The terms "right" and "left" when used in a political context are meaningless

[Flea Man Marbles]

They are easy ways to invoke the lizard-brain conflict reaction and disable critical thinking. They do not define anything with any degree of certainty. They are only used to enable wider division between people and obfuscate the real issues. Both sides are guilty of performing the actions of the 'opposite' side: IE right-wingers do left-wing things, and vice versa.
People tend to think of people "on the other side" as sub-human and do not accord them the same degree of empathy and respect they deserve. True freedom is tolerating views you find disagreeable as long as actions don't infringe upon other rights
Anyone using these terms to seriously describe political affiliations or ascribe intentions automatically are autistic. Stop listening to what people say and pay more attention to what they do: that's where you will find peoples' true intentions. Labels are only skin deep. Discuss.

 

[mario if smoke weed]

Agreed, at this point it shouldn't be the left versus the right; it should be the sensible versus the senseless.

 

[DeadFish]

Try calling for what it then some out of date binary classification

Between mcdonald's and burger king isn't taco bell.

 

[knobslobbin]

Whoever is supporting shutdowns, masks, and mandatory vaccinations are the real enemy left or right. And the left right coalition to keep our elections fucked.

Covid has taught me that humanity deserves to be nuked from orbit, you know just to be sure.

 

[Syaoran Li]

The term got its start in the French Revolution but wasn't codified into its most commonly understood positions until the post-WWII era and even now, it's increasingly become a relic and a diversion in the age of neoliberal corporatism being the dominant order here in the West.

 

[biggest big boy]

i just want to grill for god's sake

 

[Bland Crumbs]

Yeah, I am not going to tolerate communism that is how we got here.

 

[Penis Drager]

So first off: no shit, idiot. Nobody 100% conforms to the left-right paradigm and it's really wishy washy what that paradigm even is.
However, they are useful labels to describe general sentiment. I can tell you I'm "right wing" and that will tell you a fairly good deal about what I believe on a good number of issues. While there's a bunch of exceptions and asterisks, as is the case with any thinking human being, the exceptions don't outweigh the rule.
It's perfectly fair to lump people in boxes, no matter how fuzzy the edges are, as long as you bear in mind the fuzziness of those edges.

 

[DumbDude42]

they're general terms that broadly describe a persons (or organisations) political worldview, and they work well enough in that regard to warrant their continued usage.

 

[All Cops Are Based]

reddit take. Language only works because we've collectively agreed as a culture that we're able to interpret something complicated (reality) and sum it up as a series of categories. When somebody calls themselves left-wing or right-wing, they're not doing it because they have a fetish for dichotomous language, they're doing it because it's way faster than telling you their life story and listing every value and opinion they hold.

 

[PaleTay]

True freedom is tolerating views you find disagreeable as long as actions don't infringe upon other rights

You understand that infringing on other rights is the basis for left wing social and political beliefs?

 

[Brigada]

You understand that infringing on other rights is the basis for left wing social and political beliefs?

As opposed to the social and political beliefs from the right wing? ever heard of institutions such as the church? before it got completely defanged by left wing politicial thought, of course.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

You understand that infringing on other rights is the basis for left wing social and political beliefs?

Mussolini and Franco were real freedom loving guys yeah....

 

[Smug Chuckler]

lmao the church was the left wing when the roman empire was around.

 

[Existential MD]

I actually think, in the US context, the problem is calling one party "liberal" and the other "conservative," when in many ways those are not good labels for the two parties. Environmental conservation is conservative. Muslims are extremely conservative as are most African Americans, but they are alienated from the supposedly conservative party. Troonism is supposedly a left-wing issue, but really it's libertine and not left, necessarily, as it relies on conservative gender stereotypes. TERFs, after all, are making more traditionally leftist arguments than troons.

The bigger problem, of course, is the two-party system.

I do think it's good to reconsider R-L. I think we need heuristics in any large democracy to signal beliefs. But at least in the US, the parties do not actually align.

funny little note, since the political compass test is so popular -- a lot of people think the odd "do you believe in astrology" question makes you more "left" because it is associated with SJWs -- it makes you more authoritarian, which actually makes sense to me.

 

[ArnoldPalmer]

True freedom is tolerating views you find disagreeable as long as actions don't infringe upon other rights

I don't necessarily agree. Information Hazards like Communism and the Equity Olympics have always given rise to a force to confront it. They, like the Nazism that existed in direct response to Communism, are inevitable, as soon as 'actions' happen. Tolerating known bad views is a net bad for society, and one I will admit is far beyond anyone's control, regardless of whatever version of the magna carta you keep as a sacred calf.
This isn't to say that The U.S. Constitution is one of those bad ideas by any means, but it amounts to little more than a napkin when shit starts hitting the fan. I think that proverbial shit is close to, if not outright touching, the blades, but the result, however slow, will be inevitable. The lesson we should all learn from the coming balkanization of the U.S., is that you should NEVER tolerate a viewpoint that fundamentally changes the core principles of any society. Change comes peacemeal, and sometimes it just shouldn't come at all.

 

[BingBong]

You understand that infringing on other rights is the basis for left wing social and political beliefs?

wow, you don't even know what left and right mean, do you? You probably still think that voting and democracy are good things lmao.

 

[Lone MacReady]

It SHOULD be everyone against the State, anything else gets dealt with on a Tribal level and you will never get rid of that human instinct.

 

[draggs]

Of course they aren't meaningless, they're convenient labels for two sets of associated beliefs and politically allied groups

 

[Dom Cruise]

These days it's no longer a battle between right and left, it's a battle between the truth and lies and a battle between chaos and order.

It's also to some degree a war between the first world and the third world, the third world wants to take what we got, don't want the United States to turn into a third world country? Then you should support whatever prevents that no matter what it takes, the hippy dippy days of sitting around and singing kumbaya are gone, the question is do you want food to eat or do you want to starve?

Leftists today fight for turning the US into a third world country, look at Portland today and the effect almost a year of chaos and riots have had, that's what they want for everywhere.

I've gone without food, thanks to my foolishness in not planning better for a hurricane once I wound up having to go days without food, you can't imagine the hunger if that's never happened to you, all I know is I never want to feel hunger like that again and would do anything or support anything to prevent it.

This is what the battle is going to boil down to as the 21st century goes on, food, who has it and who doesn't, this is what the battle has always been about, anything else is just meaningless pretense.

It's a shame people in the world have to go hungry, but the solution is not opening the gates on every first world nation and letting the third world just flood in unabated, that's going to result in just everyone starving, there's only so much food to go around.