Submitted by fortmis in AskRaddle

I'm starting to feel like the idea of left and right in politics is dissolving to the point of near chaos (not to shit on chaos).
You can find "versions" of just about every ideology on the left side of the political spectrum and on the right. And the "centre" omg don't even get me started! It's a mess!
The concept of left and right isn't even that old... circa french revolution.
What do you think? Is it time to do away with left and right all together? what do you think would happen if we did?

11

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Fool wrote

What the fuck!
You want to deny people's identity!

People can identify any way they want.
You can't just dismiss their identity like that.
Next you'll say people can't be Gamers or Weeaboos.

You can't just take away their sense of belonging in this world.

/s

7

fortmis OP wrote

taking submissions for potential replacements for "left" and "right"

5

Archaplain wrote

Why bother with replacements at all, it was a dumb idea in the first place to condense diverse political views into a spectrum

8

fortmis OP wrote

really?? but imagine the improvements if the political spectrum looked like this instead:
floppy <-----------------------> sloppy

3

Fool wrote

How about <why is C word banned, it is culturally significant to the Scots and Skips (possibly Irish and Kiwis)>?

In all seriousness, "the left" was the rich aristocrats that took down the kings to expand Capitalism, "the right" was the rich aristocrats that supported the king.

Neither were ever on the side of the masses. It is all just identities to build division.

I listened to the following yesterday, and thought it was good discussion of how the situation of identity has become so rigid and inflammatory. https://immediatism.com/archives/podcast/734-laughing-about-something-you-said (Note: it may have just been helpful because of other things I had been thinking about)

6

existential1 wrote

All identities create mental borders and all borders are archy.

5

subrosa wrote

Still the same. I think it's time to do away with politics altogether.

5

OdiousOutlaw wrote

The left/right dichotomy is ultimately just a way to simplify politics in a matter that allows for people to maintain the "us" or "them" mindset in the most pragmatic, boring, and "effective" way possible. Various (sometimes outright incompatible) ideologies group up based on "commonly-held" beliefs, in-fight based on differences (perceived or real), but quake in fear of "the other side" winning.

Politics is ultimately a group activity to determine who gets to rule; I'm not particularly invested.

5

deeppurplehazedream wrote

Politics is ultimately a group activity to determine who gets to rule

2 things: I. The right: more hierarchy is better because they deserve and merit domination of society: better than others. By this definition a lot of the left is actually part of the right. The left: Equality is better for various reasons. People are not better than other people. 2. Politics is the organization and distribution of social violence. Politics and violence are 2 sides of the same coin. I have a plan to develop this. How much of a plan? I dunno... Twelve percent? Barely a concept.

2

OdiousOutlaw wrote

By this definition a lot of the left is actually part of the right

Most of the left wants the state structure intact; the ones that don't are anarchists, who don't merit much mention because they don't even make up for half of what is considered "left".

4

flingwingin wrote (edited )

https://ia803104.us.archive.org/24/items/ZineArchive/Wager-on-the-Future-Read.pdf

this zine is really good and brings this shit up well

the way i see it, shit is kind of heartbreaking right now - the people who correctly identify the problems of society with us today, most will be the ones to make an even more oppressive future tomorrow. We're looking at either techno-socialism (as descended from capitalism and the state evolving to stay alive), or collapse. The default option is techno-socialism and it will be hell. I don't fucking want free healthcare, free housing, guaranteed work, etc. if it means that the state owns all land (as a monopolization of private property), the surveillance state increases, no resistance or riot is allowed at all, internet and free media are clamped down, your job dictates your life and the conditions of employment, the national health system dictates what health service you're allowed to receive, etc.

Many anarchists are still very aligned with "the left" though, but the left is only going to inform the next horrifying, degrading, and oppressive facets of the future society.... just like liberal shit looks progressive but is really just a way to ensure even less dissent and further clamp down on our ability to fight back, and conservatism was considered more civilized and less barbaric than the upwardly mobile openly racist "fascism" that laid the groundwork for it, technosocialism will appear to address our demands and be a fix for a broken system.... society doesn't usually move via discreet stages and revolutions, those are outliers. We gotta be tearing shit down and building the networks that let us survive (economically and from the cops) while we do this, not demanding it to be better.

This is the way i've come to see my break with left and right... right is the old way of doing business and it's barbaric and sucks, and the longer we live in the current world the more it's apparent what it is. The left is for change in society, and it's the new boot on our backs.

That said fuck the thing of being post-left and anti-left and then refusing to read leftist authors - they had and generally still have good shit to say, good analyses, etc. and so within the world of writing and theories, i don't discredit the left's contributions, but when it comes to the real effects of certain actions, trains of thought, and demands on the ground, they might be our bigger enemies. When the state weakens what happens first? The mask falls off and they wield power openly. There's a backsliding effect as the people at the bottom get stronger and bolder and the state weakens. We shouldnt let ourselves be bullied into supporting the left wing of this society (and it's development into even more total control) because the alternative is open social war. The war has been going, and well idk just ask MLK about this shit tbh i'm done typing, unjust peace and shit

4

Erinna_Io wrote

So you mean that people's identities shouldn't be based on stuff written by old, white men in the 19th century Europe? How outrageous!

2

El_Burrito wrote

I just discovered this video recently that argues that the political model for left/right and libertarian/authoritarian is quite flawed. It made a great deal of sense to me with the points he went into so maybe give it a look Establishing and accurate model of political ideology

Left and Right definitely seems outdated to me. For instance in the UK, we have the Labour and Conservative parties. I used to consider Labour was left and Conservative was right leaning. However I've come to realise more recently that they are both economically liberal and so in my eyes basically represent the same thing. Yes some of their social objectives may be different, but fundamentally they're two sides of the same coin.

2

Ennui wrote

What if, forwards backwards? Up down?

2

janicejen wrote

I'm not sure, but I believe many people get more attached to these labels than to ideas. I think this manifests in multiple ways. For one, I've seen people be transphobic the second a trans individual has acted in a despised way, as if their transness could suddenly disappear when they're revealed to, say, be a right winger. Also the obsessively normalized fatphobia and bodyshaming for much the same excuses.

I think that attaching so much importance to these labels also lets people masquerade under things like 'left unity' while being violently repressive especially socially. All tankies need to do for instance is preach few words about "the working peoples' will" and leave the rest of their horrid views unquestioned. And it also supports to a lot of party-line Bolshevik style "for the people" hierarchies, I've found.

2

ziq wrote

And by for the people they of course mean for the rulers

3