What Is More to Blame (Looking Back)

[StCapps]

The left-right spectrum is total bullshit. Always has been.

If you are going to use it, the only thing that makes sense is that what we call the "left" is a counter-civilizational force, and everything that is not trying to erode civilization is the "right", which is a pretty big group of ideologies and opinions.

In truth, there exists no spectrum of ideas. The difference between Fife and Nukedog is not a matter of degree of "right wingness". They hold completely different values and policy opinions.

I wish to God we could just abandon this stupid idea of political spectrums.

Wrong. That isn't left or right either, this isn't D&D faggot, it isn't order vs chaos or good vs evil, you dummies.

Absolute monarchy = far right, Communism = far-left, Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy, center.
How so many of y'all have no idea what is left or what it right, is beyond me. You want to replace an actually useful metric with a useless one and call it the exact same thing, how bout you use your imagination and come up with a new term instead of hijacking left-right because you are lazy idiots.

[Speaker to Animals]

The left-right spectrum is total bullshit. Always has been.

If you are going to use it, the only thing that makes sense is that what we call the "left" is a counter-civilizational force, and everything that is not trying to erode civilization is the "right", which is a pretty big group of ideologies and opinions.

In truth, there exists no spectrum of ideas. The difference between Fife and Nukedog is not a matter of degree of "right wingness". They hold completely different values and policy opinions.

I wish to God we could just abandon this stupid idea of political spectrums.

Wrong. That isn't left or right either, this isn't D&D faggot, it isn't order vs chaos or good vs evil, you dummies.

Absolute monarchy = far right, Communism = far-left, Parliamentary Constitution Monarchy, center.
How so many of y'all have no idea what is left or what it right, is beyond me.

Chocolate cake and sweet tea both contain sugar as an ingredient. Sweet Tea is not to the left or right of chocolate cake. These are two completely different things that happen to share in ingredient.

There exists nothing connecting these ideologies onto some fabled spectrum. They are totally different systems of thought. You are free to compare and contrast them, especially where they may share specific components or hold opposing components to their ideologies. But to pretend like there exists some intellectual line you can arrange political thought upon that actually exists.. that's just silly. That's confusing your thoughts with reality.

You are engaging in the narrative-building fallacy I have described before. You get caught up in your ideas and are more interested in the intellectual model you constructed than reality.

[StCapps]

It's an artificial construct that doesn't actually exist, but so is your version of left-right. At least the left-right spectrum born out of the French Revolution is more useful as an artificial construct than what you are calling left-right, hence why you should call it something else.

[BjornP]

The left-right spectrum is total bullshit. Always has been.

If you are going to use it, the only thing that makes sense is that what we call the "left" is a counter-civilizational force, and everything that is not trying to erode civilization is the "right", which is a pretty big group of ideologies and opinions.

In truth, there exists no spectrum of ideas. The difference between Fife and Nukedog is not a matter of degree of "right wingness". They hold completely different values and policy opinions.

I wish to God we could just abandon this stupid idea of political spectrums.

Absent the value judgement, the definition you're alluding to is the one we learned in school. The left as wanting to change the current social order, the right wanting to preserve it. Radicalism vs. Conservatism/Traditionalism.

And while I don't agree the left-right spectrum is bullshit, it's a simplistic means of gaging someone's political belief system. There are views on for example individual liberty that place me on the right, also in regards to monarchism and immigration, but I'm on the left when it comes to the welfare state and solidarity with the poor.

Fife and nuke are indeed different in political views. There's also quite substantial differences in views from a Maoist and a Social Democrat, and even more so with a progressive Sociial Liberal. That's because there are lots of various beliefs that fit in on the left, or right. A belief in preservation of the monarchy, puts you on the right in my country. A support of universal basic income puts you on the left.

The left-right spectrum isn't so helpful in determining individual political belief systems, but it's helpful in determining that of political parties in a practical way. In a multi-party system, it is helpful to know roughly where the parties stand.

[Speaker to Animals]

Negative. LOTS of groups on the right want to change the social order. That's pretty much all anybody wants to do to some extent.

What I mean by the so-called left being a counter-civilizational force is that they don't just want to change the social order (though they will attempt to sell it that way) but, rather, they oppose everything about their civilization. They want to destroy everything, including the human family, gender identities, etc. They try to sell it as "progress", but when you put it all together, it's end times of any civilization. What I mean by the left is more like a temperament or a predisposition to wanting to abandon everything about civilization, humanity, etc. It's ultimate expression, I suppose, would be transhumanism.

What happened historically after they took over a national government was that strongmen come in and neuter it. The counter-civilizational figures are usually lined up against walls and shot to death, or they just disappear in general. If you look at the Soviet government, for example, it was extremely anti-degeneracy. If you pegged another dude in the ass, then you were going to a reeducation camp to get fixed. But if you looked at the leftist movement preceding the revolution, there were all sorts of degenerates in there.

The mistake is in confusing what comes after they topple the government with the kinds of clowns you see running the show leading up to it. The Robespierre's always get what is coming to them, and the Napoleons are always waiting in the wings. Napoleon will talk a good game about the republic and the cause, but he's in it for himself. Don't confuse him with the degenerates he killed off or sent out in front of his main troops to soak up some bullets.

The problem for the tried and true degenerates is that most people don't want to live without civilization. Stalin is better than the paleolithic.

[BjornP]

Lots of groups on the right want to change the current social order, yes, but their motive for doing so is - in their own minds, at least - as a preservation of pre-existing values, tried and true values, if you will. Their motive is continuity. Radicalists seek to break with pre-existing continuity.

Civilization doesn't stop being civilization by being totally insane. Cue Spartans. They rejected family life and sent their boys off to be institutionally sodomized by older men untill they became adults, instead. Can't excatly say they're not a civilization, or an unsuccesful one. They're just a horrible example of civilization. Nazis were also civilized and their mass murders of Jews was almost all conducted in an perfectly civilized manner.

Also, I'd generally advise you to read and judge what the left (in the US or whereever you want to search) actually advocate for. And try to understand them (not agree with, just understand). Is your thesis that they'd ultimately seek transhumanism true, and verifiable by data (meaning textual examples of them saying so)? Is it fringe leftist, or a generally accepted belief amongst them? I personally find that deduction of yours unlikely.

[ssu]

Seems that StCapps believes in an existence some absurd universal of left and right.

The truth is (as said here By others) that it really does differ from country to country. Hence if StCapps refers to the classic origin from France, one can easily note the differences betwen the American right and the French right (or the American left and the French left).

[StCapps]

Seems that StCapps believes in an existence some absurd universal of left and right.

The truth is (as said here By others) that it really does differ from country to country. Hence if StCapps refers to the classic origin from France, one can easily note the differences betwen the American right and the French right (or the American left and the French left).

Name a form of government more to the right than Absolute Monarchy, then name a form of government on the left more to the left than Communism. If you can't then the spectrum still holds, regardless of nation, and the spectrum hasn't changed much at all, even though it dates all the way back to the French Revolution. The political overton windows of various nations may have moved around the left-right spectrum since the french revolution, but what is left and right hasn't changed.

All of y'all are idiots who don't know what left and right are, you just refuse to admit it to yourselves, and I am here to rub it in your faces.

Right is towards the prerogative of the crown.
Left is towards the prerogative of the masses.
Center is the middle ground between the two.

Not that difficult to understand, but y'all have to be obtuse about shit.

[Fife]

Well, there you go. The reason that your L v. R spectrum fails is because it has the crown on one end and the horde on the other.

False dichotomy.

AMA about any general topic and I'll tell you which end of a particular spectrum I am on; e.g., life vs. abortion/murder, prohibition vs. freedom, property vs. theft, &c, &c, and I'll give you a consistent answer on every one -- none of which fit on the spectrum that you cling to in the mad aversion to entropy.

Embrace the abyss, broham.

[StCapps]

Well, there you go. The reason that your L v. R spectrum fails is because it has the crown on one end and the horde on the other.

False dichotomy.

AMA about any general topic and I'll tell you which end of a particular spectrum I am on; e.g., life vs. abortion/murder, prohibition vs. freedom, property vs. theft, &c, &c, and I'll give you a consistent answer on every one -- none of which fit on the spectrum that you cling to in the mad aversion to entropy.

Embrace the abyss, broham.

Other spectrums can cover that stuff, and you don't have to call it left-right, unless your lazy as shit that is. Plus sometimes that stuff does still fall on traditional left-right spectrum, just not always.

Not everything in politics is about the political left versus the political right, why would anyone want to pretend that it is?