Far Right - Far Left

All of you who are continually using the above words, STOP, it is so boring.

Permanently labelling people you do not know is petty and pointless.

Someone can be far right on one subject but far left on another, get my drift.

This means YOU.

I am neither . I lean to the left, but not that far.
I liked Ted Heath and Teresa May has got off to a decent  start

Handy Andy wrote:I am neither . I lean to the left, but not that far.
I liked Ted Heath and Teresa May has got off to a decent  start

I do not have much time for conservativez or any of them for that matter but I sorta have a feeling Thersa may be just the one to help us, I do feel that her own lot might wear her down.

I hate the "right and left" labels with a passion! I hate any label, with a passion, if I'm honest. People can't be put into boxes simply, because of an idea or opinion.
Ideas and opinions are ever-changing for most of us.

I have never seen so much labelling of people as I do here.

Is calling someone "far left" or depending on your political stance "far right" the new insult?
It seems to have overtaken "racist".

It really has! And each side uses it as a stick to measure the other poster.
People are not usually just one thing or another, and I can't judge someone on politics alone.

This is Wiki's definition of "far-right" (it's as good any for this purpose):

Far-right politics often involve a focus on tradition, real or imagined, as opposed to policies and customs that are regarded as reflective of modernism. Many far-right ideologies have a disregard or disdain for egalitarianism, if not overt support for social hierarchy, elements of social conservatism and opposition to most forms of liberalism and socialism.

The term is commonly used to describe right-wing populist ideologies known for extreme nationalism and opposition to immigration, as well as Nazism, neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature extreme nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, or reactionary views, which can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or perceived threat to the nation, state or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.

I will continue to use the term if and when the cap fits.

Sums a few up here and on the rancid site very well.

"RANCID SITE" would that be, by any chance, Flap?

Handy Andy wrote:Sums a few up here and on the rancid site very well.

And now of course the far-right object to the use of the label "far right" - here's why (from the Guardian):

...they have  built a coherent ideology and steadily chipped away at the establishment parties’ hold on power by pursuing a new and devastatingly effective electoral strategy. They have made a very public break with the symbols of the old right’s past, distancing themselves from skinheads, neo-Nazis and homophobes. They have also deftly co-opted the causes, policies and rhetoric of their opponents. They have sought to outflank the left when it comes to defending a strong welfare state and protecting social benefits that they claim are threatened by an influx of freeloading migrants.

They have effectively claimed the progressive causes of the left – from gay rights to women’s equality and protecting Jews from antisemitism – as their own, by depicting Muslim immigrants as the primary threat to all three groups. As fear of Islam has spread, with their encouragement, they have presented themselves as the only true defenders of western identity and western liberties – the last bulwark protecting a besieged Judeo-Christian civilisation from the barbarians at the gates.

But sorry, haters, we weren't all born yesterday.

I think 'left' and 'right' are exciting terms, and engaging in politics is definitely fun.  They are like the score of a game, and to criticize them is like condemning sports competition.

Of course, the nature of the game has recently deteriorated, largely by the tactics of the right, which is perennially losing ground to the left.  Donald 'pussy-grabber' Trump is the personification of the degradation of politics, and he is definitely RW.  

But Donald is only the summary and culmination of the litany of values that the RW harbors: xenophobia, racism, selfishness, pessimism, misanthropy and cynicism.  People who formerly spouted these things used to wear a suit and tie and run for Congress; now they show up in jeans and a hoodie-sweatshirt, and start fights at Trump rallies.

That has led to a lowering of the esteem of politics, perhaps temporarily. Hopefully, like the RW, it will pass.

Nothing intrinsically wrong with left or right - both have crossover policies.
The problems occur when each side lurches further to their extremes.
Both far left and far right are wrong at every level, culminating at a point where they almost meet in a horrible crescendo  of nastiness. and violence

Handy Andy wrote:Nothing intrinsically wrong with left or right - both have crossover policies.
The problems occur when wach side lurches further to their extremes.
Both far left and far right are wrong at every level, culminating at a point where they almost meet in a horrible crescendo  of nastiness. and violence

I think that's a timeless and inevitable quality, which only happens to the RW.  It's one of the themes of my book, Why Elephants Lie.  

Conservatives are constantly in opposition to the mainstream of the people, regardless of point-in-time.  They are the left-over...the out-of-step.  This means that politically they are constantly in need to be corrupt and deceptive, if only to get votes and be successful.  It's a situation of disequilibrium and discord, which eventually leads to their collapse of self-esteem....and look at Donald Trump to see what they become.

This is not necessarily a new theme.   A lot of works have been devoted to the inevitable progress leftward, which leaves the right with a decaying and broken ideology.  As disenchantment become anger, we see this pattern reoccur throughout history.  See, eg, Bullock, Alan, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny. http://www.archive.org/stream/hitlerastudyinty002762mbp/hitlerastudyinty002762mbp_djvu.txt

Handy Andy wrote:Nothing intrinsically wrong with left or right - both have crossover policies.
The problems occur when each side lurches further to their extremes.
Both far left and far right are wrong at every level, culminating at a point where they almost meet in a horrible crescendo  of nastiness. and violence

I agree with this point.
Almost everything taken to extreme is potentially dangerous....politics and religion being two good examples.

Ziz wrote:This is Wiki's definition of "far-right" (it's as good any for this purpose):

Far-right politics often involve a focus on tradition, real or imagined, as opposed to policies and customs that are regarded as reflective of modernism. Many far-right ideologies have a disregard or disdain for egalitarianism, if not overt support for social hierarchy, elements of social conservatism and opposition to most forms of liberalism and socialism. The term is commonly used to describe right-wing populist ideologies known for extreme nationalism and opposition to immigration, as well as Nazism, neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature extreme nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, or reactionary views, which can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or perceived threat to the nation, state or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.


I will continue to use the term if and when the cap fits.

Hahahaha. Brilliant. Shots fired.

Handy Andy wrote:Nothing intrinsically wrong with left or right - both have crossover policies.
The problems occur when each side lurches further to their extremes.
Both far left and far right are wrong at every level, culminating at a point where they almost meet in a horrible crescendo  of nastiness. and violence

I absolutely agree with every last word you just said.