Do you swing to the Left or Right?

[AceRimmer 10]

I definately fall into the far left category. I do strongly believe that the world would be a better place to live in without social competition, inequality and a capitalist economy if the people were educated enough to understand the social responsibilites that arise from egalitarianism, were willing to participate voluntarily in their communities and were capable of preventing the rise of power hungry egotists through their social relationships (all of which have been acheived over very long periods of time in the past).

 

I don't believe at all that this is an impossible scenario, but I understand it seems unacheivable to most when considered from the perspective of being raised within a right wing relatively totalitarian society that is economically complex. It wouldn't seem so unacheivable to an African tribesman who was acquainted with western technology, for example- so it's really just about an individual's social conditioning. It's a matter of complexity essentially. Today we have simple social relationships (buying a product from a person is a simple exchange of money for product, for example- no actual relationship is necessary) running in conjunction with a complex economy and system of trade. A far left society would have highly complex and strongly developed social relationships and a highly organised, but much simplified system of trade- more localised and more rational.

 

I believe that when a future society finally does occur based upon far left principles (particularly having overthrown hierarchical control) then that will be considered the true peak of advanced civilisation and they'll look back on us as barbarians for the way we treat anybody that doesn't live up to the western capitalist ideal of the perfect worker (which is how we currently judge a persons beauty and social value).

 

OK, the current system is far from perfect but your idealistic beliefs in a far left system is just that "idealistic". It would never work.

If everyone had the same as everyone else (same income, housing, etc) then how fair would that actually be?

On the surface it might seem fair, but actually it would be very unfair because everyone is different and different people have different work ethics. Personally I would find it very unfair to have the same reward for my hard work compared to someone who does no work at all or maybe someone who works in the same job but produces much less.

Through hard work someone can achieve a better life style.

In your idealistic society none of this is possible.

The ultra/far left (imo) is just the ideology of people who enjoy living off the fruits of other peoples labour.

An ultra left wing society would reduce the productivity of the people killing aspiration and the chance to achieve their full potential. Truly a step back!

 

It beats me how you can talk about getting rid of inequalities when this system would actively setup inequalities.

How fair would it for a civil engineer to be paid the same as someone working in McDonalds? The person who is the civil engineer has more value and has worked harder to achieve the relevant qualifications.

So why shouldn't he be paid more and have a better standard of living?

 

How fair would it be for someone working 60 hours a week to be paid the same as someone sat on the dole playing xbox all day?

 

Noone really enjoys going to work, but we do it to keep a roof over our heads, feed our families and buy nice things. Take away this incentive and

there would be no point in working hard or even in working at all.

Edited April 23, 2012 by AceRimmer

[Conrod 10]

OK, the current system is far from perfect but your idealistic beliefs in a far left system is just that "idealistic". It would never work.

If everyone had the same as everyone else (same income, housing, etc) then how fair would that actually be?

On the surface it might seem fair, but actually it would be very unfair because everyone is different and different people have different work ethics. Personally I would find it very unfair to have the same reward for my hard work compared to someone who does no work at all or maybe someone who works in the same job but produces much less.

Through hard work someone can achieve a better life style.

In your idealistic society none of this is possible.

The ultra/far left (imo) is just the ideology of people who enjoy living off the fruits of other peoples labour.

An ultra left wing society would reduce the productivity of the people killing aspiration and the chance to achieve their full potential. Truly a step back!

 

It beats me how you can talk about getting rid of inequalities when this system would actively setup inequalities.

How fair would it for a civil engineer to be paid the same as someone working in McDonalds? The person who is the civil engineer has more value and has worked harder to achieve the relevant qualifications.

So why shouldn't he be paid more and have a better standard of living?

 

How fair would it be for someone working 60 hours a week to be paid the same as someone sat on the dole playing xbox all day?

 

Noone really enjoys going to work, but we do it to keep a roof over our heads, feed our families and buy nice things. Take away this incentive and

there would be no point in working hard or even in working at all.

Nicely put. There is an element of 'niceness' to the left wing ideal - but it's a dream only. As you say, it's 'idealistic' but unworkable.

 

There has to be incentive for people to strive. At the same time, we have to accept that some people are lazy/feckless/stupid and not necessarily deserving of help. Other people are capable, hard-working and ambitious.

 

What it boils down to is that we are not all equal, and shouldn't be treated as such. Left wing ideals appeal hugely to those who don't relish hard work, and those who resent others' success.

[bigjoker 10]

Re thread title: Do you swing to the Left or Right?

 

I'm an avid naturist and depending how fast i walk i do both.:hihi:

[Cavegirl 10]

OK, the current system is far from perfect but your idealistic beliefs in a far left system is just that "idealistic". It would never work.

If everyone had the same as everyone else (same income, housing, etc) then how fair would that actually be?

On the surface it might seem fair, but actually it would be very unfair because everyone is different and different people have different work ethics. Personally I would find it very unfair to have the same reward for my hard work compared to someone who does no work at all or maybe someone who works in the same job but produces much less.

Through hard work someone can achieve a better life style.

In your idealistic society none of this is possible.

The ultra/far left (imo) is just the ideology of people who enjoy living off the fruits of other peoples labour.

An ultra left wing society would reduce the productivity of the people killing aspiration and the chance to achieve their full potential. Truly a step back!

 

It beats me how you can talk about getting rid of inequalities when this system would actively setup inequalities.

How fair would it for a civil engineer to be paid the same as someone working in McDonalds? The person who is the civil engineer has more value and has worked harder to achieve the relevant qualifications.

So why shouldn't he be paid more and have a better standard of living?

 

How fair would it be for someone working 60 hours a week to be paid the same as someone sat on the dole playing xbox all day?

 

Noone really enjoys going to work, but we do it to keep a roof over our heads, feed our families and buy nice things. Take away this incentive and

there would be no point in working hard or even in working at all.

 

Yes, philosophically speaking, the ideas about society proposed by people such as me are 'idealistic', but all that actually means is that I believe that human ideas (beliefs and values) are capable of shaping society. There's nothing particularly controversial about that.

 

David Cameron et al are currently shaping our society according to their idealistic belief that a Neoliberal economy will produce the best possible society- they're so enamoured with neoliberalism they even announced it to be the 'end of history' just a few years before the system completely collapsed!

 

There's no reasoning behind your view that liberal far left idealism could "never work", because a huge range of ideas are brought into reality every day in this world.

 

Your belief that a left wing society appears to be uniform (same housing, income etc) stems from Communism- in this type of society the government dictates to people how they must live. Everything is centralised and bureaucratic and of course that prevents creativity and individualism because everything is heavily controlled. A liberal left wing society doesn't suffer from this problem- individualism is celebrated, just as it is in a right wing liberal society. People are free to determine how they wish to live, they are empowered rather than controlled.

 

When you talk about issues such as some people having to work hard to support others on the dole, it shows that you really don't understand the far left. A liberal far left society wouldn't have the dole at all, nor would it have charities, bankers, politicians, administrators, bureaucrats or any other socially useless or socially disempowering type of 'job'.

 

There wouldn't be any money in a far left society, there wouldn't be an economy as such. The whole society would work on voluntarism and the reward for that voluntarism would be greater social gratitude and technological, social improvements that improve everybody's lives rather than a pay rise that only slightly improves your own life.

 

It would eradicate poverty and inequality which in turn would reduce crime dramatically- no burglaries, no muggings, no fraud or economic corruption and massive reductions in violent crimes. Crimes of passion would still occur and of course, it would still be necessary to prevent any group/ individual from attempting to rise in power through social corruption or violence.

 

A far left society would also focus heavily upon people who needed extra help to adjust socially- far greater efforts would be made to assist the mentally and physically disabled and they wouldn't be ostracised from society as they too often are today because they are not considered economically useful. A liberal far left society looks for 'equal opportunities' for all rather than absolute equality because it recognises that everybody has something different to offer.

 

To equate the far left with joblessness or an unwillingness to work is completely preposterous!! The far left has often been the position of academics and the most intelligent members of society- those who actually think about how we live rather than just apathetically go with the status quo like robots. It's a provision of the far left that no, we don't particularly like engaging with the right wing economy that exists today, but it doesn't mean we don't work within it. If you look at the High Street today you'll find that the left wing socialised corporations- The Co-Op or John Lewis, for example, have been doing reasonably to very well throughout the current downturn and more and more people are taking a fresh look at the co-operative business model when thinking about starting up businesses. They find that models which directly reward staff members rather than faceless shareholders have many advantages in a modern setting. This is, in fact, a global trend.

 

I think that if you went back in time 500 years and said to a member of the church then that by 2012 the church would only play a minor role in society and that science would be more important than religion they would tell you that you were being ridiculous, but as we can see time changes everything! We only really have 6 areas of the political spectrum to play with in general terms-

- totalitarian far left such as Communism has been shown to be immoral, deadly and quickly failed.

-totalitarian far right such as Nazism led to disgusting inhumane acts and quickly failed.

- centrist left socialism is easily corruptible and the debts accrued by the government quickly lead to its downfall.

-centrist right conservatism leads to high levels of inequality and fraudulent business practices which leads to its downfall.

-a liberal far left system has never been tried in modern times but has existed in the past for many thousands of years.

- a liberal far right system has never been tried in modern times and has never existed.

 

Of course both varients of the liberal far left or right will be tried one day, to suggest they won't is to deny our understanding of human nature and history. We hate stagnating as a society, we always seek change in the long run and we'll soon enough tire of centrist micromanagement or government dictatorship.

 

Once we have a truly liberal society, we'll go through the usual process of an entrepreneur phase during which much is acheived, a steady phase in which society becomes more complex as problems are encountered and overcome and a destruction phase in which corruption and over-complexity occurs which will eventually lead us to a new type of society. It's what always has happened and what always will happen whilst we inhabit the planet.

[LeMaquis 10]

- totalitarian far left such as Communism has been shown to be immoral, deadly and quickly failed.

 

China has managed 10% average economic growth over the last 30 years and is on course to become the world's largest economy this decade. Not bad for a failure.

[Mecky 10]

Yes, philosophically speaking, the ideas about society proposed by people such as me are 'idealistic', but all that actually means is that I believe that human ideas (beliefs and values) are capable of shaping society. There's nothing particularly controversial about that.

 

David Cameron et al are currently shaping our society according to their idealistic belief that a Neoliberal economy will produce the best possible society- they're so enamoured with neoliberalism they even announced it to be the 'end of history' just a few years before the system completely collapsed!

 

There's no reasoning behind your view that liberal far left idealism could "never work", because a huge range of ideas are brought into reality every day in this world.

 

Your belief that a left wing society appears to be uniform (same housing, income etc) stems from Communism- in this type of society the government dictates to people how they must live. Everything is centralised and bureaucratic and of course that prevents creativity and individualism because everything is heavily controlled. A liberal left wing society doesn't suffer from this problem- individualism is celebrated, just as it is in a right wing liberal society. People are free to determine how they wish to live, they are empowered rather than controlled.

 

When you talk about issues such as some people having to work hard to support others on the dole, it shows that you really don't understand the far left. A liberal far left society wouldn't have the dole at all, nor would it have charities, bankers, politicians, administrators, bureaucrats or any other socially useless or socially disempowering type of 'job'.

 

There wouldn't be any money in a far left society, there wouldn't be an economy as such. The whole society would work on voluntarism and the reward for that voluntarism would be greater social gratitude and technological, social improvements that improve everybody's lives rather than a pay rise that only slightly improves your own life.

 

It would eradicate poverty and inequality which in turn would reduce crime dramatically- no burglaries, no muggings, no fraud or economic corruption and massive reductions in violent crimes. Crimes of passion would still occur and of course, it would still be necessary to prevent any group/ individual from attempting to rise in power through social corruption or violence.

 

A far left society would also focus heavily upon people who needed extra help to adjust socially- far greater efforts would be made to assist the mentally and physically disabled and they wouldn't be ostracised from society as they too often are today because they are not considered economically useful. A liberal far left society looks for 'equal opportunities' for all rather than absolute equality because it recognises that everybody has something different to offer.

 

To equate the far left with joblessness or an unwillingness to work is completely preposterous!! The far left has often been the position of academics and the most intelligent members of society- those who actually think about how we live rather than just apathetically go with the status quo like robots. It's a provision of the far left that no, we don't particularly like engaging with the right wing economy that exists today, but it doesn't mean we don't work within it. If you look at the High Street today you'll find that the left wing socialised corporations- The Co-Op or John Lewis, for example, have been doing reasonably to very well throughout the current downturn and more and more people are taking a fresh look at the co-operative business model when thinking about starting up businesses. They find that models which directly reward staff members rather than faceless shareholders have many advantages in a modern setting. This is, in fact, a global trend.

 

I think that if you went back in time 500 years and said to a member of the church then that by 2012 the church would only play a minor role in society and that science would be more important than religion they would tell you that you were being ridiculous, but as we can see time changes everything! We only really have 6 areas of the political spectrum to play with in general terms-

- totalitarian far left such as Communism has been shown to be immoral, deadly and quickly failed.

-totalitarian far right such as Nazism led to disgusting inhumane acts and quickly failed.

- centrist left socialism is easily corruptible and the debts accrued by the government quickly lead to its downfall.

-centrist right conservatism leads to high levels of inequality and fraudulent business practices which leads to its downfall.

-a liberal far left system has never been tried in modern times but has existed in the past for many thousands of years.

- a liberal far right system has never been tried in modern times and has never existed.

 

Of course both varients of the liberal far left or right will be tried one day, to suggest they won't is to deny our understanding of human nature and history. We hate stagnating as a society, we always seek change in the long run and we'll soon enough tire of centrist micromanagement or government dictatorship.

 

Once we have a truly liberal society, we'll go through the usual process of an entrepreneur phase during which much is acheived, a steady phase in which society becomes more complex as problems are encountered and overcome and a destruction phase in which corruption and over-complexity occurs which will eventually lead us to a new type of society. It's what always has happened and what always will happen whilst we inhabit the planet.

 

Looks suspiciously like a cut and paste jobfrom a wishy washy liberal

[Cavegirl 10]

China has managed 10% average economic growth over the last 30 years and is on course to become the world's largest economy this decade. Not bad for a failure.

 

China gave up on communism for state run capitalism in 1978. During the 1990's many state run facilities were privatised. Their economy grew by selling cheap goods to the US, a situation that will not be able to continue with high oil prices because the high costs of shipping eat away any profits made from cheap labour. China must now develop quickly in a technological sense in order to compete globally or their economy will crash.

 

China never became democratic, the Communist Party held onto power and doesn't hold elections hence why you're confused about the idea that it's a communist country- it isn't.

[Cavegirl 10]

Looks suspiciously like a cut and paste jobfrom a wishy washy liberal

 

Yeah, I did very well to find an article I could cut and paste that dealt throughout with the specific points raised by AceRimmer and in the order he made them

 

God forbid I'd have a bit of knowledge about a political philosophy that I follow in order to bring to a conversation- I guess for you it's much better to just cut and paste your non-thoughts.

[Aleksandr 10]

I want strictly controled immigration but I want all the vital industries(including public transport) to be nationalised), where does this put me?? dont say national socialist please!!

Me too. I don't think right or left does us justice. We need a new dimension. Tail wing perhaps?

[LeMaquis 10]

China never became democratic, the Communist Party held onto power and doesn't hold elections hence why you're confused about the idea that it's a communist country- it isn't.

 

China is a communist dictatorship. Just because it allows private industry doesn't mean it's not communist. Nazi Germany allowed private industry but it was still fascist. The Chinese state still regulates the economy in a top-down system. Communism doesn't necessarily mean totalitarian. Just because China isn't like the old Soviet Union doesn't mean it's not communist. There are different types of communist states just as there are different types of capitalist ones.

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

China is a communist dictatorship. Just because it allows private industry doesn't mean it's not communist. [...] The Chinese state still regulates the economy in a top-down system.

If they employ a free market for goods and labour then it distinctly moves away from what we know as 'Communism'. If the state is dominant over citizens but not over the markets then it can be a dictatorship and capitalist.

 

I dislike the word 'communist' post-USSR, it means so many different things to many different people that it's hard to use it properly anymore.

[janie48 97]

Thank goodness we are still a democracy and not a one party state.At least we are free to swing to to the left or right.

The problem now though is more of us are in the middle because the difference between the three major parties are much more blurred.Around thirty years ago we knew what they stood for and there historical values,and they were clearer about what their policies were.I think its got worse since they started to use these spin doctors too,they play to the camera's now and you don't see the real person.

I can quite understand why more people don't vote now,but its a shame though because the vote is a right our ancestors had to fight for,and sometimes people forget that.

Edited April 30, 2012 by janie48