Is the Left - Right Paradigm Obsolete?

[ShawnChris13]

Basically, it is still the Federalists of New England versus the Jeffersonians in the Heartland.



The Federalists are winning because they understand the tendency toward Decline of Societies.



They have mastered the art of borrowing money to give out free stuff in exchange for votes; and so have gained control of such groups as are happy on the Federal Plantation.



But, they couldn't borrow enough to fully fund ObamaCare, and they wound up sending the Middle Class a bill---due and payable now.



So, the Jeffersonians may do pretty well in the next election.

I never read on this site tea baggers, conservatives, Jeffersonians and the like complain about free stuff going to corporations and the extremely wealthy, including their ability to influence politics with big money. How about the supremes declaring corporations people? Nope, just whine about free stuff for votes.

While you didn't refute any of the previous points, the new ones you raise are valid.

This only shows the differences between the parties and how they vie for their base. Both parties are pandering to opposite ends of the spectrum. Both parties are in turn hurting the progress of social and financial problems that need to be addressed.

 

[Wry Catcher]

which party's President signed the DHS into law? If that aint Big Gov't, I don't know what is.

Regardless, they both work for the same people (the ones who fill the campaign coffers and give them fake jobs w/ exorbitant salaries after leaving Washington DC.

Good point. Rabbi points fingers at elected officials, most of whom do what their donors tell them to do. We do have big government and elected or appointed leaders find a way to profit - many times for the benefit of the few and not the many. Who are the few? Who hires former officials and what is their agenda? Who are the power elite, the oligarchs who exercise power and control over We The People?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Basically, it is still the Federalists of New England versus the Jeffersonians in the Heartland.



The Federalists are winning because they understand the tendency toward Decline of Societies.



They have mastered the art of borrowing money to give out free stuff in exchange for votes; and so have gained control of such groups as are happy on the Federal Plantation.



But, they couldn't borrow enough to fully fund ObamaCare, and they wound up sending the Middle Class a bill---due and payable now.



So, the Jeffersonians may do pretty well in the next election.

I never read on this site tea baggers, conservatives, Jeffersonians and the like complain about free stuff going to corporations and the extremely wealthy, including their ability to influence politics with big money. How about the supremes declaring corporations people? Nope, just whine about free stuff for votes.

While you didn't refute any of the previous points, the new ones you raise are valid.

This only shows the differences between the parties and how they vie for their base. Both parties are pandering to opposite ends of the spectrum. Both parties are in turn hurting the progress of social and financial problems that need to be addressed.

Thinking about your comment, "Both parties are pandering to opposite ends of the spectrum", I wonder how you might define each end of the "spectrum"?

 

[ShawnChris13]

I never read on this site tea baggers, conservatives, Jeffersonians and the like complain about free stuff going to corporations and the extremely wealthy, including their ability to influence politics with big money. How about the supremes declaring corporations people? Nope, just whine about free stuff for votes.

While you didn't refute any of the previous points, the new ones you raise are valid.



This only shows the differences between the parties and how they vie for their base. Both parties are pandering to opposite ends of the spectrum. Both parties are in turn hurting the progress of social and financial problems that need to be addressed.

Thinking about your comment, "Both parties are pandering to opposite ends of the spectrum", I wonder how you might define each end of the "spectrum"?

Republicans point their policies (tax loopholes) towards those who are looking for financial breaks to spend money.

Democrats point their policies towards those who are looking for financial relief because of how little they earn. (Welfare)

Very generalized but it contains truth.

 

[Contumacious]

Here we have a chance to see where our middle ground is, please use it to the best of our abilities.

So we don't want Liberty - we need to be partially enslaved, right?

What is the middle ground between being alive or dead, a coma?

.

What is liberty without security? Conversely, what is security without liberty?

Why don't you learn a marketable skill(s)? You will see that it/they will provide you security without having to surrender liberty to the bureaucrats?

.

 

[candycorn]

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.

If you look at a parabola with the "bottom" turned on it's side (put it at the 3 o'clock position) and the other two ends at 10 and 8; the opposite ends are closer to one another than the middle.

I think the paradigm between left and right is healthy but the DEM/REP paradigm is almost non existent.

Their overarching goal is to maintain the two-party system and America is a worse-off place because of it.

 

[Contumacious]

Yawn.
Do we really need another brain-dead poster spouting crap about "there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats" and "they are all controlled by the (Zionist) banksters"?
We have our quota of crazy here. Go somewhere else.

Exactly.

There is a huge difference between liberals and conservatives.

Liberals want to spend gazillions on the welfare/warfare state.

Compassionate Conservatives on the other hand only want to spend bazillions.

Big fucking difference.



.

 

[dblack]

Yawn.
Do we really need another brain-dead poster spouting crap about "there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats" and "they are all controlled by the (Zionist) banksters"?
We have our quota of crazy here. Go somewhere else.

Exactly.

There is a huge difference between liberals and conservatives.

Liberals want to spend gazillions on the welfare/warfare state.

Compassionate Conservatives on the other hand only want to spend bazillions.

Big fucking difference.



.

The only difference is what they pretend to be about when not in power.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So we don't want Liberty - we need to be partially enslaved, right?

What is the middle ground between being alive or dead, a coma?

.

What is liberty without security? Conversely, what is security without liberty?

Why don't you learn a marketable skill(s)? You will see that it/they will provide you security without having to surrender liberty to the bureaucrats?

.

My skills have given me an early retirement, with excellent health care for my wife and I, and an income more than twice that of the mean income of Americans in 2013. I own a California rancher in the SF Bay Area free and clear and another home which we rent to one of my sons and his wife less than a mile from our primary residence. So FU and your condescending ad hominem attack.

Of course I understand your inadequate education prevents you form responding intelligently to my comment, it does require a bit of thought, but nothing so radical (to you) as critical thought.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Basically, it is still the Federalists of New England versus the Jeffersonians in the Heartland.

The Federalists are winning because they understand the tendency toward Decline of Societies.

They have mastered the art of borrowing money to give out free stuff in exchange for votes; and so have gained control of such groups as are happy on the Federal Plantation.

But, they couldn't borrow enough to fully fund ObamaCare, and they wound up sending the Middle Class a bill---due and payable now.

So, the Jeffersonians may do pretty well in the next election.

I never read on this site tea baggers, conservatives, Jeffersonians and the like complain about free stuff going to corporations and the extremely wealthy, including their ability to influence politics with big money. How about the supremes declaring corporations people? Nope, just whine about free stuff for votes.

You never read my posts? Or do you just ignore them because they call you out for supporting all the things you claim to oppose?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

If you look at a parabola with the "bottom" turned on it's side (put it at the 3 o'clock position) and the other two ends at 10 and 8; the opposite ends are closer to one another than the middle.

I think the paradigm between left and right is healthy but the DEM/REP paradigm is almost non existent.

Their overarching goal is to maintain the two-party system and America is a worse-off place because of it.

Parabolas do not have ends.

 

[Peterf]

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.

It was obsolete on the day it was invented. By lazy minded Frenchmen who thought that everyone those who sat on the right side of the Chamber agreed with each other about everything - and that this was also true of those who sat on the left.

Supposed "Left/Right" differences have always been mangled and distorted to suit the speaker. The most damaging has been the silly idea that Communism is 'left' and Naziism is 'right'; Whereas both preach total State supremacy and are equally dependent on leftist ideology.

 

[Wry Catcher]

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.

It was obsolete on the day it was invented. By lazy minded Frenchmen who thought that everyone those who sat on the right side of the Chamber agreed with each other about everything - and that this was also true of those who sat on the left.

Supposed "Left/Right" differences have always been mangled and distorted to suit the speaker. The most damaging has been the silly idea that Communism is 'left' and Naziism is 'right'; Whereas both preach total State supremacy and are equally dependent on leftist ideology.

Your last sentence is confusing, I see and agree both "preach State Supremacy", though I consider both as generally totalitarian; but, how do you conclude Fascism and Communism are "equally dependent on leftist ideology"?

How do you define leftist Ideology and how does it comport with the governments of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet and other Fascists?

 

[candycorn]

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.

If you look at a parabola with the "bottom" turned on it's side (put it at the 3 o'clock position) and the other two ends at 10 and 8; the opposite ends are closer to one another than the middle.

I think the paradigm between left and right is healthy but the DEM/REP paradigm is almost non existent.

Their overarching goal is to maintain the two-party system and America is a worse-off place because of it.

Parabolas do not have ends.

Where the ends run off the page, they're closer to one another than the opposite end. I'm sure you know what that other end is called....

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If you look at a parabola with the "bottom" turned on it's side (put it at the 3 o'clock position) and the other two ends at 10 and 8; the opposite ends are closer to one another than the middle.

I think the paradigm between left and right is healthy but the DEM/REP paradigm is almost non existent.

Their overarching goal is to maintain the two-party system and America is a worse-off place because of it.

Parabolas do not have ends.

Where the ends run off the page, they're closer to one another than the opposite end. I'm sure you know what that other end is called....

If the "Ends run off the pay" then you can't see them, can you?

A parabola is a curve where every point is an equal distance from the focus and the directrix. This can include curves where the points are further away from each other than the vertex.

It was, however, a nice attempt to explain your, erroneous, point.

 

[Contumacious]

What is liberty without security? Conversely, what is security without liberty?

Why don't you learn a marketable skill(s)? You will see that it/they will provide you security without having to surrender liberty to the bureaucrats?

.

My skills have given me an early retirement, with excellent health care for my wife and I, and an income more than twice that of the mean income of Americans in 2013. I own a California rancher in the SF Bay Area free and clear and another home which we rent to one of my sons and his wife less than a mile from our primary residence. So FU and your condescending ad hominem attack.

I see.

If you REALLY have wealth and health care insurance why are you always sucking up to welfare state bureaucrats.

People with wealth and marketable skills are independent. They don't like giving away their hard earned money.

.

.

 

[Wry Catcher]

In simple 'plan' geometry we think in terms of a clock face. The top third are the moderate Democrats and the moderate Republicans, the middle third are the liberal Democrats and the conservative Republicans; and the bottom third Radical Democrats and Reactionary Republicans. At Six, the middle of the extreme are the Revolutionaries, those who seek or support the violent overthrow of the establishment. It is where the far left and the far right intersect, and in the opinion of moderates, liberals and conservatives, the Idiot Fringe.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why don't you learn a marketable skill(s)? You will see that it/they will provide you security without having to surrender liberty to the bureaucrats?

.

My skills have given me an early retirement, with excellent health care for my wife and I, and an income more than twice that of the mean income of Americans in 2013. I own a California rancher in the SF Bay Area free and clear and another home which we rent to one of my sons and his wife less than a mile from our primary residence. So FU and your condescending ad hominem attack.

I see.

If you REALLY have wealth and health care insurance why are you always sucking up to welfare state bureaucrats.

People with wealth and marketable skills are independent. They don't like giving away their hard earned money.

.

.

Probably because I was raised Catholic and the values I learned came from the teachings of Jesus. Of course most know I'm an agnostic, but be Jesus a God, a man or a fiction, he or He had it right.

 

[Peterf]

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.

It was obsolete on the day it was invented. By lazy minded Frenchmen who thought that everyone those who sat on the right side of the Chamber agreed with each other about everything - and that this was also true of those who sat on the left.

Supposed "Left/Right" differences have always been mangled and distorted to suit the speaker. The most damaging has been the silly idea that Communism is 'left' and Naziism is 'right'; Whereas both preach total State supremacy and are equally dependent on leftist ideology.

Your last sentence is confusing, I see and agree both "preach State Supremacy", though I consider both as generally totalitarian; but, how do you conclude Fascism and Communism are "equally dependent on leftist ideology"?

How do you define leftist Ideology and how does it comport with the governments of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet and other Fascists?

The key - I would say the defining - element in leftism is that priority should be given to the collective, not the individual. This collective may be an abstraction - 'the Broad masses' - or may be defined in class terms.

The idea of an Enemy of the People is a profoundly leftist idea. And so is the concept of sacrificing worthless individuals for the 'greater good'. Even if the tyrants come from what has, quite wrongly, been identified as the 'right'.

Read biographies of, for example, Mussolini. Before founding the Fascists he was the most influential and respected Italian Socialist of his day. And recall that Hitler built his reputation as a public speaker through adrresses to the German Worker's Party.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

It was obsolete on the day it was invented. By lazy minded Frenchmen who thought that everyone those who sat on the right side of the Chamber agreed with each other about everything - and that this was also true of those who sat on the left.

Supposed "Left/Right" differences have always been mangled and distorted to suit the speaker. The most damaging has been the silly idea that Communism is 'left' and Naziism is 'right'; Whereas both preach total State supremacy and are equally dependent on leftist ideology.

That was the big lie of the 20th Century. The big lie of the 21st century is that if you like your current policy you can keep it.