Not right wing, not left wing…. I don’t really like hockey

There’s not actually a trend of right wing violence, it’s a hokey assertion in the first place.  Other thing:  the right / left spectrum by which we categorize things is by now long known as imperfect as a matter of political science.  Academically, we’d use to talk about the left being socialist and right being fascist.  Well, in real history fascist autocracy hasn’t been much different than socialist autocracy, so what’s the usefulness of judging on a spectrum where the autocratism on the ends are basically the same?…  Conservatives like to argue the Nazis were left / socialists (and ya know, this ought not be unpersuasive really…the ‘national socialist’ thing and all).  Anyway, these kooks that we have in America that pop up and do something destructive now and then, they get characterized as ‘right wing’ because they have ‘anti-government’ sentiments or racial grudges.  I think this is very tenuous linkage, and implicitly slanderous.  Yeah, they are ‘anti-government’ as far as it goes.  But they are also consistently mentally ill loners with paranoia.  Such that this motivates them to individually commit revolutionary acts, it’s their own mental feature there and not one shared with the larger body of conservative politics.  IE, mainstream conservative thought does not have a revolutionary manifesto.  Then, the racial thing… In global political science, racial grudges are supposed to be a feature of right wing politics… Uh, I don’t think that’s actually true, it has some appearance of being an analysis made up by sentimentally lefty political science professors who’d like the lefty egalitarianism to seem altruistic and unbesmirched by racism.  Anyway, in America conservatives are unsympathetic / obtuse to racial issues to a real fault.  But what they aspire to is a color blind society.  Taken literally, that ought not be ‘racial grudges’ that make for a proper categorization of ‘right wing’.  And it’s to say further, as American conservative thought has evolved in good ways with its emphases on personal and market liberty …  that stuff ain’t ‘right wing’ at all, by the pejorative terms of fascism ‘right’ was supposed to mean in old political science.

So I don’t like the word usage.  Left wing for liberals is still totally appropriate though amirite.

Jots w/ dots 7/1

Outrage du jour:  many of the conservative blogs are going over this, while none of the liberal blogs are.

It’s not partisan when the 4 liberal justices always vote together as a sycophantic adjunct of the administration.


3 thoughts on “Not right wing, not left wing…. I don’t really like hockey

  1. pm1956


    Your ironic assertion that the Liberal justices are a bloc in support of Obama is voided by the facts… “The liberal justices voted against the Obama administration more often than the conservatives did.”

    Bottom line: the conservative justices are more often motivated to vote based on their ideology than are the liberal justices. They (the conservatives) are the partisan ones.

    As for your left/right concern, and the things that we map on top of that…generally, left and right have, in the US, tended to be a shorthand for how people feel about property and ownership of property, which is why autocracy tends not to map too well with it. When we talk about right wing, we generally mean (in the US) things concerning the primacy of private property/ownership, and when we talk about left wing, we tend to be talking about public property/ownership (and, in both instances, whether this is a good/bad thing, and whether there should be more/less of it). Fascism was a form of autocracy with private ownership, while communism was autocracy with public ownership (although, theoretically, the autocratic part was supposed to disappear though that never happened in practice). Bottom line is that you can have autocracy with all forms of ownership.

    Racism is generally the same–you can be a racist and be right or left. But, there is a historical aspect of this in the US where the right is more connected to a racist history than is the left, because of slavery (which was all about private property, after all).

    And there are plenty of right wing organized groups who are opposed to the government, who are willing to commit violent acts. Have you already forgotten about Cliven Bundy? Posse Comitatus? They do have a revolutionary agenda, they are racists, they have affiliations with neo-nazi and white supremacist organizations, etc. Yes, they are on the fringes, but they certainly find the GOP more appealing than they find the Dems.

    1. W.E. Peterson Post author

      I think these freaks who drive out to Bundy’s place to hang out and look tough is the equivalent of the black bloc showing up to break a bunch of windows at WTO – Seattle or Occupy Oakland.

      I’ll say they’re both fringy and not reflective of their mainstream brethren on the right or left. But I do have an inclination to argue the mainstream left is more sympathetic to its radical left with its revolutionary manifesto than the right is to the far right.

      1. pm1956

        I absolutely agree that neither is reflective of their mainstream brethren.

        I would, however, argue that the left extremists have been in significant decline over the last few decades, while the extreme right has been at least stable if not growing. There have been NO acts of domestic left wing terrorism recently.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s