Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesn't surprise me that there is such a conflict of opinions, since few can even agree on the definition of the terms, and even fewer possess the historical perspective to understand these terms Right-Left .. or Republican-Democrat.
The facts are, the lines have become so blurred, and philosophies have switched back and forth so much, these terms have very little meaning relative to history ... so going back 100 years to evidence a point about democrats or republicans now is less than worthless, unless the point is to show how little difference actually exists between them today.
Traditionally, "Conservatives" (most closely associated with Republicans or Right Wing) meant exactly what the term implies ... cautious, supporting the status quo and resisting major change. This bore out in the conservative approach to fiscal policy which was reserved. This equates to small, limited government and anti-war for the plain simple fact that big government and war costs lots of money and requires lots of spending and higher taxation.
Whereas the "liberals" (most closely associated with Democrats or Left Wing) have been viewed as the Tax & Spend party (as well as the War Party) because of their philosophy of a greater role of government to socially engineer society for the alleged purposes of protecting individual freedoms (traditionally a liberal view). And, a fact that will have the liberal democrats heads spinning is the fact that the traditional and historic label of the democrats were previously known (prior to Kennedy) as the White Man's Party" exemplified by the "southern democrats" long term opposition to civil rights in the south. My, how things have been twisted around!
Even going back as far as Lincoln, a republican, who was the first champion of civil rights (liberal) and was certainly pro federal powers and big government (liberal) challenges the current view of the historic position of the republican party. By today's standards, Lincoln would personify a progressive liberal democrat by any reasonable measure, and we see this exact same fundamental philosophy from both sides now ... who only claim to be opposing forces.
Sure, each side champions a certain set of supposed different social agendas which keep the masses at odds with one another, while they both continue securing greater and greater federal powers to which they pass back and forth, while the sheep continue butting heads.
The truth is, the further one travels in either direction ... far left or far right, you wind up meeting yourself eventually, and the final results end up the same.
This is the great fraud that's been foisted on the people .... that somehow government is the answer to all our problems when in reality, it is most certainly the source of most. And I think it was Einstein that said "the same level of consciousness that created the problems cannot possibly solve them" .. (or something like that).
What I see happening today is a blend of the worst aspects of both ideologies coming together as a two headed Trojan Horse, pretending to be in opposition, with the end goal of an authoritarian dictatorship where "government" runs everything (socialism) or Big Business runs government (Capitalism). Yet, two labels are also misleading.
The truth is, there is no difference really ... it's all just a matter of perspective versus reality. And that reality is that government is controlled by the corporations who exercise their powers and self interests through authoritarian government measures, and that those corporations are owned by the Bankers. Tyranny is tyranny .. and it doesn't matter who delivers it ... be it the Federal Reserve Bankers, Corporate CEO's, or their paid for pimps in congress.
We have an authoritarian financial dictatorship which wears different hats, calling itself different names, and appealing to various sects to convince the masses to believe that "we the people" are in charge, while they continue furthering their agenda quietly behind the scenes.
There is no such thing as a Liberal or a Conservative in politics today .. those are the false labels and philosophies for the people to argue about, while the the financial oligarchs continue to "direct and oversee" the collective digging of our own graves.
Neither political party is there to dazzle the public with their brilliance ...they are here to baffle us with their Bull$ht.
Too many are too gullible to see this ... and this is the only true separation at this point ... not Democrats versus Republicans versus Libertarians, but deceived versus deluded, with the balance made up by those trying to wake up both sides to the reality that they are being massively manipulated to support their own self destruction.
This is a tried and true military tactic of creating diversions with false fronts, while the real attack comes from the flanks or the rear.
You all may now return to arguing semantics at your own collective peril, or you can finally wake up to this rather childish version of reverse psychology, and realize that George W. Bush represented the same interests, and drove the same agenda as Obama does now. Both drink from the same cup, dine with the same crowd, and promote the same agendas, none of which is in the best interests of the people. In fact, it's diametrically opposed to our best interests as a people and as a nation.
Last edited by GuyNTexas; 07-22-2010 at 12:06 PM..
Define far left, centrist, and far right, just so we are all on the same page.
Wow..what a question. I usually do this in a 2 hour lecture with my kiddos I teach but here it goes.
Politically:
A conservative (right wing) person is someone who is a strict interpreter of the constitution. They read exactly what is written and that is it, you can not read anymore into it.
A liberal (left wing) person is someone who is a loose interpreter of the constitution. They read the meaning of what is written and go from there.
Example: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
A far right winger would read that and say I can keep and own any weapon I want and how ever many I want.
A far left winger would read that and say ok people can own guns, but it doesn't say what kind or how many, so we can limit that and say a person can own one gun.
A centrist falls in the middle.
Economically:
A far right winger believes in pure capitalism, with absolutely no government regulation or interference. The commodities trading boards (ie the last scene in "trading places" is the best example)
A far left winger believes in pure communism, with the state owning everything. (North Korea)
Just to the left of the communist, is the socialist that believes people can own property, however the government will "take care of people" and tax them heavily. (western europe)
To the left of socialism is a market economy which is actually a mix of capitalism and government interference, people own things and can make a profit the argument is how much can government step in. (US)
There are other categories but that is the most general that people talk about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When was the last time, we had a far right President?
