What do you mean by 'far-left'?

[Viet Minh]

To me the far left implies Stalinist, basically. But then thats just an assumption I made thats probably wrong. Is there an agreed definition here for far left? Is it a compliment of sorts, or does it imply some sort of leftist version of the far right?

[Hivemind]

This implies that it's a one-axis paradigm, which is certainly not the case. Two axes are more common (example: the political compass test, which isn't very reliable in my opinion, but has two axes), or even three axes. You can be "far left" and be really authoritarian, or you can be far left and be libertarian. Calling someone "far left" isn't accurate enough. There's no set definition, as some people's far left can mean something completely different than someone else's. It requires context, in the case of someone calling someone else "far left" as an attack, but more importantly, it requires that extra something, which, in the case of authoritarianism vs libertarianism, is more important than just being called "far left".

At least that's the way I see it.

[#FF0000]

Maybe you're referring to the term "ultraleftist"?

[Viet Minh]

This implies that it's a one-axis paradigm, which is certainly not the case. Two axes are more common (example: the political compass test, which isn't very reliable in my opinion, but has two axes), or even three axes. You can be "far left" and be really authoritarian, or you can be far left and be libertarian. Calling someone "far left" isn't accurate enough. There's no set definition, as some people's far left can mean something completely different than someone else's. It requires context, in the case of someone calling someone else "far left" as an attack, but more importantly, it requires that extra something, which, in the case of authoritarianism vs libertarianism, is more important than just being called "far left".

At least that's the way I see it.

I favour the dual axis of social and economic freedom, but the left and right to the best of my understanding is purely in terms of economics. So a completely free market is far right, and a government-controlled non-capitalist economy is far left, but of course this requires some state intervention to maintain the balance and prevent corruption.

Maybe you're referring to the term "ultraleftist"?

I've heard that but I have even less idea what it means!

[The Douche]

Far left isn't a term with meaning, and wouldn't be used, in the context you're describing, by members of the left.

For instance, I would be called "far left" by anybody in the realm of bourgeois politics, but so would somebody who is, say, a stalinist. Furthermore, many on the right refer to Obama as being on the "far left", its really just a slur to use on somebody who is farther to the left than you are.

[Dr Mindbender]

To me its a very subjective term. I regard it as a term utilised by our political enemies in the extreme right and capitalist ideological pogrom to demonise our position.

As if to say we are 'far' as in far from the norm or what is deemed 'civilised' thought.

[ColonelCossack]

Maybe you're referring to the term "ultraleftist"?

What's an ultraleftist? pardon my ignorance...

[Hivemind]

but the left and right to the best of my understanding is purely in terms of economics. So a completely free market is far right, and a government-controlled non-capitalist economy is far left, but of course this requires some state intervention to maintain the balance and prevent corruption.

Not quite, for you can be as far left as you can go, and be an anarcho communist, for example, which is obviously not a government controlled economy, since there's no government. A lot of other "far left" politics don't advocate a state, but certainly not all of them. So in that aspect, the left-right scale can be wrong, especially just by itself. This is where the second or third axes come in.

[RGacky3]

In mainstream talk it just means communist (as in eurocommunist parties or leninist parties), and anarchists/radical syndicalists.

[Lyev]

It is a difficult term, because on the one hand it can distance us from the social-democrats or left-liberal enviromentalists or some other shit, but then it is so wide that it could mean anything from impossiblism, Stalinism, eurocommunism or Bolivarianism or whatever. But I guess if you think simply the term 'communism' itself will "scare people away", then perhaps far-left is a tad better. But then perhaps far-left might have much the same effect because of the connotations of 'extremism' etc. I "far-left" actually connotes that our views are too crazy so their almost falling off of the political spectrum, and it seems to go nicely with the crappy "horse-shoe" diagram: That if you go so far left or right you will eventually end up in the same place. I think perhaps we would do better to call ourselves communists and just let the politics themselves do the talking.

[#FF0000]

What's an ultraleftist? pardon my ignorance...

I've heard that but I have even less idea what it means!

It's p. much just a name people call people who don't agree with them on something.

[Rafiq]

Far left isn't a term with meaning, and wouldn't be used, in the context you're describing, by members of the left.

For instance, I would be called "far left" by anybody in the realm of bourgeois politics, but so would somebody who is, say, a stalinist. Furthermore, many on the right refer to Obama as being on the "far left", its really just a slur to use on somebody who is farther to the left than you are.

It depends on people's contraint of politics.

Stalinists are too right wing, in my opinion, but that certainly isn't the case for people like Billy O'Rily or any other fuckskunk like that

[Leftsolidarity]

Ultra-Leftist is a term that mostly ML's use. It for the most part, means nothing and is just like saying anything you don't agree with is liberal. People usually refered to as Ultra-Leftists are Left Communists, Anarchists (?), and basically just anything to the left of Marxist-Leninism. I'm pretty sure Deng called Mao an Ultra-Leftist.

[Viet Minh]

Thank for the replies. It seems like a misnomer to me, in that there is no scale of left-wingedness as such, its a boolean value, you either are or you aren't. Basically you have equality or you don't. And if you don't its pointless saying nation A has more equality than nation B, it doesn't mean A is more left wing, it means its less right wing than B. At least thats how I see it. Still if I'm ever lucky enough to be called 'far left' I'll take it as a compliment.

[ckaihatsu]

This implies that it's a one-axis paradigm, which is certainly not the case.

I'll maintain that it certainly *is* the case, from the basic "variable" of one's relation to the means of production. This is a sliding scale, from major corporate ownership and decision-making power down to an order-taking slave-for-life.

One's conscious *politics* about this determines where one is *in principle* regarding these objective capitalist conditions.

Remember the part about how one's objective class interests are determined by one's objective relation to the means of mass production -- ? Industrialization has brought us a leviathan -- if you will -- that is certainly larger than any one of us and it cannot be ignored. Hence politics, in the most encompassing sense of the term.

sick of right-wingers who don't understand the spectrum

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...5&postcount=23

[In] the case of someone calling someone else "far left" as an attack, but more importantly, it requires that extra something, which, in the case of authoritarianism vs libertarianism, is more important than just being called "far left".

At least that's the way I see it.

I favour the dual axis of social and economic freedom, but the left and right to the best of my understanding is purely in terms of economics. So a completely free market is far right, and a government-controlled non-capitalist economy is far left, but of course this requires some state intervention to maintain the balance and prevent corruption.

Two axes are more common (example: the political compass test, which isn't very reliable in my opinion, but has two axes), or even three axes. You can be "far left" and be really authoritarian, or you can be far left and be libertarian.

That popular, well-known two-axes shit is just bullshit that muddies the waters -- if someone is serious about upholding / realizing their politics they wouldn't even *blink* about seeing it realized through "authoritarian" means. It's really a misnomer, anyway, since politics is all about mass sentiment and activity -- once the mass base changes, everything political changes, and violence is only a characteristic of the in-between parts. (Consider the ending of apartheid in South Africa.)

Calling someone "far left" isn't accurate enough. There's no set definition, as some people's far left can mean something completely different than someone else's.

I find myself using the term 'hard left' lately, since it serves to distance from the 'soft left', which is what most people think of when they think 'left'.

To me the far left implies Stalinist, basically. But then thats just an assumption I made thats probably wrong. Is there an agreed definition here for far left? Is it a compliment of sorts, or does it imply some sort of leftist version of the far right?

It is a difficult term, because on the one hand it can distance us from the social-democrats or left-liberal enviromentalists or some other shit, but then it is so wide that it could mean anything from impossiblism, Stalinism, eurocommunism or Bolivarianism or whatever. But I guess if you think simply the term 'communism' itself will "scare people away", then perhaps far-left is a tad better. But then perhaps far-left might have much the same effect because of the connotations of 'extremism' etc. I "far-left" actually connotes that our views are too crazy so their almost falling off of the political spectrum, and it seems to go nicely with the crappy "horse-shoe" diagram: That if you go so far left or right you will eventually end up in the same place. I think perhaps we would do better to call ourselves communists and just let the politics themselves do the talking.

My take is that *if* there is to be two axes used, the vertical axis should indicate *scale* (national-international), and *not* some bullshit 'personal freedom' crap.

But two axes is still a contrivance, anyway, since a 'hard leftist' would *want* a workers-controlled politics to be worldwide anyway....


Political Spectrum, Simplified

http://postimage.org/image/35tmoycro/


[3] Ideologies & Operations -- Fundamentals

http://postimage.org/image/34modgv1g/


[21] Ideologies & Operations

http://postimage.org/image/1d2pk9lok/


Ideologies & Operations -- Left Centrifugalism

http://postimage.org/image/1g4s6wax0/

http://postimage.org/image/2cvo2d7fo/

[ckaihatsu]

Maybe you're referring to the term "ultraleftist"?

I've heard that but I have even less idea what it means!

What's an ultraleftist? pardon my ignorance...

Someone being 'ultraleft' (on a particular, specific political point) means that they've been deemed by someone to be *overly demanding*, by the standards of (revolutionary) leftism.

Generically it means that someone is overly dismissive of everyone else's leftist politics, in favor of their own, by subscribing to ridiculously unrealistic expectations.

So while it's certainly *not* ultraleft to demand that the workers of the world control the world's means of mass production, it *would* be ultraleft to demand that this all begin next week or else everyone else is "not genuine about their revolutionary politics".

[Rocky Rococo]

I think perhaps we would do better to call ourselves communists and just let the politics themselves do the talking.

That's the approach I'm taking these days. Although technically I'm probably some kind of social anarchist, I figure that's pretty much what the originators of the concept "communism" had in mind, and plus, eventually if we're ever going to get anywhere the terms "communism" and "communist" have to be rehabilitated, and I don't mind being the one that takes the hits from people for it in the process. I just tell them I'm far left and proud of it!

[tradeunionsupporter]

I think far left is a term used by the right.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Apparently Krushchev called Stalin an Ultra-Leftist.

[Leftsolidarity]

Apparently Krushchev called Stalin an Ultra-Leftist.