Talk:Political spectrum/definitions
< Talk:Political spectrum
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RobSmith (talk | contribs) at 17:47, April 10, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Definitions
- Traditionally political scientists have defined the left-right political spectrum by saying that politics on the 'right' usually supports the traditional institutions and values of a society, while politics on the 'left' usually favors challenging traditional institutions and values.[1],[2],[3]
- Stop right here. Is al-Qeade left or right under this definition?
- An alternative definition which some political scientists say better describes current political differences states that those on the 'left' tend to favor bigger government, egalitarianism, and collectivism while those on the 'right' favored smaller government, free markets, and individualism.[4]
- egalitarianism, and collectivism. This is unacceptable. to equate "egalitarianism" to "collectivism" is ludicrous.
- Yet another definition describes current political differences by saying that the 'left' tends to favor personal freedoms, while the 'right' tends to favor economic freedoms.[5]
- Bogus arguement. economic freedom is personal freedom.
- ↑ H. Winter and T. Bellows (1997), Conflict and Compromise: An Introduction to Political Science, 8th ed., Ch. 3. Longman, Inc.
- ↑ S. Tansey (2000), Politics: the Basics, 2nd ed., Ch. 4. Routledge, Inc.
- ↑ Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, def. 2.8 of 'right' and def. 2.3 of 'left'
- ↑ Ed Poor's high-school teacher
- ↑ Somebody named Nolan?
Criticisms of a one-dimensional view
Many people reject a one-dimensional view of the political spectrum.
- "The old one-dimensional categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's complex political landscape." [1]
For example, libertarians say that their point of view - advocating personal freedom in all its forms, as long as it does not conflict with the freedom of others, is not a left-wing or right-wing position. Advocating freedom sometimes leads them to take positions that are usually considered right-wing (for example, defending a worker's right not to join a labor union) but at other times leads them to take positions that are usually considered left-wing (for example, defending gay rights). --Redblue 08:03, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
- This is bogus double-talk; Liberal#Original meaning: "Classical liberalism" states right here,
- Liberal in its secular meaning, describes someone who favors personal freedom in all its forms[1], as long as it does not conflict with the freedom of others
- You cannot have it both ways. A Liberal and a Libertarian are not the same thing, and you cannot use the same definition for different things on two different pages. But thanks for trying to ameliorate dissenters by "throwing 'em bone" anyways. RobS 13:47, 10 April 2007 (EDT)