What Has Happened To The Left?

[unbeliever]

That's not strictly true.

 

Hitler was tolerant of capitalist enterprise as long as it was compliant. It's just a refined form of capitalism where corporate and state power work together

 

You're describing a form of socialism. The state effectively controls industry at arms length. Any system in which the state controls industry is blatantly socialist.

[Mister M]

The German jews were the wealthiest ethnic group in 1930's Germany. Their wealth was seized and they were murdered so they couldn't complain.

Any other reasons or justifications for the holocaust were just propaganda.

Their wealth was spent on providing jobs are public services for the majority ethnic group in Germany.

It's just an aggressive implementation of the redistribution of wealth that all socialists go in for.

 

 

You're only struggling with this because you've crudely lumped socialism in with tolerance and liberalism, then lumped capitalism in with authoritarianism and bigotry. It's a circular argument.

There's some history in the US and to a lesser extent in the UK of political alliances between social traditionalists and capitalists, and conversely between social progressives and socialists. These ideologies are essentially independent. You can be a socially conservative socialist or a progressive capitalist. Whether you're labelled "right" or "left" is contextual and arbitrary.

 

All the absolute worst people in the last century have been either religious of socialist zealots. Get used to it.

 

 

By any reasonable definition, I'm a progressive capitalist. Does that make me "right" or "left"?[/QUOTE]

 

 

I think lumping the Nazis in with socialists on the basis that Nazism was simply "an aggressive implementation of the redistribution of wealth that all socialists go in for" is crude.

 

I'm not struggling with anything. Nor have I lumped political ideologies together with personal attributes. You said that I 'lumped capitalism in with authoritarianism and bigotry'. No I didn't.

 

If you think that 'All the absolute worst people in the last century have been either religious of socialist zealots'. Then that's your opinion, not fact. I may agree with you on some, but not others. I'm not going to get used to anything. I would remind you that it was you who accused me of lumping capitalism & authoritarianism.

 

I have no idea whether you're a 'progressive capitalist', and I've no idea whether you're right or left. If you're on the political right then that's your choice, nobody else's.

[unbeliever]

The German jews were the wealthiest ethnic group in 1930's Germany. Their wealth was seized and they were murdered so they couldn't complain.

Any other reasons or justifications for the holocaust were just propaganda.

Their wealth was spent on providing jobs are public services for the majority ethnic group in Germany.

It's just an aggressive implementation of the redistribution of wealth that all socialists go in for.

 

 

You're only struggling with this because you've crudely lumped socialism in with tolerance and liberalism, then lumped capitalism in with authoritarianism and bigotry. It's a circular argument.

There's some history in the US and to a lesser extent in the UK of political alliances between social traditionalists and capitalists, and conversely between social progressives and socialists. These ideologies are essentially independent. You can be a socially conservative socialist or a progressive capitalist. Whether you're labelled "right" or "left" is contextual and arbitrary.

 

All the absolute worst people in the last century have been either religious of socialist zealots. Get used to it.

 

 

By any reasonable definition, I'm a progressive capitalist. Does that make me "right" or "left"?[/QUOTE]

 

 

I think lumping the Nazis in with socialists on the basis that Nazism was simply "an aggressive implementation of the redistribution of wealth that all socialists go in for" is crude.

 

I'm not struggling with anything. Nor have I lumped political ideologies together with personal attributes. You said that I 'lumped capitalism in with authoritarianism and bigotry'. No I didn't.

 

If you think that 'All the absolute worst people in the last century have been either religious of socialist zealots'. Then that's your opinion, not fact. I may agree with you on some, but not others. I'm not going to get used to anything. I would remind you that it was you who accused me of lumping capitalism & authoritarianism.

 

I have no idea whether you're a 'progressive capitalist', and I've no idea whether you're right or left. If you're on the political right then that's your choice, nobody else's.

 

 

I've laid out pretty clearly what I think the modern terms "left" and "right" mean.

What do they mean to you. Are they defined by socialism vs capitalism, social conservatism vs progressiveness, or liberalism vs authoritarianism? Or perhaps you have a different interpretation?

Edited November 12, 2015 by unbeliever

[Mister M]

Fascism has no links to capitalism. It requires heavy state intervention in the economy and a large, powerful government.

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 21:09 ----------

 

 

It doesn't.

 

These labels are useless.

 

People are either progressive or socially conservative, either capitalist or socialist and either libertarian or authoritarian.

Many combinations are possible. I consider myself a progressive, liberal, capitalist.

 

The term "right" is applied to traditionalists, capitalists and the authoritarian.

The term "left" is applied to progressives, socialists and liberals.

 

Stalin and especially Hitler were extreme social conservatives, socialists and authoritarian. That gives them 2 ticks on the "left" and one on the "right". The one on the right is perhaps what they are best remembered for.

 

It is very hard to be an authoritarian capitalist. Capitalists want minimal government. Government can't be small (therefore weak) and authoritarian at the same time.

It is very easy to be an authoritarian socialist. Both require big and powerful government.

 

One of the people I'd put as one of the absolute worst people of last century was Augusto Pinochet, former dictator of Chile. He managed to be both fervently pro capitalist and authoritarian.

[unbeliever]

One of the people I'd put as one of the absolute worst people of last century was Augusto Pinochet, former dictator of Chile. He managed to be both fervently pro capitalist and authoritarian.

 

Fair point.

So it's hard to be authoritarian and capitalist, but not impossible.

 

Pinochet's lot tortured a few tens of thousands of people and murdered a few thousand. Mostly to preserve their power.

Not really in the same league as Stalin or Hitler each with a body count into 8 figures.

Edited November 12, 2015 by unbeliever

[Mister M]

.................

 

---------- Post added 12-11-2015 at 21:31 ----------

 

 

 

I've laid out pretty clearly what I think the modern terms "left" and "right" mean.

What do they mean to you. Are they defined by socialism vs capitalism, social conservatism vs progressiveness, or liberalism vs authoritarianism? Or perhaps you have a different interpretation?

 

Probably some of the above, but it would include other factors, and to be honest I'd struggle to articulate what they are.

[Crosser]

After reading all this long winded, long worded, carp....

 

It seems to me that Everyone wants what they percieve to be best for them.

 

Be it left/right/centre or anywhere between.

 

It's a huge arena and (to me at least) some "far right" views seem good, however, so do some "far left" views too.

 

So I can imagine that this "debate" could go on forever and ever and ever

[WiseOwl182]

I didn't say all of them are thick!!

 

The ones at the top of the tree are obviously very switched on.

 

The trick is to gain power and throw scraps to the single-minded folk that become their followers. Deliver the simple messages that push the right buttons. At the same time cement their power and ensure nobody like you Alan will ever, ever be in the 1%. You'll be useful to them though by providing votes and fighting their battles for them. At the same time you'll be encouraged to look down on people less fortunate, and also to follow the pack in attacking whatever group are the current bogeymen.

 

 

Rough translation: anyone with conservative views must be thick. Anyone with socialist views is the epitome of intelligence. You've basically just insulted around 51% of the country (minus the top 1%, of course).

 

Or maybe, people have free thought and form different opinions on their own? Maybe that isn't a trait unique only to those who share your viewpoint?

[I1L2T3]

After reading all this long winded, long worded, carp....

 

It seems to me that Everyone wants what they percieve to be best for them.

 

Be it left/right/centre or anywhere between.

 

It's a huge arena and (to me at least) some "far right" views seem good, however, so do some "far left" views too.

 

So I can imagine that this "debate" could go on forever and ever and ever

 

I don't seem to fit any of unbelievers nice little categories.

 

I consider myself to be on the left but I strongly support capitalism as the best economic model for us. I believe we can weave elements of socialism into that to mitigate against the extremes of capitalism, and in some ways improve it for the greater good.

 

What I just said there would have most avowed socialists screaming at me but I expect plenty on the Tory left would be quite comfortable with it.

 

So there you go. Not everything is always black and white.

[Mister M]

Rough translation: anyone with conservative views must be thick. Anyone with socialist views is the epitome of intelligence. You've basically just insulted around 51% of the country (minus the top 1%, of course).

 

Or maybe, people have free thought and form different opinions on their own? Maybe that isn't a trait unique only to those who share your viewpoint?

 

I didn't read I1L2T3s post as a put down to others