No, i am using the opposing parties metric of what left or right means to display that it doesn’t make sense in a global understanding of the terms. democrats are to left of republicans so they are leftists. Chinese communist that oppose genocide are to the right Chinese communists that support genocide so they are Right wingers.
It makes no sense.
No, as you correctly point out, that would be ridiculous.
I am glad we agree on that.
I’m confused. How are communists who oppose genocide to the right of communists who support genocide? Are you characterising opposition to genocide as a right-wing stance? Or are you saying that, since they are in opposition to Chinese government policy, they must be classed as on the right, on the unspoken premise that it’s impossible to oppose Chinese government policy from the left?
That does seem to be what he’s saying, that opposition to the CCP is inherently right wing.
I still want an answer to my earlier question:
I get the impression the OP is using “left wing” to mean “Communist,” but if so, it would be clearer if he would come out and say so.
No.
Modern GOP = far right. Fascist, intentionally uses misinformation, obsessed with identity politics, hostile to democracy.
Moderate democrats = center right
Progressives = center left
Communists and socialists = far left. For the mot part outside of isolated individuals there is no far left in the US. However it seems to be making a resurgence, but there is no organized far left here.
And your basis for that assessment is ?
Surely that is absurd. Imagine, hypothetically, that my party’s stance is that the CCP is communist in name only, too authoritarian, corrupt, and inefficient in reducing income inequality and capitalism compared to my brilliant ultra-orthodox Marxist-Leninist policies. Is my opposition party right-wing?
ETA it’s not hypothetical, either, but a historical fact that plenty of left-wing parties are, and have been in the past, banned by the Chinese Communist Party.
I think the misunderstanding stems from the very thing i’m trying to discuss.
Left does not equal Liberal. And Right does not equal Conservative.
As others have said, compared to other countries, Democrats and Republicans are essentially center right and further right.
Others have argued the right/left spectrum is specific to each country. I disagree with that premise.
I apparently have not done a good job explaining myself.
But when i posit that an anti CCP party in the PRC is to the right of the CCP, i am not suggesting there are right wingers in the US concept of the term. As in any anti communist is a republican because democrats are commies too. Quite the opposite. On a global scale, they would be closer to the center right party (Democrats)
And while the US does have actual communists and socialists, they are fringe group with no power.
My point is, the Democratic Party of the USA is not really “Leftist”
That’s right. A well-known attempt to put these differences into two dimensions instead of one is the “Political Compass”:
With economic view-differences being characterized as “left versus right” and social-organization views being placed along axes with Authoritarianism at one end and Libertarianism at the other, you do get a more nuanced way of classifying political positions.
Best-known treatment of this concept may be at the site The Political Compass:
Why? Why? Why?
(two additional “why?s” to satisfy Discourse, not for emphasis.)
Could you be more specific? I think i’ve tried to reply to opposing viewpoints.
“But why?” Doesn’t really help me know what you are arguing about.
Maybe give your views on the topic. And we can go from there.
It’s a simple question. On what basis do you posit that someone in China who wants greater free speech, gay rights, etc is right-wing? What ideological framework leads you to that conclusion?
Because the the opposing viewpoint to my theory that left/right should be a global standard. Some have insisted that the left/right standard is based on each individual country.
So as a contrast, I put forth this argument that anyone to the who opposes the CCP would be considered “right wing” in the context of the PRC.
Actually, the CCP espouses fairly right-wing views. It’s a homophobic, anti-feminist, un-environmentalist, nationalist, anti-democracy party, for instance. Someone who opposes the CCP, in China, would probably be considered liberal.
This goes to my main point, that some people conflate left/right with liberal/conservative.
Would someone who opposed the CCP be considered “left wing”
China being a de facto one-party state, you will find yourself quickly banned due to opposing the CPC, regardless of whether you espouse left-wing or right-wing economics. The constitution (commissioned by the party Central Committee) does say that China is a “socialist state”, where Chinese socialism is defined as leadership by the CPC, and it is prohibited for anyone to damage said system.
While i might quibble or nitpick with some of these posters, i think they at least they understand the point i am trying to make.
If you haven’t already guessed, this thread was inspired by the “Am I a Leftist” thread. People were all over the place on what a leftist was.
I don’t think an ardent free market capitalism believer who supports certain regulations on free market capitalism, pro LGBT rights, pro-choice, anti-racist, is “Left Wing”
There is no global standard for party political ideology. It only makes sense to compare countries with similar political systems and levels of development. So we might compare the US with Western Europe and considering that both have a similar population it’s not clear that either one should be considered a standard. You could just as well argue that Western Europe doesn’t have a real right-wing party as that the US doesn’t have a real left-wing one.
And frankly most people have no idea about the full range of policy differences between the US and Europe. While there are indeed certain areas like the size of the welfare state and levels of taxation where Europe is clearly more left-wing there are several others where this is not the case. A very important one is monetary policy where the EU has generally been more conservative over the last 20 years, sometimes a lot more. Another one is tort law and the ability of individuals to sue companies which is generally easier in the US than Europe.
When it comes to social issues it gets even more complicated. In general free speech rights are stronger in the US. Separation of state and church is stronger than in several European countries which have some type of established church. The time limit for abortion under Roe v Wade is longer than in most of Europe. I don’t think US-style affirmative action exists on the same scale in Europe.
This. I’m not sure why posters want to push the global standard as that makes no sense when discussing internal politics. Suppose you had a democracy that was an outlier in its Overton Window. Should the nightly news talk about the “very super ultra right party” and the “very very extremely super ultra right party”? And the third party spoiler who thinks they are both nuts because he is merely “very ultra right.”
Really well said.
Oddly, though, they find immense solace in, and trumpet, the worst practices of other countries (“Go ahead and try being an illegal immigrant in Mexico or Saudi Arabia. See how they treat you”) but literally Could Not Care Less about how countries execute best practices*.
It’s the sort of deep-seated insecurity that only finds succor in tribalism (viz: nationalism and religious fundamentalism – two things that – IIRC – Deepak Chopra referred to as “scourges of Humanity.”)
Incidentally, for the American Exceptionalist crowd: to the extent that they think any thing or everything in the US is great, it got to be that way in spite of them, not because of them.
No problem was ever fixed … no situation was ever made better … through ardent denial and boisterous jingoism.
…
*It reminds me of a line from an old Jewish jokes song about “Irving – the 142nd fastest gun … in the West:” “A hundred-and-forty-one could draw faster than He, but Irving was looking for one-forty-three.”
That’s our American Exceptionalism friends: as long as they’re not dead last, they’re content, and ready to send checks to The Grifter du Jour.
Because … 'Murica !