what to do because the corporation, in the vast majority of historical examples, is in the habit of enforcing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA) its (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbyist) edicts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_welfare) by coercive tactics; typically, via the state. Both represent concentrations of political and economic power away from, and at the expense of, the sovereign individual. As such, I see no virtue in either one.

Omstia already described perfectly what little difference exists between the two: "The real difference is in their chosen buzzword." What euphemism shall we invoke to justify the destruction of the individual?

Nah, let me fix that for ya...

Left wing: socially depraved and without direction or guidance, believes the role of government is necessary as an agent to strip all other social forms of socioeconomic guidance and social standards (such as that of forcing non-belief over belief in government practices and image), limiting business practices with the misguided idea of benefiting the employee or the consumer over the employer but end up creating a non-profitable corporation that loses money and becomes a ward of the state to keep their employees paid.

Right wing: limiting government power as a result of distrust of government, individualist, believe all is fair if matters are conducted legally (ie; inequality is acceptable is a way of life, having learned in kindergarten grade from their teacher that “life is not fair” they attempt to create rules that will accommodate all but not favor one over another), often compassionate to worldly matters desiring to extend their liberating ‘rules’ for one and all beyond national borders, believe in individuals being given the opportunity to better themselves over being handed their share of ‘slop’ from the public trough and being a drain on the rest of the society unless in an emergency or long term disability situation (government assistance), better business = better people = moral people = better governance by the people.

Wow...

You took an extreme but fairly unbiased view of the two ideologies and turned it into one unbalanced piece of slander against the left. Congratulations...

Wow...

You took an extreme but fairly unbiased view of the two ideologies and turned it into one unbalanced piece of slander against the left. Congratulations...

LOL, “fairly unbiased view?” ... Perhaps you should look up the phrase "fairly unbiased view" and then understand how that phrase does NOT apply to his post (nor mine for that matter).

LOL, “fairly unbiased view?” ... Perhaps you should look up the phrase "fairly unbiased view" and then understand how that phrase does NOT apply to his post (nor mine for that matter).

With the possible exception of throwing the words 'often uncompassionate' in his description of right-wing, PM's definition is fairly unbiased, as far as I can see.

Your's is highly biased.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/leftchurchsign.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/rightchurchsign.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/leftchurchsign.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/rightchurchsign.jpg


funny....usually you think its the opposite

funny....usually you think its the opposite
Never met a left wing Baptist. I don't believe they exist.

Met some left and right wing Catholics.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/leftchurchsign.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/rightchurchsign.jpg

Nice!

Left wing: Hates nobody but the Right wing.

Right wing: Hates everybody but the Right wing.

Centre: Hates everyone and everything.

often compassionate to worldly matters desiring to extend their liberating ‘rules’ for one and all beyond national borders
This is left-wing internationalism.

funny....usually you think its the opposite
Listen to what the Vatican says, especially under Pope John Paul II, and you understand why much Catholic thinking leans left.

Listen to what the Vatican says, especially under Pope John Paul II, and you understand why much Catholic thinking leans left.
Ah, but isn't the current Pope against a lot of that? Against "revolution theology"?

Left-wing and Right-wing are very limited terms that are often raped by being applied to a wide varieties of political stances.

Left-wing refers to the economic stance that believes in tax-and-spend and that the state is often the best organ for driving the economy.

Right-wing refers to the economic stance that believes in free markets, and that when industry is left be it will perform better than if it is 'meddled with'.

Both of these terms can only be used vis a vis a person's opinion on economic matters. You cannot be socially left-wing, you can only be socially progressive, or socially conservative. Likewise Left and Right do not equate exactly to Liberal and Authoritarian, consider that Gandhi and Stalin were both Left-wingers.

All religious institutions, be they Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Spiritist or whatever are, by their very nature conservative. - They look to maintain certain social structures, certain moral values. They desire to impose their view as to what is right and what is wrong on the population in general.

Thgis is essentially a definition of the right wing sociocultural behaviour.

Conclusion: all churches (not faiths) are right wing.

its more economic term.

left-controled, right-free.

used socially but in opposite ways.

left-equal to walk over someone elses rights.:upyours:
right-free unless you walk over someones rights.:mp5:

With the possible exception of throwing the words 'often uncompassionate' in his description of right-wing, PM's definition is fairly unbiased, as far as I can see.

Your's is highly biased.
i tried to be as unbiased as i can be, considerin how much i dislike right-wing ideologies :P
the "compassionate" comment was mostly an element from my own personal experience


Nah, let me fix that for ya...

Left wing: socially depraved and without direction or guidance, believes the role of government is necessary as an agent to strip all other social forms of socioeconomic guidance and social standards (such as that of forcing non-belief over belief in government practices and image), limiting business practices with the misguided idea of benefiting the employee or the consumer over the employer but end up creating a non-profitable corporation that loses money and becomes a ward of the state to keep their employees paid.

Right wing: limiting government power as a result of distrust of government, individualist, believe all is fair if matters are conducted legally (ie; inequality is inevitable to some degree, having learned in kindergarten grade from their teachers that “life is not fair” they attempt to create rules that will accommodate all but not favor one over another as much as possible), often compassionate to worldly matters desiring to extend their liberating ‘rules’ for one and all beyond national borders, believe in individuals being given the opportunity to better themselves over being handed their share of ‘slop’ from the public trough and being a drain on the rest of the society unless in an emergency or long term disability situation (government assistance), better business = better people = moral people = better governance by the people.
what a crock of shit




as a side note it'd be good to talk about belief in positive rights (lefties) or only negative rights (righties), but i'm saying that mostly cos AB's about :D (and i know he likes disagreeing with me over this :p)

Conclusion: all churches (not faiths) are right wing.


what about mao's cult of personality?:p

Thats the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. The real difference is in their chosen buzzword as their ideal that they would like to achieve
Left=equality
right-libertyWhich is just silly, since maximizing one means maximizing the other.

Which is just silly, since maximizing one means maximizing the other.

That just doesn't add up...

If Liberty is maximized, people will end up with varying degrees of results, therefore, less equality.

If Equality is maximized, most likely you will need to limit someone's liberty in order to equalize the results.

You can have high degrees of both, but 'maximized'? Not so sure about that one...

If Equality is maximized, most likely you will need to limit someone's liberty in order to equalize the results.And in the process, increase the liberty of others.

And in the process, increase the liberty of others.

But not maximized liberty for all.

So his argument holds water. Left leans towards equality, Right leans towards liberty.

(Of course, plenty of right-wing governments don't lean towards liberty, so it's probably not the best gauge of left vs. right.)

Left/Liberal:

-Believes Humans are inherently in need of external control and regulation
-Believes in a large Government as a means to that end
-Believes in subjective morality
-Tends to seek after warm fuzzies

Right/Conservative:
-Believes Humans are inherently able to function best with little regulation
-Believes in smaller Government as a means to that end
-Believes in absolute morality
-Tends to seek after results

EACH can easily lead to oppression or Dystopian society if carried to an extreme

Left/Liberal:

-Believes Humans are inherently in need of external control and regulation
-Believes in a large Government as a means to that end
-Believes in subjective morality
-Tends to seek after warm fuzzies

Right/Conservative:
-Believes Humans are inherently able to function best with little regulation
-Believes in smaller Government as a means to that end
-Believes in absolute morality
-Tends to seek after results

EACH can easily lead to oppression or Dystopian society if carried to an extreme
So what about Libertarians and communists? I would imagine the former right and the latter left but not with your defination.

So what about Libertarians and communists? I would imagine the former right and the latter left but not with your defination.

Look at the political compass, people...

It's the same as the George Carlin definition of driving:

"Eveyone going slower than you is a moron, but everyone going faster than you is a MANIAC!!"

Left = freedom
Right = security

You need just as much of one as you do of the other, or you throw the whole thing out of whack and everyone ends up dead.

But not maximized liberty for all. But an increase in liberty overall, as equality would benefit the majority of people.

The Terms left and right side of politics are used all the time, but are actually pretty hard to pin down. Check out wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_politics) for some examples.

So I was wondering what other peoples definitions were?

Mine is:
Left is: long term solutions at the expense of short term practicality

Right is: short term practicality at the expense of long term solutions

Obviously taken to an extreme both are gonna be bad.. I guess that's why democracy tends to work ok occasionally as it mashes things up enough till they all come out about middle of the road...

What's your definition?

I wonder where your inclinations lie?:rolleyes:

To me, the left evokes images of nationalisation, elevated levels of taxation and a proclivity for welfare payments.

By contrast, the right as I perceive it ought to signify a depreciation in taxation, government involvement in fiscal affairs, privatisation and an endorsement of personal repsonsibility in precedent to reliance upon the state.

But an increase in liberty overall, as equality would benefit the majority of people.

Well, the only way to truly maximize equality, would be to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator, or at least as high as the lowest person can possibly achieve. Odds are that's probably way below average, which would mean that most people would be highly restricted in their liberty in order to achieve maximum equality.

Really, we're just debating semantics here. Equality and Liberty benefit the majority of people. Left wingers put the emphasis on equality, right wingers on liberty. (supposedly)

Well, the only way to truly maximize equality, would be to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator, or at least as high as the lowest person can possibly achieve. Odds are that's probably way below average, which would mean that most people would be highly restricted in their liberty in order to achieve maximum equality. Well, I was thinking specifically of economic equality; other types of quality may be trickier, it's true (not that they're necessarily desireable).

Really, we're just debating semantics here. Equality and Liberty benefit the majority of people. Left wingers put the emphasis on equality, right wingers on liberty. (supposedly)Yes, I can agree with this.

The left tends to value civil liberties, government welfare, and equality the most.
The right tends to value security, the economy, and traditional social values the most.

Right wing- anyone who believes in anysort of capitalist market- be it "socialism with chinese characteristics", liberalism, libertarianism, conservatism, fascism, social democrats, etc etc.

Left wing- Anyone who seeks to create a world in which profit is not the motive, the means of production are collectively owned- marxists, anarchists (the real ones) socialists, etc.

The really basic (and unbiased) definitions
Right: higher social control, lower economic control
Left: lower social control, higher economic control

The slightly longer (with some personal bias) definitions
Right: self-reliance, lower taxes, distrusts government, equal liberties/no special treatment, punish(/deter?) criminals, economic freedom, and morality is a big issue for a lot for some reason. Seems cold and heartless, the strongest survive.
Left: nanny state, higher(/crippling) taxes, welfare state, special treatment for minority groups, rehabilitate criminals, economic restriction, and morality isn't a big thing (except state enforced charity, also known as the welfare system). Seems warm and fuzzy, everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator.

All religious institutions, be they Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Spiritist or whatever are, by their very nature conservative. - They look to maintain certain social structures, certain moral values. They desire to impose their view as to what is right and what is wrong on the population in general.

Thgis is essentially a definition of the right wing sociocultural behaviour.

Conclusion: all churches (not faiths) are right wing.
You've evidently not been to any Unitarian churches.

So to sort of change the topic a little.
I don't know what its like in the rest of the world.. but here in Australia political commentary rarely goes beyond left/right. People don't usually define Politicians or political parties for that matter as Libertarian, Authoritarian.. or any of the more descriptive terms floated about .. just the vague constructs of Left and Right.. which obviously mean a whole heap of different things to different people. Is it just cause I live in a cultural backwater.. or is it the same around the world, because your average Joe who listens to the News doesn't care enough about politics to warrant any more than a vague left/right description.

I wonder where your inclinations lie?
Well about middle of the road I would say.
Not as short sighted as your average Right winger and not as impractical as your average Left winger ;)

Never met a left wing Baptist. I don't believe they exist.

Met some left and right wing Catholics.same here.

All religious institutions, be they Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, Spiritist or whatever are, by their very nature conservative. - They look to maintain certain social structures, certain moral values. They desire to impose their view as to what is right and what is wrong on the population in general.

Thgis is essentially a definition of the right wing sociocultural behaviour.

Conclusion: all churches (not faiths) are right wing.in a way this is 100% true.

So to sort of change the topic a little.
I don't know what its like in the rest of the world.. but here in Australia political commentary rarely goes beyond left/right. People don't usually define Politicians or political parties for that matter as Libertarian, Authoritarian.. or any of the more descriptive terms floated about .. just the vague constructs of Left and Right.. which obviously mean a whole heap of different things to different people. Is it just cause I live in a cultural backwater.. or is it the same around the world, because your average Joe who listens to the News doesn't care enough about politics to warrant any more than a vague left/right description.

Yeah, I think you get that most places.

Like here in Britain the press has a go at the Liberal Democrats for them not stating whether they are a left-wing or right-wing party, the Liberal Democrats always state that the left/right axis does not properly pertain to their position. The press then takes that as weasling out of the question, which is just dumb.

So what about Libertarians and communists? I would imagine the former right and the latter left but not with your defination.

The thing is, this stuff is fluid and constantly changing, and are layers deep. It's impossible to come up with a truly accurate 100% reliable definition, just like people are almost never 100% liberal or 100% conservative, because everyone has their own point of view and belief on things.

Libertarians and Communists are political parties in this counrty, just liek Democrats and Republicans. Are Democrats all Liberal? No. Are Republicans all Conservative? No. But they don't have to be, either. The whole concept of left and right is all about generalization. They also overlap in a way.


Consider that someone in the thread earlier said that Liberals are for more personal freedom. Fine. But look at the classic liberal ideas on church and state. The ACLU, an organization viewed as being generally liberal, aggressively eliminated public religious displays, especially on Government buildings. One could make the argument that that, in itself, is a limit on certain levels of personal freedom, in limiting what any one person can puiblicly do with respect to their religion.

Ah, but isn't the current Pope against a lot of that? Against "revolution theology"?
JP2 wasn't a Liberation Theologist either, but both he and Benedict oppose(d) war, the type of capitalism that "reduces a man to his economic value" and support helping the less fortunate.

Left/Liberal:

-Believes Humans are inherently in need of external control and regulation
-Believes in a large Government as a means to that end
-Believes in subjective morality
-Tends to seek after warm fuzzies

Right/Conservative:
-Believes Humans are inherently able to function best with little regulation
-Believes in smaller Government as a means to that end
-Believes in absolute morality
-Tends to seek after results

EACH can easily lead to oppression or Dystopian society if carried to an extreme
How about you write definitions that don't make your own ideology so obvious?

same here.
What flavour of Christian are you?

Consider that someone in the thread earlier said that Liberals are for more personal freedom. Fine. But look at the classic liberal ideas on church and state. The ACLU, an organization viewed as being generally liberal, aggressively eliminated public religious displays, especially on Government buildings. One could make the argument that that, in itself, is a limit on certain levels of personal freedom, in limiting what any one person can puiblicly do with respect to their religion.
The ACLU is way too capitalist/liberal. They say "display what you want on your own private property" but this makes the freedom to express religious faith not a right, but a privelidge for the rich.

How about you write definitions that don't make your own ideology so obvious?

What part do you disagree with?




The ACLU is way too capitalist/liberal. They say "display what you want on your own private property" but this makes the freedom to express religious faith not a right, but a privelidge for the rich.

Good point.

I'll try to break into a two axis scheme.

Economic axis
Left wing- social collectivism (means of production should be controlled by society, described in a variety of competing ways.)

Right wing- private collectivism (means of production should be owned privately by a minority of individuals)

Liberty axis
Authoritarian- Strong State (state exists as the end it self, the state, whether it is private or publicly owned, has broad authority.)

Libertarian- Weak or no state (state exists as a means to an end, if it cannot fulfill that end, it should be removed)

Any economic position should be able to be combined with any liberty postion. Hence we have both statist capitalists and libertarian capitalists, and we have both Stalinist dictators and libertarian socialists.

The really basic (and unbiased) definitions
Right: higher social control, lower economic control
Left: lower social control, higher economic control

The slightly longer (with some personal bias) definitions
Right: self-reliance, lower taxes, distrusts government, equal liberties/no special treatment, punish(/deter?) criminals, economic freedom, and morality is a big issue for a lot for some reason. Seems cold and heartless, the strongest survive.
Left: nanny state, higher(/crippling) taxes, welfare state, special treatment for minority groups, rehabilitate criminals, economic restriction, and morality isn't a big thing (except state enforced charity, also known as the welfare system). Seems warm and fuzzy, everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator.

This is more than "some personal bias." It's simply not true.

Personality profiles indicate that conservatives are tremendously inclined to follow leaders instead of thinking and doing for themselves. They like to think that they distrust government, but they fall right in line when a politician tells them that they're right to distrust government, so then those conservatives think that they're doing the right thing by following the government that doesn't believe in government.

Morality is not a big thing with the right wing. Affirmation of their own self-righteousness is a big thing, and they call it morality. But it goes back to not thinking for themselves. If your only sense of right and wrong is what righ-wing ministers and politicians tell you is right, then you have no morals. Not that you're completly immoral, you litarally have no morals, and you rely on the stated morals of others.

e.g. Republican policies result in more abortions. If you vote Republican you are pro-abortion. Republicans think that Demcrats are pro-abortion, but in reality, they understand that education and sexual liberty results in less abortions. Republicans think it's more important that they follow a discredited theory of what would happen but doesn't. Same with minimum wage. Raising it would hurt workers, even though it doesn't.

Democrats don't believe in a "nanny state." They believe in standards. If individuals can't steal, then why should corporations? If you can't get away with tax evasion, why should corporations?

You're showing more than a bias. You're showing a meme that is in direct opposition to reality.

Left wing...surrender monkeys that think appeasment is the best policy .
Right wing...peace through strength ..mess with us we kill you .

Thats all that matters to me .

As a famous Texan says, "how's that workin' for you?"

If you answered "well," then you've got to change your name to Ultraextremly Delusional.

The Right Wing has done nothing but weaken our hand internationally.

You do however do a wonderful job of indicating the evil inherent to right-wing ideology. "All that matters" to you is that we, as a nation, are a bunch of bullies.

Nah, let me fix that for ya...

Left wing: socially depraved and without direction or guidance, believes the role of government is necessary as an agent to strip all other social forms of socioeconomic guidance and social standards (such as that of forcing non-belief over belief in government practices and image), limiting business practices with the misguided idea of benefiting the employee or the consumer over the employer but end up creating a non-profitable corporation that loses money and becomes a ward of the state to keep their employees paid.

Right wing: limiting government power as a result of distrust of government, individualist, believe all is fair if matters are conducted legally (ie; inequality is inevitable to some degree, having learned in kindergarten grade from their teachers that “life is not fair” they attempt to create rules that will accommodate all but not favor one over another as much as possible), often compassionate to worldly matters desiring to extend their liberating ‘rules’ for one and all beyond national borders, believe in individuals being given the opportunity to better themselves over being handed their share of ‘slop’ from the public trough and being a drain on the rest of the society unless in an emergency or long term disability situation (government assistance), better business = better people = moral people = better governance by the people.

I guess you mean "fix" like in how the mafia fixes sporting events. You've demonstrated the right wing belief system, but that belief system is so far from reality that even if the haze that clouds the thinking of most right-wingers were to clear up for a while, reality would still be to far away to see on that one clear day.

You've just re-affirmed one of my earlier contentions on right-wing thinking. It's based on what "ought to be" instead of what actually is. Stephen Colbert's "liberal bias of reality."

Although, I feel I should mention that I pointed out the liberal bias of reality after the second Bush election.

What part do you disagree with?

Left:
-Believes Humans are inherently in need of external control and regulation
-Believes in a large Government as a means to that end
-Believes in subjective morality
-Tends to seek after warm fuzzies
-bs, the left believes that humans are inherently in need of empowerment.
- this is OK, but almost no right wing parties actually practice small government either
- not true. some do, some don't. it's not a tenet of the ideology.
- this is the most biased phrase of all. "warm fuzzies" just sounds so stupid! Leftists usually seek good results, not just good intentions.

Heres my opinion ( could be somewhat irrational, due to sleep deprivation and having taken some sleeping pills ) :

Left Wing: Believes in peace love happiness, their limited opinion matters. The whole world should be filled with fuzzy bunnies and lollipops. Usualy passafist and gets walked all over......whines about it latter. How ever when forced to become violent..goes overboard and drops an atom bomb. ( A dem was the only president to drop the atomic bomb. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it you republican jackasses. )

Right Wing: Believes might is right, fall in line ( not very prone to indepentent thought) and "our leaders couldn't possibly lie to us", niave thinking. Would step on their own dead mothers to make a buck. Prone to bullying others mercilesly and passing by a starving person and thinks " Christ that guy took a wrong turn some where" all the while gingerly caressing his pocket full of bills.


Eh.. maybe alittle dramitical, but hey like I said I'm sleep deprived and feeling the effects of sleeping pills working their bed time magic.;)

Oh and yes I know I made some spelling mistakes, so sue me and call the grammar police!

Heres my opinion ( could be somewhat irrational, due to sleep deprivation and having taken some sleeping pills ) :

Left Wing: Believes in peace love happiness, their limited opinion matters. The whole world should be filled with fuzzy bunnies and lollipops. Usualy passafist and gets walked all over......whines about it latter. How ever when forced to become violent..goes overboard and drops an atom bomb. ( A dem was the only president to drop the atomic bomb. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it you republican jackasses. )
In your definition you can't really count the Dems as leftist, they're not about peace, love happiness, pacifism. Lefties can get violent but any number of Marxist revolutionary groups would be a better example.

In your definition you can't really count the Dems as leftist, they're not about peace, love happiness, pacifism. Lefties can get violent but any number of Marxist revolutionary groups would be a better example.
I thought I mentioned something about being sleep deprived.

Either way the only time I mentioned Democrats was when I made a repherance about a Dem persident dropping the atomic bomb. Which knowing the republican mind is going to get thier bloomers in a bind, because they so vehimtly claim to be the only ones that are agressive.

Lest any one also jumps to any conclusions I hate both political parties equaly and equaly dislike extremism on either left wing or right wing thinking.

I thought I mentioned something about being sleep deprived.

Either way the only time I mentioned Democrats was when I made a repherance about a Dem persident dropping the atomic bomb. Which knowing the republican mind is going to get thier bloomers in a bind, because they so vehimtly claim to be the only ones that are agressive.

Lest any one also jumps to any conclusions I hate both political parties equaly and equaly dislike extremism on either left wing or right wing thinking.
The Democrats have little or nothing to do with left wing thinking.

New Domici,
Most current republicans are not conservatives. True conservatives are closer to libertarians or real anarchists. That means keeping government and government regulation to a minimum or getting rid of it all together respectively.

I am closest to a libertarian. I don't like the idea of government but I recognize the neccesity of police, fire protection, and a few other things. An anarchist seeks the abolition of all forms of rule.

If you don't think that the left stands for a nanny/welfare state, crippling taxation, and bloated bureaucracy, just look at the USSR. There's your socially progressive policies. There's your planned economy. That is what the left represents. That is what lies at the core of leftist thinking. Not a shining utopia where all have had their fill and everyone lives in a peace and prospers below windfarms that stretch as far as the eye can see; it is a dystopia where everyone suffers equally and live in constant fear beneath the booted heal of an oppressive government.

If you give a government an inch it will take that then pass a law and claim twenty miles more. If you want to imagine the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.