Submitted by UltimateGamingTechie t3_zz1mw3 in explainlikeimfive
grumblingduke t1_j2915mb wrote
"Left" and "right" are fairly vague terms, used to split people into convenient political groupings. They are the continental-European versions, compared with the more British/American "progressive," "liberal" and "conservative" terms. They are all a bit vague due to the different political landscapes in different countries and at different times, and the terms (particularly "liberal") can have very different meanings in different places.
Roughly speaking, and generalising horribly:
-
left-leaning people/progressives feel that power structures and social hierarchies are a bad thing, and that the role of society (via government) should be to remove them,
-
right-leaning people/conservatives feel that power structures and social hierarchies are a good thing, and that the role of society (via government) should be to protect them.
-
centrists/liberals may feel either way about power structures and social hierarchies, but don't think the government should interfere.
Then you have groups like anarchists and libertarians, and a few others, who tend to line up somewhere with the above but might disagree on the specifics.
With both left and right you get "centre-" "hard-" and "far-" etc. depending on how extreme they take their views. Far-right people and governments tend to be in favour of use of direct force to impose power structures (to the extremes of the 1930s-40s German Government which systematically killed millions of people who didn't fit in their ideal society), while far-left people and governments can do the same to abolish power structures (e.g. the 1920s Russian Government which killed a lot of nobility and religious leaders who were part of the existing power structures).
"Left" and "right" is mostly relative, though. A "left-wing" group in one country might have similar views to a "right-wing" group in another country, depending on where the "centre" is.
D3V1LS_L3TTUC3 t1_j292pqq wrote
Notice how the most extreme example of “far left” is people killing a relatively small number of wealth hoarders with the intention of redistributing wealth to society, meanwhile “far right” is the literal genocide of hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of innocent people
grumblingduke t1_j293uow wrote
Worth noting that the far-left Russian Government ended up spiralling into an authoritarian nightmare that killed a lot more people. Part of the problem with far-left politics is that if you don't have the support of the population you need to introduce all new power structures to force your lack of power structures on the people. And then you open the doors to all sorts of corruption and evil.
D3V1LS_L3TTUC3 t1_j2aaofk wrote
So your critique against leftism is the same critique that could be applied to literally any sort of political ideology.. “if you don’t have the support of the population you have to force things and that ends with corruption”
grumblingduke t1_j2b7q5l wrote
Yes... is that a problem?
biggsteve81 t1_j297lr1 wrote
The Khmer Rouge would be considered far left, and resulted in the Cambodian genocide.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments