TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- A Chart To Put All Political Questions To Rest

A Chart To Put All Political Questions To Rest

Click and maximize:

http://www.newsweek.com//frameset.a...ight_world.html

the difference between the left and the right

looks pretty accurate to me

that's a good chart, it needs a few minor changes to become more balanced though imo, for example if they put communism on the extreme end of the left it should be fascism not nationalism on the extreme end of the right.

and i think "INTERFERE - SOCIETY, SOCIAL LIVES" on the left and "DONT INTERFERE" for the right is a bit disingenuous, they could put "SUPPORT" on the left and "DONT INTERFERE" on the right to balance it out.

these are minor changes but to someone who can't tell a pie chart from propaganda small little changes make a big difference

Post it here:

i just noticed one of the vocations for the left is Media - those damn socialists in control of the Libral Media

quote:

Originally posted by tathi that's a good chart, it needs a few minor changes to become more balanced though imo, for example if they put communism on the extreme end of the left it should be fascism not nationalism on the extreme end of the right. and i think "INTERFERE - SOCIETY, SOCIAL LIVES" on the left and "DONT INTERFERE" for the right is a bit disingenuous, they could put "SUPPORT" on the left and "DONT INTERFERE" on the right to balance it out. these are minor changes but to someone who can't tell a pie chart from propaganda small little changes make a big difference

No, it should be left at interfere. Most definitely not "support". But "don't" should be removed from the right. Both the left and right sides of the spectrum interfere with the society and social lives of the populace.

Why isn't the left blue and the right red?

Other than that, it's pretty accurate. I don't see why the conservative side is so attractive to some.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Both the left and right sides of the spectrum interfere with the society and social lives of the populace.

I don't think that's the ideal... though it's certainly the effect more often than not.

quote:

Originally posted by ziptnf I don't see why the conservative side is so attractive to some.

Then I am skeptical that you know exactly why the liberal side is attractive to you.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Then I am skeptical that you know exactly why the liberal side is attractive to you.

It's not like I'm some brainwashed college student who voted for Barack Obama just because he was bringing change or that I'm a liberal because my parents are. I read the news regularly (in before conspiracy theorists say it's controlled by the white house), I understand the process of government, and I generally always look at both sides of any situation before I decide my opinion.

That being said, I tend to almost always take the liberal viewpoint, simply because that is how I perceive things. Most of the things (not all) on the left side were pretty accurate as to how I have been raised and what things I focus on. I highly doubt that you can say that I have a liberal bias just because "it's the cool thing to do".

I suppose it's a matter of being raised with a different attitude, I'm sure I wouldn't be able to understand the left if I had parents that taught me conservative ideals.

Hmm, interesting that you think I was pigeonholing you as just another brainwashed college-age liberal or something, though I suppose that is the image the media would like to suggest for our demographic.

Do not mistake my skepticism as doubt or opposition to your ideas, but rather, hesitance to accept that you truly correlate the aims of either side. Really, they are just labels constituent of very flexible stereotypes, tarnished - as all philosophies must be - by a legacy of constant re-definition; for example, American liberalism and classical liberalism are a gulf apart so far as theory and action are concerned, though I am certain you knew this already. The point I am getting at is that all political systems are marketed to people under the veil of Utopic promises - whether they are claiming that CHANGE is the right course of action, or preservation of the status quo is how we'll achieve anything, politics - in this sense - are similar to religion in that the only way they can move product is to tell people that there is paradise at the end of the tunnel.

With this in mind, is it still difficult to see why conservativism is attractive to some people? Even smart people? You were probably sold your beliefs just the same as the other side - and either can believe what they like, there shall still exist a restlessness in the obtainment of a more successful nation. The true question lies in the methods however, and your beliefs lie in the liberation of social values and breadth of acceptance as well as the strengthening of the central state to the service of the population. What are the pitfalls of this, if any?

I was raised a conservative evangelical Christian but turned into a raging leftist liberal progressive.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I was raised a conservative evangelical Christian but turned into a raging leftist liberal progressive.

I was raised to vote liberal, but with fiscal conservative and social values. When I found out what each side actually stood for, I became a bit more of a solid conservative voter, which is tough, because I DON'T support the general conservative social agenda.

If there was a party that was social-liberal and fiscal-conservative, I'd have my no-questions-asked party of choice.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam If there was a party that was social-liberal and fiscal-conservative, I'd have my no-questions-asked party of choice.

You and every single other person in this country

I was raised to think for myself, so I don't agree with liberals or conservatives.

Unfortunately, we have a two-party system, and one of the parties is the republican party. It might as well be a dictatorship for all the choice that leaves me. =\

The ethics vs. morals dichotomy is the most interesting element of that chart. I'd never thought of it that way, but it is a provocative way of looking at the divide.

Universalistic v. Particularistic is a comparison I might add.

Don't like this picture much, but luckily 'libertarian' was taken off the left side which was found in earlier versions (WTF?)

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov The ethics vs. morals dichotomy is the most interesting element of that chart. I'd never thought of it that way, but it is a provocative way of looking at the divide.

Agreed, there are a couple of nice little things in there, but the fact that libertarians do not really fit into the 'right' side of the figure shows it's not really a good fit.

No mention of the environment either, even though it's highly relevant to politics.

The family thing is a little too dichotomous. Very few children have an all 'strict' household or an all 'nurturing' household. I suspect the author drew these from Lakoff, who used the 'strict' and 'nurturing' families as metaphor for the two sides of US politics.

quote:

Why isn't the left blue and the right red?

Outside the US, blue has been associated with economic liberalism, and red is associated with socialism and Marxism more generally.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** clearly written for the right wingers.

Left not commie enough for you?

quote:

Originally posted by ******** no there are rhetorical jabs at the left in the thing. I'll point them out if you can't see them. The language actually makes fun of the left.

It takes jabs at both sides of the spectrum. I think that's the point. I found that it doesn't really take cheap-shots at either side though, but it is a bit of an over-generalization.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter I was raised to think for myself, so I don't agree with liberals or conservatives. Unfortunately, we have a two-party system, and one of the parties is the republican party. It might as well be a dictatorship for all the choice that leaves me. =\

That's the thing I find odd about American politics. We've got dozens of different parties here in Brazil, and no two of them can outshine the rest.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira That's the thing I find odd about American politics. We've got dozens of different parties here in Brazil, and no two of them can outshine the rest.

At this point, political parties create people's views more than they respond to them, which makes it basically impossible for any other party to emerge. It would take a truly massive investment to successfully introduce a third party, and anyone with those kinds of resources can just become a powerful figure in one of the existing parties for much less.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter At this point, political parties create people's views more than they respond to them, which makes it basically impossible for any other party to emerge. It would take a truly massive investment to successfully introduce a third party, and anyone with those kinds of resources can just become a powerful figure in one of the existing parties for much less.

Enter Sarah Palin.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...an-in-ny-23.php

hogwash, the left right paradigm is nonexistent, just a distraction to keep you guessing while you get robbed blind by the top 1%

quote:

Originally posted by ziptnf Why isn't the left blue and the right red?

I'll just assume you are kidding

quote:

Originally posted by ziptnf Other than that, it's pretty accurate. I don't see why the conservative side is so attractive to some.

Well this looks quite american focused despite being uk based (which is good).

I think the right is more libertarian/neo con. Conservatism is quite different in the uk.

However:
Both interfere with society. I fail to see how Communism interferes with social lives though (and if anyone references any stalinist regimes you're an idiot).

ALSO. It shouldn't be don't tax and spend on the right. Should be tax minimally and don't spend on services (the right is almost always for additional spending on military/police).

Also if the left get's Utopianism then the right should get an equally negative term to describe itself, rather than just "preservatism". Perhaps reactionaryism?

And as for parties, conservative should perhaps be (neo) conservative and nationalist is a bit vague. Perhaps nationalist/libertarian?

Also liberal isn't a uniquely left idea. Libertarians or neo liberals can be quite "liberal" with aggressive de regulation etc. I guess it's sortof hard to stick libertarians and conservatives together, but this does the job reasonably well.

Also the middle of Society and culture should be Internationalist. Multi cultural is a bit vague, anti nationalism (or internationalism) can be against more than the holding up of the national culture.

quote:

Originally posted by Max Thomson hogwash, the left right paradigm is nonexistent, just a distraction to keep you guessing while you get robbed blind by the top 1%

Since when have the genuine left been interested in doing that?

quote:

Originally posted by Darkarbiter I'll just assume you are kidding

...no? If I recall, American democrats are always blue and republicans are always red. Why would I be kidding?

quote:

Well this looks quite american focused despite being uk based (which is good).

Most of the ideals are true for modern societies, the family values section should depend on the culture, and there is other variety in the rest of the chart.

quote:

Also if the left get's Utopianism then the right should get an equally negative term to describe itself, rather than just "preservatism". Perhaps reactionaryism?

If the far right makes decisions and passes bills simply favoring reaction and opposing all forms of social and political change, then that would make me sad. Some are currently like that, but the ideal conservative shouldn't make decisions based on what would piss off the democrats.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.