Left and Right

[Luisrah]

Can someone give me a good explanation on the differences, and where did important leaders stand in the left/right spectrum?

I've tried learning about it, but everything seems kind of biased, I don't know, I can't get conclusive info.
I'm getting stuff saying that Hitler wasn't a far-right winged, and that Gandhi was lefty, that Thatcher was more right-winged than Hitler etc..

[mel]

Can someone give me a good explanation on the differences, and where did important leaders stand in the left/right spectrum?

I've tried learning about it, but everything seems kind of biased, I don't know, I can't get conclusive info.
I'm getting stuff saying that Hitler wasn't a far-right winged, and that Gandhi was lefty, that Thatcher was more right-winged than Hitler etc..

The left/right dichotomy (and the political compass for that matter) are next to useless for distinguishing between political ideologies.

That being said, the left generally (and this includes liberals/social democrats) are primarily concerned with the orchestration of economic and social equality in society. The right generally is concerned with the protection of national, personal and property rights (which comes with a general belief that equality of opportunity is the only necessary equality, and that outcomes will be solely facilitated based on merit).

This does little to distinguish meaningfully between several vastly differing leftist or rightist ideologies. Not even the addition of the second axis of authoritarian/libertarian does much to allow one to appreciate the differences between ideologies, certainly not to the degree necessary to allow one to appreciate the difference between Thatcher and Hitler at a glance, so I'm afraid I can't give you much clarification as to who was "further right", it is itself a somewhat vague and meaningless concept.

[ComradeMan]

I agree with Mel, I think that left and right are not helpful terms anymore. The reason we use them is that they have become entrenched in the symbology of modern politics.

[Die Rote Fahne]

We should use the 4 quadrant spectrum, such as the political compass. It judges on Social and economic values.

For instance. Economically, Noam Chomsky and Stlain would be far left, but Chomsky would be on the bottom and Stalin near the top.

[mel]

We should use the 4 quadrant spectrum, such as the political compass. It judges on Social and economic values.

For instance. Economically, Noam Chomsky and Stlain would be far left, but Chomsky would be on the bottom and Stalin near the top.

But that depiction isn't really accurate and doesn't take historical context into account. No spectrum for easy placement of political ideologies into a symbolic grid will be helpful for much other than pure curiosity. The differences between what Chomsky believes and what Stalin believed cannot be expressed as a graph of "Degree of Market Freedom" vs. "Degree of personal/social freedoms allowed" (the graph used by the political compass) because it presupposed a society in which markets exist in any form, and also that we have an idea of what is meant by "Personal/Social Freedom" distinct from simply the number of laws in place to keep people from doing stuff. It's simply a nonsensical way of describing a political system, which divorces it from its actual program and goals.

[Luisrah]

But which more characteristics define right and left?

So far I've heard that the left is progressive whilst the right is conservative.
Right has very defined social classes and differences, whilst the left has less/none.
The left, opposed to the right, cares less about the individual and more about the whole (:blink: is this true?)
The left means a bigger state that controls more the life each individual and the economy (that seems liberal talk)

I am almost sure that the first two are correct, but what about the other two?
I'm beggining to understand that there must be more factors to define some government or person as lefty or righty since going by the political compass that everyone uses in this forum, (as is said in the site) if you put Stalin and Hitler talking without talking about economy, they're pretty much the same. :confused:

[mel]

But which more characteristics define right and left?

I already told you, the left is generally concerned with structuring social and economic equality in society and the right with the protection of property and personal rights. There are no other constants.


So far I've heard that the left is progressive whilst the right is conservative.
Right has very defined social classes and differences, whilst the left has less/none.
The left, opposed to the right, cares less about the individual and more about the whole (:blink: is this true?)
The left means a bigger state that controls more the life each individual and the economy (that seems liberal talk)

The bolded portions are partially or wholly inaccurate. The italicized portion has some truth to it, but it's not something that you can approach as simply as you are trying to.

For the "progressive/conservative" thing, it depends on what you mean by those. For example, I'd still consider US democrats to be on the "Left" (as opposed to the political compass, though not "leftists" as we talk about on revleft) due to the fact that they do believe to an extent in the redistribution of the products of society in order to lessen social and economic inequality. On the other hand, they are "conservative" in that they wish to retain capitalism and the state apparatus.


I am almost sure that the first two are correct, but what about the other two?
I'm beggining to understand that there must be more factors to define some government or person as lefty or righty since going by the political compass that everyone uses in this forum, (as is said in the site) if you put Stalin and Hitler talking without talking about economy, they're pretty much the same. :confused:

It's not about "lefty" or "righty". The problem you are finding is not attempting to classify individual into one or the other, though it may look like that now. The actual problem that you are encountering is that such classifications themselves are of limited worth. As for Hitler and Stalin, the comparison between them is tenuous at best, and I'd put off comparing or contrasting the two of them without being prepared to do a great deal of reading of historical sources beyond your textbooks. The differences between the ideologies of particular people can be best understood, not in an attempt to classify "left" against "right", or "authoritarian" against "libertarian", but by reading the materials that each present about the goals they are trying to achieve, the methods by which they hope to achieve them, and then going outside of their own literature to look at the historical context in which the program was developed. By doing so, and doing away with your concerns about the left/right classification, you will come away with a far more contextually versed understanding of the political positions of the people you've mentioned.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I wouldn't worry yourself with the left/right axis too much. It is horribly inaccurate in all honesty, although it is a useful reference point.

Generally the following apply, although I emphasise the word generally, as there are huge variations within each position (different currents of socialism, Communism etc).

Very left-wing: Communism, Revolutionary Socialism (within these, Trotskyism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, Hoxhaism, Anarchism, Left Communism and more). Believe in revolution based on class war; most believe in many/most of Marx's principles and would identify themselves as Marxists. Opposed to private property, free markets, war, poverty. For full employment, abolition of class differential, participatory/grassroots democracy as opposed to the 'elective dictatorship' and workers' ownership of the means of production. Some are for Vanguardism (Marxist-Leninists/Communists). Examples would be Comrades Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Fidel.

Left-Wing: Could include Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists. Generally support participation in Bourgeois politics and political institutions. Diluted support for Socialism; e.g. would generally support nationalisation but oppose de-centralised workers' control of the means of production. Examples would be Clem Attlee, Tony Benn, George Galloway, Hugo Chavez.

'Centrists': Liberalism. Pro-markets and Capitalism. Believe in equality of opportunity and little past that; very supportive of individualism and the 'hand of the market'. I put Centrists in apostrophes because in reality, they are pretty right-wing. Socially liberal (would support abortion, for example) but also very economically liberal.

Right-Wing: Includes all manner of conservatives and Nationalists. Those who are really the last defence of Capitalism. Both economically liberal (pro-markets, anti-welfare, anti-redistribution, believe in 'trickle down' economics) and socially conservative (family values and all that). Tend to have a jingoistic tinge. Examples would be Binyamin Netanyahu, George W. Bush.

Far-right: The fascists. Adolf Hitler, Nazism. Nuff said.

That is a basic guide for the OP.

Now i'd suggest reading some good Socialist material.:cool:

[The Idler]

In an era of lies, misinformation and disinformation on an unprecedented scale by mainstream media (and in some education), where bailing out banks is considered "socialist", then understanding the (deliberately marginalised among the hard right) left-right political axis remains among the best tools against those in power. The only better representation that comes to mind is the much less well-known Political Compass. Its flawed but among its advantages are its concise and simple.

[Floyce White]

I gave the definitions of "left" and "right" in my third post on Revleft:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=579803&postcount=5

I wrote a series of 11 essays on the topic. They were at www.geocities.com/antiproperty/index.html (http://www.geocities.com/antiproperty/index.html)

but Geocities shut down. They can now be found on the Internet Archive.

When I have the time, I will conclude the series with the twelfth article on radical rightism.