Is the Left - Right Paradigm Obsolete?

[RKMBrown]

no i wouldnt say that. I would say because of technology things have become more extreme. Maybe not extreme, but focused.

It is new, because the this is not something that we were ready for and we are ( the american public) are currently playing catch up on.

Yeah cause being the number one country on the planet in nearly every measure, unless you are measuring level of marxism and socialism, means we need to change everything about this country so we can catch up to the marxist socialists.

what? stop hitting your face with a hammer, then you won't post such stupid irrelevant garbage.

Says the POS libtard who wouldn't be able to subsist without welfare.

 

[Plasmaball]

Yeah cause being the number one country on the planet in nearly every measure, unless you are measuring level of marxism and socialism, means we need to change everything about this country so we can catch up to the marxist socialists.

what? stop hitting your face with a hammer, then you won't post such stupid irrelevant garbage.

Says the POS libtard who wouldn't be able to subsist without welfare.

if you think you are insulting me, your not. In fact you can't.
I work hard at my job, im working to advance, but that takes time, so if my family needs help im going to use it.

I dont sit here and buy beer with it.

But then again i dont hit myself in the face with hammers.

 

[The Rabbi]

Politics had become an issue by issue battle..where someone may fall into the liberal camp on say education,may take the conservative route on immagration.the 2 party system isnt made for this. So right now you have this "war, persay with in the parties on how to handle this. We see this more on the right ,right now.

So you might say "Politics makes strange bedfellows" to describe this current phenomenon, right? It accurately expresses that Left-Right dichotomy breaks down in certain specific issues, just like you say. Right?
Unfortunately it was coined in the 19th century. So this is hardly new. In fact it is the essence of politics that allegiances shift based on interests.

no i wouldnt say that. I would say because of technology things have become more extreme. Maybe not extreme, but focused.

It is new, because the this is not something that we were ready for and we are ( the american public) are currently playing catch up on.

That's utter nonsense. People have shifted views on single issues for years.
The emergence of 24/7 intense media coverage and feedback from the public has certainly caused changes though.

 

[Plasmaball]

So you might say "Politics makes strange bedfellows" to describe this current phenomenon, right? It accurately expresses that Left-Right dichotomy breaks down in certain specific issues, just like you say. Right?
Unfortunately it was coined in the 19th century. So this is hardly new. In fact it is the essence of politics that allegiances shift based on interests.

no i wouldnt say that. I would say because of technology things have become more extreme. Maybe not extreme, but focused.

It is new, because the this is not something that we were ready for and we are ( the american public) are currently playing catch up on.

That's utter nonsense. People have shifted views on single issues for years.
The emergence of 24/7 intense media coverage and feedback from the public has certainly caused changes though.

right they have, but the second half plays into the first half.

 

[lakeview]

I think the left-right paradigm has become obsolete. The lines blur as one moves to the extreme edges of political activism. If you believe they remain instructive, please offer examples of the beliefs of those on the far right and far left.

I don't think the left-right paradigm is going anywhere anytime soon, from my point of view it's actually a recent occurrence. A few people have mentioned technology as the culprit here and I agree with that.

When I was younger there was a lot less of this "left-right" nonsense. Splitting tickets used to be the norm when I was younger, now if you don't vote straight-ticket a lot of people see you as not being ideologically pure. I think the reason for this is the explosion of infotainment. If you want to get your message out there it had better be 5 seconds or less because if it's not most outlets won't carry it and that leads to over-simplification of the message and there's nothing simpler than a binary decision. As long as we live in a 24/7 society that feeds us McNews the left-right paradigm will be with us.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Of course, there is a dichotomy.

The Liberals want to tyrannize us in the name of the common good and the Fatherland.

The Conservatives want to do the same but in the name of god and religion.

Massive difference.

.

.

The point is that the 'package deals' offered by the left and the right, as represented by the Democrats and Republicans, don't accurately map to the views of a large chunk of disaffected voters. They split along an axis that ignores the libertarian/authoritarian distinction, with both parties leaning authoritarian. The left/right mapping places pure authoritarians alongside pure libertarians, forcing both groups into the meaningless role of 'centrists', when if fact we are polar opposites.

It boils down to an ideological battle and this is one war that cannot be fought to the death.

For America to survive, neither extreme should be permitted to lead.

I still say that the solution to the problem is to remove from congress the power to customize taxes for 'special interests' and remove their power to spend beyond what they're willing to collect in taxes, and not in some broad changing of the ideological minds of the masses.

Spot On!

 

[dblack]

The point is that the 'package deals' offered by the left and the right, as represented by the Democrats and Republicans, don't accurately map to the views of a large chunk of disaffected voters. They split along an axis that ignores the libertarian/authoritarian distinction, with both parties leaning authoritarian. The left/right mapping places pure authoritarians alongside pure libertarians, forcing both groups into the meaningless role of 'centrists', when if fact we are polar opposites.

It boils down to an ideological battle and this is one war that cannot be fought to the death.

For America to survive, neither extreme should be permitted to lead.

I still say that the solution to the problem is to remove from congress the power to customize taxes for 'special interests' and remove their power to spend beyond what they're willing to collect in taxes, and not in some broad changing of the ideological minds of the masses.

Spot On!

Indeed.

 

[Kondor3]

It is a pity that we cannot (practically speaking) dissolve both the Democratic and Republican political party structures all up-and-down the geographical food chain, and start from scratch, with a dozen or more parties contending for power, and with a do-over on criteria for getting one's name (or one's party name) on the ballot.

Then again, if we did such a thing, there wouldn't be much left except the second- and third-stringer parties, and some of those just won't do - at all.

Mebbe we'd better make that 'dissolve ALL political parties' and then let new ones spring up.

Never gonna happen but it's mildly (if delusionally) soothing to ruminate on such things.

 

[Kondor3]

I voted "No" - it's not dead - there's too much mileage to be wrung from it yet, by the Dogmatics and Haters and Concrete Thinkers on BOTH sides of that divide...

 

[Pogo]

The terms "liberal (Left)" or "conservative (Right)" need to be preceded by an adverb.

For example: socially liberal, fiscally conservative.

There are plenty of issues in which there is a distinct Left and Right position. Abortion: Left is pro-choice, Right is pro-life. Gun control: Left is for it, Right is against it. Big government: Left is for it, Right is against it.

See, this is where we get into trouble. I would submit that so-called "pro-choice" is a Liberal tenet (which does not mean left), while "gun control" is a leftist tenet (which does not mean Liberal). The "big govenment" canard is a non-starter; both left and right push big government. That's part of why definition cleanup is needed.

We owe this conflation of left with liberal to Joe McCarthy and his mindset, who attempted to conflate the demon of the day (communism) with the liberals who represented the left. IMO.

The Left-Right paradigm is alive and well, despite demagogues like Glen Beck trying to muddy the waters.

Beck tries to make the liberal Democrat today the same guy as the conservative Democrat of 50+ years ago. He tries to paint the old Right as Left and pretend there is, and never has been, an extremist Right position. He says with an earnest straight face that Nazis are left wing. It is pretty scary times when some dipshit is trying real hard to say no Rightward position is extreme and people are buying it.

True but a disingenuous look through a telescope that deliberately ignores temporal settings surely isn't limited to Beck. We see it in these forums daily.

 

[Pogo]

Extremism at both ends of the spectrum is the direct opposite of freedom and democracy.

Yeah cause extreme freedom is the opposite of freedom.

Depends on which one-dimensional shortsighted spectrum you're using.

 

[Pogo]

Left and Right are still very clear cut, despite the tards' best efforts to say they are not.

Of course, there is a dichotomy.

The Liberals want to tyrannize us in the name of the common good and the Fatherland.

The Conservatives want to do the same but in the name of god and religion.

Massive difference.

.

.

The point is that the 'package deals' offered by the left and the right, as represented by the Democrats and Republicans, don't accurately map to the views of a large chunk of disaffected voters. They split along an axis that ignores the libertarian/authoritarian distinction, with both parties leaning authoritarian. The left/right mapping places pure authoritarians alongside pure libertarians, forcing both groups into the meaningless role of 'centrists', when if fact we are polar opposites.

Again, this is why we need definition cleanup. I read Contumacious' post above as pure ironic humor at first, but I wonder if by "Liberals" he means "leftists"...

When you work Liberal in independent of left and right, you no longer have the libertarian/authoritarian grey area.

 

[Esmeralda]

I think the left-right paradigm has become obsolete. The lines blur as one moves to the extreme edges of political activism. If you believe they remain instructive, please offer examples of the beliefs of those on the far right and far left.

The US needs more than two viable political parties, more than two that have a chance of winning an important political office, including president. The two party system has become something that simply divides the country down the middle and creates all this intense partisanship that is doing nothing but harm to the country.

 

[Pogo]

So you might say "Politics makes strange bedfellows" to describe this current phenomenon, right? It accurately expresses that Left-Right dichotomy breaks down in certain specific issues, just like you say. Right?
Unfortunately it was coined in the 19th century. So this is hardly new. In fact it is the essence of politics that allegiances shift based on interests.

no i wouldnt say that. I would say because of technology things have become more extreme. Maybe not extreme, but focused.

It is new, because the this is not something that we were ready for and we are ( the american public) are currently playing catch up on.

Yeah cause being the number one country on the planet in nearly every measure, unless you are measuring level of marxism and socialism, means we need to change everything about this country so we can catch up to the marxist socialists.

I know that's meant facetiously but the premises on both ends are fallacious.

There is no such thing as "the number one country on the planet in every measure", nor should there ever be. We gotta get over that national megalomania.

 

[Avatar4321]

Of course, there is a dichotomy.

The Liberals want to tyrannize us in the name of the common good and the Fatherland.

The Conservatives want to do the same but in the name of god and religion.

Massive difference.

.

.

The point is that the 'package deals' offered by the left and the right, as represented by the Democrats and Republicans, don't accurately map to the views of a large chunk of disaffected voters. They split along an axis that ignores the libertarian/authoritarian distinction, with both parties leaning authoritarian. The left/right mapping places pure authoritarians alongside pure libertarians, forcing both groups into the meaningless role of 'centrists', when if fact we are polar opposites.

It boils down to an ideological battle and this is one war that cannot be fought to the death.

For America to survive, neither extreme should be permitted to lead.

I still say that the solution to the problem is to remove from congress the power to customize taxes for 'special interests' and remove their power to spend beyond what they're willing to collect in taxes, and not in some broad changing of the ideological minds of the masses.

And yet, it will be fought to the death unless the people humble themselves.

 

[Pogo]

Affirmation of the previous post?

 

[RKMBrown]

no i wouldnt say that. I would say because of technology things have become more extreme. Maybe not extreme, but focused.

It is new, because the this is not something that we were ready for and we are ( the american public) are currently playing catch up on.

Yeah cause being the number one country on the planet in nearly every measure, unless you are measuring level of marxism and socialism, means we need to change everything about this country so we can catch up to the marxist socialists.

I know that's meant facetiously but the premises on both ends are fallacious.

There is no such thing as "the number one country on the planet in every measure", nor should there ever be. We gotta get over that national megalomania.

Don't worry about that were #2 no three no four ... Yeah that's what massive government buys you, guranteed obsolecence. Democrats win. The country looses.

 

[uhkilleez]

It would be impossible for you to dumb down anythjing because Dumb is where you start.
Laws and regulations affect businesses. I realize that's a blinding flash of the obvious for most people but clearly you havent gotten the message.
What do unions have to do with this? Do you really think unions dont contribute money etc to campaigns? Do you really think laws are not written to exempt or benefit unions? Really? Tell me you aren't that ill informed. With a straight face.

Right, so I take it that you are your own measure for who is ignorant and intelligent? Right, because that's not at all delusional.

Anyway, of course laws and regulations have effects on business... That's kind of the point.
And yes, unions also lobby government to get tax exemptions and benefits, however they are not the ones fucking us over the most. They are not the ones who lobby for a smaller capital gains tax than an income tax, or a copious amount of loopholes in the tax code; So that people like Warren Buffet pay a smaller percentage of income in tax than their secretaries. Is it any wonder many of these corporations are pulling in the highest profits of all time during the worst recession since the Great Depression... Must just be a coincidence.
All of that is generally beside the point when compared to the fact taxes are far too high and government has an uncontrollable addiction to spending money.

In addendum, if the best you've got for me is being a sarcastic prick with an overinflated sense of self worth, I am pretty sure there is no more beneficial discussion to come between the two of us and I have better things to do. Have a good night.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Yeah cause extreme freedom is the opposite of freedom.

Define your "extreme" freedom.

Extreme means being in or attaining the greatest or highest degree.
Freedom means Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

Thus the english translation of extreme freedom is being in or attaining the greatest or highest degree of liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

I don't see a reason to proffer a change to the book definitions.

"English translation" from what language?

Now who exactly is enslaving you? Who is detaining you? Who is oppressing you?

Since none of the above is actually occurring you already have "extreme freedom" by your own definition. Therefore you have just proved that I was 100% right when I posted this statement;

Extremism at both ends of the spectrum is the direct opposite of freedom and democracy.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So you might say "Politics makes strange bedfellows" to describe this current phenomenon, right? It accurately expresses that Left-Right dichotomy breaks down in certain specific issues, just like you say. Right?
Unfortunately it was coined in the 19th century. So this is hardly new. In fact it is the essence of politics that allegiances shift based on interests.

no i wouldnt say that. I would say because of technology things have become more extreme. Maybe not extreme, but focused.

It is new, because the this is not something that we were ready for and we are ( the american public) are currently playing catch up on.

Yeah cause being the number one country on the planet in nearly every measure, unless you are measuring level of marxism and socialism, means we need to change everything about this country so we can catch up to the marxist socialists.

Being number one in gun deaths and gun crimes while lagging sadly in education and healthcare is your definition of being the "number one country on the planet"?