Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,848
I definitely agree with the juxtaposition of social change with what we consider to be our class pulling in different directions from historic reference points, both those matters alone would be worthy matters for discussion.
The left/right debate though is just too simplistic, and dumbs down the nuance of how people genuinely see themselves politically. Indeed, part of the problem with the political system we have is that we are essentially given a binary choice on Governments. I am not making a case there for proportional representation, personally I think that would be worse, but that is a helpful segway to the left and right debate.
The genesis of left/right is driven from the outcome of the French Revolution, the Revolutionary radicals (jacobins) sat on the left, the monarchists on the right. The key to what was left and right was therefore the scale of change. The radicals eventually got their way, and up came the national razor, the end of organised religion and even a new calendar (the 10 day week).
The monarchists obviously resisted this change and wanted to shift closer to the British constitutional monarchy where parliament governs and the monarch as head of state is reduced to broadly figure head.
History is now the only judge on whether France did benefit, my own view is that the reign of terror, which was how the radicals sought to control the population after the revolution was deeply facist and led to civil strife for decades. This period saw the rise of a tyrant which resulted in the Napoleonic wars that killed millions across Europe.
So, in my view left and right is effectively change, how much and how fast. If BLM is left so is Brexit. If keeping statues is right so is staying in the EU.
Radical change can be good it can be bad, and people can desire both.
i could have written more but not sure if anyone reads my comments.My left and right was about movement in thinking rather than just a static left wing or right wing place on a spectrum. The short bit I wrote missed off large chunks of political groups and concepts however we are polarising to the left and the right and whilst the extremes of these are small minorities they are the most vocal. I get what you are saying regards change versus as is' but again that is a little too simple.
What it all comes down to is resources and decisions around who gets what and forming groups to 'fight' for that. But what that statement ignores is how and why you form those groups and what cannot be ignored is the way humans think and react, flight or fight is deep within all of our subconscious thoughts and that is all about identifying similar and what you feel bonded to. Decision making is not always rational or consistent. You mentioned BREXIT, I was/am a remainer not because i love the EU as it is but why view is why change? No one has presented me with an economic argument for leaving . Guesses and comments that are whimsical yes, but most debate came to a 'taking back power' position which I can't relate to whereas a simple you will be £2k better off I can.