Where I come from, left or right or centre refer to relative geographical positions depending on where someone is standing but I think those words mean entirely a different thing in the “west”( I have it quotation marks as a way of asking west of what?)
So I was listening to this video and there is talk of regressive left, alt-right and woke left that has left me confused.
So here is the question, assume you’re explaining to a child and tell me the difference between the right, alt-right, leftist and regressive left.
Thank you
Random thoughts 
They seem to be inventions of the American political discourse which has reduced itself to simple division.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yep. Well put.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I often see some people use these terms here and I feel it makes no sense to a majority of the population starting with yours truly
LikeLiked by 2 people
I can sympathise with that.
LikeLike
Alt-right have tendency’s that run toward fascism and racism. Right and left are centrist Neo-liberal capitalists protecting the current system. And regressive left seems to be a insult thrown by those centrist left/right folks on anybody on the left who “rocks the boat” by wanting to correct or change the current system. in my opinion.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Well summed up, sir.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This looks like how I see it.
There is a blog I visit which I am sure the author identifies as leftist but is always writing against the regressive left. It leaves me confused half the time
LikeLiked by 3 people
Jeremiah:
I am not sure I agree really. I think the term “regressive left” is used, correctly or not, by some on the liberal side as well as conservatives to refer to leftists completely beholden to the group identity/identity politics side of the modern Left. I have never heard it really used purely as a conservative trope.
People who give too much credence to self-appointed “representatives” of a minority “faith community” who demand the State or culture cater to religious dictates the culture as a whole may find…distasteful or even illegal. Of course, the argument is usually made by those particularly concerned about fundamentalist Islam, but it can be too easily adopted and adapted to outright bigots.
It can thus be very problematical, yet their are people, particularly in Britain, who DO frighten otherwise well-meaning people in their calls for a Caliphate in Leeds and the like.
Is anyone else having issues with the commenting system here? I tried to post this comment on the “reply” button above, but it just flashed and dropped me at the bottom of the thread.
LikeLike
i find the comments on this post quite interesting, especially on the right-left divide
LikeLike
I will change the nesting of comments. that is the likely culprit
LikeLike
Since I barely understand it myself, I’d hesitate to burden a child with this kind of thing, and maybe do the “when you’re older we can figure it out together” statement.
Beyond that, I just ignore the entire business. it’s a way of labeling people, often to their detriment, “nyah nyah, you’re just a liberal right winger” and as far as Im concerned they’re used more as insults in an argument (the kind no one wins) than anything else.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree on both points
LikeLike
The labels are designed to be-fog and confuse, divide and rule, divert us from the machinations of the monopoly-money-war-and-fear-mongers. Personally I opt for the term social justice; the world is in grave deficit of same.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Even the term social justice warrior is not spared in that talk.
I think you are right about use of labels. It’s also a means to forestall debate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And if you add the word ‘warrior’ to social justice in today’s climate the objective is at once tainted – subliminal suggestions of terrorist or at least someone socially disruptive and therefore undesirable. And so social justice itself is placed beyond the pale, outside the norm of human needs, when it should be the true measure of a civilised society.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. The question Jeff asked is quite telling: who does not want social justice? How then does social justice result in so much negativity
LikeLiked by 2 people
My current post has a short video on tax injustice that explains some of what’s going on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I saw it.
Tax cuts for the rich and the rest of us increases in VAT, financial transactions tax and breathing tax and all.
It really is a race to the bottom
LikeLiked by 3 people
Economist Yanis Varoufakis explains how capitalism will eat democracy in this TED talk
LikeLiked by 3 people
I will watch this later.
In the book I was reading the other day by Wole Soyinka he asks a very interesting question; is it still democracy when a democratically elected government abolishes democracy like it has happened in theocracies? Especially when this motive is clear in the party manifesto
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’m thinking it can’t be, but then again…that’s the sort of question that sends you round in ever more maddening circles. Yanis Varoufakis splits politics from economy. He says the economy is a democracy-free zone. Another problem is that people tend to think that capitalism and democracy are somehow synonymous.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That talk by Yanis is superb.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He’s impressive, isn’t he. He also says everyone of us needs (albeit through gritted teeth for many of us) to get to grips with economics if we wish to hang on to democratic freedoms (at least the ones we think we have). To that end he’s written ‘Talking to my daughter about the economy; a brief history of capitalism.’ I’m thinking I need to read it. https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2015/04/23/talking-to-my-daughter-about-the-economy-preface-to-the-german-edition/
LikeLiked by 1 person
He is quite impressive.
He kinda shook me; the difference between the money invested in manufacturing, housing verses money just held in mutual funds and all excluding what is hidden in tax havens
LikeLiked by 2 people
SJW is another term tossed around so often it has lost any meaning to me. Who in their right mind is against social justice? Yet, somehow, the letters SJW have a negative connotation. I completely disregard anyone’s argument who uses the term. Ah, divisiveness! When has that EVER caused us homo sapiens problems, eh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s the wonder. Why would anyone in their right mind be against social justice? I don’t get it. I am confused all the time
LikeLiked by 2 people
Power and control is bottom line….
It’s a foolish game man plays because it usually bites them in the ass.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Seems about right
LikeLiked by 2 people
The meanings of these words are fluid. Generally they’re used as epithets. Alt-right is a polite way of calling someone a racist or bigot. Regressive left is a nice way of calling someone an extremist polemic. Right is a catch-all way of saying someone’s a conservative jackass. Left is a general term for saying someone’s a dirty, stinking liberal.
You can define these terms as however you want, Mak. You can even take over the term “west.” It’s fun!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That American satirist, Mark Twain, said we should always use simple words. And because I don’t like to confuse my readers, I use words like asshole, bigots, idjits and all.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Good question! 🙂
LikeLike
The two-dimensional Political Spectrum still has merit, and that’s why it is so commonly used. Here’s a summary from Wikipedia:
LikeLiked by 2 people
While I think the two dimensional spectrum has merit, for some us, it is confusing at best
LikeLike
I have tried to redefine (albeit for the sake of a fictional country) left and right using the Laffer-curve:
left->we are to the left of the optimal tax rate, so we need to raise taxes;
right->we are to the right of the optimal tax rate, so we need to cut taxes.
(see: https://fascinatingfuture.wordpress.com/2019/09/17/elynesian-politics-left-and-right/)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I strongly reject the use of “left” and “right” in politics, I prefer to use “reasonable” vs “lunatic” instead.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think i like your usage too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
These terms seem to be (US) American, so I would not attribute them to “The West”. Back here in Europe, or at least here in Germany, they are not used and I am also not sure about the details. You will have to ask the Americans.
Questions to ask: who coined these terms, when and for what audience. Are they self-descriptions of certain groups or have they been assigned from the outside, perhaps from their enemies? Such terms are parts of as-if-constructions, they are ideological in one way or the other. They might also come out of neutral attempts by historians or sociologists to describe what is going on, but one should be careful about claims of neutrality. The question is if it is even possible.
Besides that, I am not sure “The West” still exists (and the West is, of course, also an as-if-structure). The current US government certainly does not stand for the values I used to think where the values of the West back when I was young. The (old) East of cold war times also does not exist again the way it used to be, so maybe the “West” is a concept of the past (or it has changed its meaning).
LikeLike
i think they are as-if-constructions that are context relevant. they make no sense in my political dispensation
LikeLike
Basically, people fall into two camps: those who wish to live their lives unmolested by others and those who wish to rule over others. The labels merely describe the manner and degree to which the latter group wants to exert control over others.
LikeLike