Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,858 Year: 4,115/9,624 Month: 986/974 Week: 313/286 Day: 34/40 Hour: 6/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Far left - US/UK definition
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 286 of 305 (226219)
07-25-2005 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Ooook!
07-24-2005 6:35 PM


Re: Some examples
These remarks convey absolutely nothing but your own subjective impression and what's needed is getting at the assumptions BENEATH your subjective impression.
Well, first things first, it's not just my opinion. Ask anyone on the street in Britain with half an ounce of interest in current affairs how they would class The Guardian politically and they will say 'left-of-centre' or similar.
Fine, then it's THEIR subjective impression too. By remarking that it's your subjective impression I didn't mean to dismiss it as in "just your opinion," I meant to be emphasizing that I understand the thread to be trying to get at the CRITERIA embodied in the opinion.
But since Wounded King mentioned the far left overtly Marxist and socialist press in the UK, I'd ask if you think possibly the Guardian is not considered leftist simply because people think the term really only applies to these far left positions?
In any case, we have YET to spell out some CRITERIA> Maybe your post will start to get to that.
Guardian readers have a reputation as middle-class moderates (see the Volvo/Sandal comment in my first post), and it has the rather affectionate nickname ('The Grauniad') because of a previous propensity for spelling mistakes. Likewise most people will class the BBC as non-partisan.
But, dear Oook, simply telling me how people classify these things does not illuminate for me the basis upon which they do so.
If you want an example of what most people in Britain would class as 'Left-Wing' try the The Socialist Worker. Of course you'll have to take my word for this; I'm not about to conduct a round of street surveys.
Yes, this agrees with what Wounded King was saying, and perhaps it is the conspicuousness of this line of thought that makes the Guardian appear more to the center. [???]
Secondly, my opinion in this instance does count for something.
Again I would merely repeat I wasn't questioning the value of your opinion, merely wanting to know on what you base it.
I would class myself as left of centre politically in Britain, and I'll be very surprised to find anyone that has ever met me thinking that I'm some kind of dangerous revolutionary loony.
When I call people leftists in the US I don't mean they are dangerous revolutionary loonies, I have a set of political views in mind that they hold that I consider politically bad bad bad and derived from Marxism too as a matter of fact, but mostly without their being aware of it, so therefore not dangerous revolutionary loonies (except unintentionally.)
Why then do I find myself agreeing with a lot of the editorials and commentaries in The Guardian, if it is a Far-Left rag?
Because maybe you are a leftist according to conservative US opinion such as mine or Steve's, if we could ever find out what you actually think and what the Guardian actually thinks, and whether it has anything in common with the categories we have been trying to spell out.
The perceptions of left/right are obviously skewed somehow. As I said, I believe that this is because the balance between 'Left' and 'Right' is different in the States.
Maybe, maybe not. It may be mostly a semantic thing. We may never find out as nobody seems willing to address specific content.
Of course my 'sliding scale' example is a massive over-simplification - I admitted that much myself - but I think that it does have some mileage (especially as a debating tool). Let me give you a few examples, one of which is taken from The Guardian unlimited:
The National Health Service
Here's a prime example of how things are obviously polarised. There is obviously a debate about the NHS in British politics over how much weight should be taken up by the private sector and how much by the state, but if any politician messes around with the principle that the care should be free at the point of treatment they are in trouble. Contrast this with US politics, where commitment to the same type of investment would be political suicide. Some people can't afford adequate healthcare - screw 'em!
Well, there's a straw man for ya.
The same argument can be put forward for education and transport, and I see the same difference in emphasis between the countries.
What emphasis?
Religious Freedom:
Although this doesn't at first glance appear to be a personal freedom vs state, I would argue that it is another good example of the contrast. Many of those involved in mainstream politics in the US have the view that because they are in the majority, then they should have the freedom to do whatever they please when it comes down to religion. The centre ground in Britain is held by people who accept that certain aspects of religion have to be curbed in order for society as a whole to be fair.
Overall would you agree that Europe and the UK are in general simply more left than the US and that may be why we might see the Guardian's views as very left and you simply see it as somewhat left of center? In which case we might actually agree on what constitutes a leftist view if we could isolate it from that context.
See, that is why I was hoping to pin down particular items. Yes, socialist medicine is a leftist item, and the view that religion should be suppressed is a leftist item from my point of view, so it appears that we are perhaps mostly talking about the greater leftist bent of the UK.
I hold that despite the constitutional separation of church and state, religion (specifically Christianity) plays a much bigger part in politics in the USA than it does in Europe.
Yes, always has, but especially became an issue in reaction against the leftist drift of the country since the sixties.
Gun Ownership
I've touched on this in another thread, and I know that at least one person will disagree with me, but in my mind this is a classic Right/Left issue. The right of one individual to own a gun is compared to the right of another not to be shot by some nutter who just lost his job and owned the gun legally!!!. The Right-wing in the US are the most fervent supporters of semi-automatic 'hunting rifles', it is a non issue in the UK.
Yes, well recall that we had a little set-to with your army at one point, in fact a couple of those, and we also had a lot of wild land with beasts to be subdued and a lot of Indians who were interested in scalping us, and the farther west we got the more we had these problems, and now we see the left taking control of the country and we do NOT want to give up our right to defend ourselves. I agree, it's a left/right issue fundamentally.
So, to summarise:
My sliding scale idea is a gross generalisation. It doesn't fully take into account that many people have a variety of opinions on a variety of subjects. It glosses over the complexity of the economy and society. It is, by and large, just my opinion.
I think I missed your sliding scale Oook, I really don't know what you are referring to.
What it does do is give you an impression of where I stand on issues and how I percieve Right vs Left. It also gives you a summary of the where I think the balance between Right and Left is struck in the US and the UK.
What I've learned from this list of yours is that the UK is officially committed to a leftist position on issues to which conservatives here are opposed, and our left no doubt agrees with your official position. So it functions perhaps as a starter list of some clear demarcators between left and right, AND they may be the beginning of an understanding of how the Guardian is leftist or a bit left of center and what those terms mean on each side of the Atlantic and why. That is, it no doubt IS leftist according to US conservative views of the list you've given.
My choice of paper is The Independent, and I would also class it as centre/centre-left. An example of a what I (and many others) would call a Right-of-Centre paper is the Daily Telegraph.
So what positions does the DT espouse that make it right of center?
What about you? How would you describe these examples? How do you define the Left/Right divide?
I agree as I've said that what you've called left I would call left only more so, but I think you think of it as less left than I do because your nation is more left overall. I think it could turn out that we agree on what specifically is a leftist position considered in isolation from such contextual factors.
It appears there isn't a single Brit here who isn't either leftist or left of center. I'd like to hear from a Brit on the right.
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-25-2005 12:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Ooook!, posted 07-24-2005 6:35 PM Ooook! has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by CK, posted 07-25-2005 12:19 PM Faith has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4155 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 287 of 305 (226220)
07-25-2005 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by Faith
07-25-2005 12:14 PM


Re: Some examples
unveils cape
that would be me. what would you like to know?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 12:14 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 12:32 PM CK has replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 288 of 305 (226221)
07-25-2005 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by CanadianSteve
07-25-2005 11:06 AM


Re: You really don't understand how it works.
it may well happen that the decision will be overturned, likely on the basis that states' rights were abridged.
i doubt it. i don't think there's enough people in favor states' rights (as opposed to a strong federal gov't) anymore. that cause was mostly lost in the civil war.
do you know who represents you in the state senate?
I reticently agree that that is as it must be, providing there are limitiations, such as first trimester.
which there are. i'm not sure where the line is -- but this is more likely to be the course of debate.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-25-2005 11:06 AM CanadianSteve has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 289 of 305 (226222)
07-25-2005 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by Faith
07-25-2005 8:59 AM


Moving Goalposts
quote:
Sheesh! Here finally comes a Brit disagreeing with the Brit bobbins about the lefty character of the Naidraug. That being the case, why not post it in answer to bobbins' opening post?
Because it DOESN'T disagree with bobbin's opening post.
From Message 1
quote:
And what sources/evidence do you have that the BBC and Guardian are far left?
emphasis mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 8:59 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 12:29 PM PaulK has replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2920 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 290 of 305 (226224)
07-25-2005 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by CanadianSteve
07-25-2005 11:45 AM


Re: Left & right
CanadianSteve says:
"I am not arguing in favour of your system - although i have read that no one goes without medical care because of finances. That is, even the poor can access public services."
Well then you need to read more - or read different sources. Yes, hospitals can't refuse to treat people who can't pay. But guess what, somebody pays (the insured through higher rates) and furthermore, many inner city hospitals with large indigent clientele eventually have to shut down and then where do people go for care? Furthermore, medical care (for the indigent) becomes all emergency room care, which is a highly inefficient way to run a medical system. And the big problem is not really with the indigent - they often have Medicaid. The problem is with working folks without medical insurance or not very good insurance. The hospitals will treat them, yes, but they are one serious illness or accident away from bankruptcy. And do you have any idea how much money is chewed up in a system like the U.S. in administrative fees when the providers have their accountants and lawyers trying to collect payment and the insurance companies have their accountants and lawyers trying to deny payment? The only ones without their own accountants and lawyers are the patients.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-25-2005 11:45 AM CanadianSteve has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 291 of 305 (226225)
07-25-2005 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by PaulK
07-25-2005 12:21 PM


Possibly explaining things a little
My mistake. Steve said FAR left and bobbins says left.
It seems to me now that the UK is simply farther left in its overall social policy, i.e. socialism, than the US, and also has a very active Marxist and socialist press, and that makes positions which to conservatives here appear far left appear to them to be merely "left of center."
However, I'm not sure we've made a whole lot of progress in pinning down exactly what ideas are leftist v rightist, let alone "very." Oook gave a few, Steve gave a couple of lists, I here and there offered some but the thread as a whole hasn't really dealt with them except to argue the usual about a few of them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by PaulK, posted 07-25-2005 12:21 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by PaulK, posted 07-25-2005 1:00 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 292 of 305 (226226)
07-25-2005 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by CK
07-25-2005 12:19 PM


Re: Some examples
So, if I followed Ook correctly, you must be a reader of the Daily Telegraph? How about starting with telling us what its position is on everything left versus right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by CK, posted 07-25-2005 12:19 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by CK, posted 07-25-2005 12:45 PM Faith has not replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 293 of 305 (226229)
07-25-2005 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by Faith
07-25-2005 11:18 AM


Me own personal views
Perfectly right, this is supposed to be a thread about definitions after all.
I think to some extent this problem is compounded by the fact that there is more than one set of criteria needed for these judgements, as with the 'political compass' with its axes for left/ right and libertarian/ authoritarian.
Just as a bit of of a guide I did the 'political' compass test myself and came out as
Economic Left/Right: -6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.41
Which make me both fairly Left wing and fairly libertarian since the scale is from 10 to -10. This sounds about right as at university I mostly claimed to be an anarchist or anarcho-syndicalist and the political compass site says that anarcho-syndicalism would be at around -10, -10.
So how do I view the left right spectrum?
I think of the far left as being those who still ascribe to marxist views on issues of history and society, this would probably include communists and hard line radical socialists. I think that most extant far-left media, certainly in britain, have a distinctly authoritatian point of view and are far too dogmatic in their views.
In the left/ left-of-centre region which I believe I occupy, though possibly towards the left within that region, there are the middle-class socialists who despite their attachment to concepts such as the welfare state and notions of equality in terms of sex, race and culture are still at least equally attached to the creature comforts and cosy familiarity of the modern world with its many private businesses and diverse outlets of entertainment to want really radical socialist government. These people are likely to be in favour of freedom of religion and liberal, as in permissive, in their views on sexuality and abortion. Historically, certainly in my parents generation, they are probably in favour of nuclear disarmament, possibly unilaterally and may be chary of nuclear power in general.
The centre is probably the hardest to define. I have a general feeling of sitting-on -the fence about this group. They are the people who can see why abortion is neccessary in a lot of cases but get the serious squicks about thinking about it at all. They like the fuzzy feeling they get thinking that by paying taxes they are helping those less fortunate than themselves, especially as it removes any feelings they migh t have that something more might need to be done in order to address issues of social inequality. They probably like the idea of the NHS but are more than happy if their job gives them some BUPA (private health car) cover. I think that I am making this out to be a fairly reprehensible group of hypocrites, but that isn't really how I see them, and I know that I myself share many of these inconsistent opinions.
On the right/ right-of-centre we have those in favour of deregulation and privatisation, who believe that more competition is the best way to improve the eceonomy and improve consumer satisfaction and services. These are more socially conservative people, the peole who feel that success is a matter of belts and braces and getting on your bike and finding a job. They are more likely to be religious conservatives, i.e. the old fashioned high anglican more pomp than the catholics or the pentacostal chapel type, and have views on marriage, homosexuality and abortion in line with that.
I'm not really sure about the far right. I certainly don't feel that parties such as the BNP can be seen to represent any valid point on any political spectrum.
I think that my idea of the far right is not at present extant in british politics, it would be along the lines of the libertarian movement in America although more extreme. Everything would be so deregulated and the government has so little scope for intervention in peoples lives that it is impractical to try and limit people's personal freedom of choice in terms of religion, sexual preference etc...Your government would at best be some sort of broker helping to organise the various tenders for private contractors in order to maintain whatever infrastructure was neccessary to keep something resmbling a cohesive state together.
Those are my tenuously coherent, brit centric and highly idiosyncratic views on the political spectrum.
TTFN,
WK
This message has been edited by Wounded King, 07-25-2005 12:51 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 11:18 AM Faith has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4155 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 294 of 305 (226230)
07-25-2005 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by Faith
07-25-2005 12:32 PM


Re: Some examples
first it's nickname is the Daily Torygraph. As for what's in it - beats the shit out of me, I get all my news off the internet using a RSS reader (I did start an RSS reader thread - if you have not used them it's worth a go, plenty of christian newsources as well) - that means i can check 50,100 newspapers over my morning coffee. I hate columnists so never read them. However I do read the odd copy on the train or on a plane.
The internet means that I don't really have much call for a paper anymore - I want facts and I'll perform my own analysis of the event and contexts in which those events occur.
I do agree with this:
quote:
The Telegraph is known for its right-wing politics. Within this classification it takes a roughly central position on the authoritarian/libertarian axis. It is less traditionalist and more libertarian than The Spectator but more traditionalist and less libertarian than The Economist.
In the last election it backs the conversatives.
The other significant paper is the Daily Mail, this is the paper of middle england and it's position can be broadly represented as : "how will situation X affect house prices" - I kid you not.
A while back I did a quite detailed analysis of all the UK papers (for something else), I'll try and find and post it later.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 12:32 PM Faith has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 295 of 305 (226234)
07-25-2005 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Faith
07-25-2005 12:29 PM


Re: Possibly explaining things a little
"Very active" ? I don't think so. Neither the Morning Star or Socialist Worker is typically sold in newsagents - and they're the main Marxist press. The latter can be found sold in street corners by volunteers (usually students).
On the whole the UK press tends to the right. Among the major dailys I can think of 3 left or left-ish newspapers - against 6 to the right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 12:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by CK, posted 07-25-2005 1:13 PM PaulK has replied
 Message 299 by Faith, posted 07-25-2005 1:14 PM PaulK has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 296 of 305 (226236)
07-25-2005 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by nator
07-25-2005 10:52 AM


Re: Ted Turner, anti-Israel?
If you were in a country that had no military and no police force, and you were being attacked by another country that had a sophisticated, large military, and they shot and killed people who threw rocks at them, how would you fight back?
Your premise is false. They are not being attacked, their own terrorists are the aggressors. There are terrorists in hiding among them, such irresponsible people they are to expose civilians to such danger. I wouldn't fight back. I'd go join the Israelis and take my family with me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by nator, posted 07-25-2005 10:52 AM nator has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 297 of 305 (226238)
07-25-2005 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by nator
07-25-2005 10:57 AM


Re: Jenin
Yes leftists appear to be only able to think on the concrete level of Them Strong Me Weak ignoring that the moral right is with the Strong and the moral wrong with the Weak in this case. The left seems more and more incapable of recognizing the difference between innocent and guilty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by nator, posted 07-25-2005 10:57 AM nator has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4155 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 298 of 305 (226239)
07-25-2005 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by PaulK
07-25-2005 1:00 PM


Re: Possibly explaining things a little
I used to have much fun on a sat morning trying to engage members of the socialist workers party in debate.
"Every had a job?"
"em..no"
when I was a student I had great fun on the first week of term, setting up a "capitalist owners of production party" stand next to the one they had during freshers week.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by PaulK, posted 07-25-2005 1:00 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by PaulK, posted 07-25-2005 1:15 PM CK has not replied
 Message 302 by Chiroptera, posted 07-25-2005 1:23 PM CK has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 299 of 305 (226240)
07-25-2005 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by PaulK
07-25-2005 1:00 PM


Re: Possibly explaining things a little
Then apparently the impression of a dominant leftist view in the UK is coming simply from the fact that the majority of Brits here are leftist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by PaulK, posted 07-25-2005 1:00 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by PaulK, posted 07-25-2005 1:21 PM Faith has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17827
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 300 of 305 (226241)
07-25-2005 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by CK
07-25-2005 1:13 PM


Re: Possibly explaining things a little
quote:
when I was a student I had great fun on the first week of term, setting up a "capitalist owners of production party" stand next to the one they had during freshers week.
Sounds nearly as much fun as playing Nuclear War a few yards from a CND stand ("got change for 25 million people ?")

This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by CK, posted 07-25-2005 1:13 PM CK has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024