| Line 5: |
Line 5: |
| | | | |
| | : Most right-wingers also favor a right to sleep with whomever you want. Fundamentalist usually refers to religious views, not political views, and is not rightist. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:56, 4 April 2007 (EDT) | | : Most right-wingers also favor a right to sleep with whomever you want. Fundamentalist usually refers to religious views, not political views, and is not rightist. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:56, 4 April 2007 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ==What defines the political spectrum?== |
| | + | |
| | + | Rschlafly-- I've been trying really hard to clarify the left/right distinction here. |
| | + | It really seems to me that if we claim "favoring individual liberties" is a rightist |
| | + | (or leftist!) position, we are just confusing things. Favoring liberties is NOT |
| | + | a position that lies anywhere on the left/right scale. Here are the points |
| | + | I would propose to help keep things clear. |
| | + | |
| | + | : (1) We should emphasize again and again that '''not all issues lie on a one-dimensional |
| | + | political spectrum'''. (And in particular "favoring liberties" is one of those things |
| | + | that just isn't part of the political spectrum.) |
| | + | |
| | + | : (2) When we talk about the political spectrum, we should try to define what it is. |
| | + | As far as I can tell, '''"right" usually means defending tradition; "left" usually means |
| | + | challenging tradition'''. Obviously that's a really general definition, but that's the point: |
| | + | if you don't make a general definition you can't clearly argue which things are left |
| | + | and which things are right (and which things are off that particular spectrum). |
| | + | This seems to be a good definition, because some of the main "rightist" causes |
| | + | in history have been: defending a country's traditional values and religion; defending the |
| | + | current system of government; joining the military to defend the country; protecting |
| | + | property by arguing against redistributive taxes. Some of the main "leftist" |
| | + | causes in history have been: defending people who want to do things that go against |
| | + | traditional values and religion; defending minority groups that do poorly under the |
| | + | current system of government; joining a revolution to challenge the current system; |
| | + | advocating taxes or other mechanisms to redistribute from those who are privileged |
| | + | under the current system to those who are not. I hope those descriptions don't sound |
| | + | insulting either from a "rightist" or "leftist" perspective, because I'm not trying |
| | + | to insult anybody or advocate one side. I'm just trying to '''clarify where the big |
| | + | difference lies'''. |
| | + | |
| | + | : (3) By the way, when I said 'freedom to sleep with whoever you want' I was using euphemisms |
| | + | appropriate to a family-friendly wiki. I will be more explicit so that I can be more clear. |
| | + | Very recently there were anti-sodomy laws on the books in a lot of US states; rightists/conservatives |
| | + | were mostly appalled when those laws were struck down by the Supreme Court. That was a ruling in |
| | + | favor of 'individual liberty' that pleased a lot of leftists |
| | + | (and liberals, in the classical liberal / libertarian sense of the word). |
| | + | You can like that ruling / you can hate that ruling... but we can all agree that |
| | + | it was an example of a form of freedom supported more by the left than by the right? |
| | + | Or for another example, [[The Economist]] has often advocated legalizing drugs. |
| | + | Most people on the "right" think that's a terrible idea; as far as I can tell most people |
| | + | on the "left" also think it's a terrible idea. So that's another example of a form of freedom |
| | + | that lies nowhere on the "political spectrum" (again, it's "liberal", but only in the |
| | + | classical liberal / libertarian sense). |
| | + | |
| | + | : (4) So I also think we should use the word "liberal" less often, because it's an |
| | + | extremely confusing word. The original meaning was favoring freedoms; political |
| | + | theorists still use the word that way. But it's often used in the US to mean "left", |
| | + | and it's often used in Europe and much of the rest of the world to mean "right". |
| | + | Of course, if we only want Americans to understand what we say here, then it doesn't |
| | + | matter. But since this site is published on the web where a lot of people in other countries |
| | + | are going to read it, '''we should use the word "leftist" when |
| | + | we mean people who challenge traditional institutions and values'''. If we (rarely) use |
| | + | the word "liberal", we should be clear about whether we really mean "leftist", |
| | + | or whether we really mean "classical liberal / libertarian". |
| | + | |
| | + | : (5) The word "conservative" is less of a problem, because if we use the word |
| | + | "rightist" to mean "defending traditional institutions and values", then that |
| | + | seems pretty close to what people mean by "conservative". I hope most people who |
| | + | love Conservapedia would agree with that definition... and I hope most people who |
| | + | hate Conservapedia would agree with that definition. |
| | + | |
| | + | So if you are going to change the definitions I've put on the "leftist" page and the "rightist" |
| | + | page, please take into consideration the points I just made. If you disagree with my definition |
| | + | of what's the defining characteristic of the political spectrum, please provide a better |
| | + | definition and explain why. And in particular, if you think "freedom" lies on one side of the |
| | + | political spectrum, try to explain what you think the political spectrum is, and why this |
| | + | implies that "freedom" is on one side of that spectrum. --[[User:Redblue|Redblue]] 05:27, 9 April 2007 (EDT) |