Political Factions

Half-formed posts, inchoate philosophies, and the germs of deep thought.

Political Factions

Postby Gloominary » Fri May 14, 2021 5:33 pm

Conservatives

'Center' Right:

Neocons/Rightwing Pluralists

In theory, fiscally libertarian leaning and socially moderate.
Increasingly corrupt in practice.

Rightwing Moderates

Fiscally and socially moderate.
Slightly to the right of leftwing moderates.

Rightwing:

Paleocons

Fiscally libertarian leaning and socially conservative.

Rightwing Populists

Fiscally moderate and socially conservative.

Libertarians

Far Right:

Fascists, Nazis and Authoritarian Conservatives

Fiscally corporatist/class collaboration and socially very conservative.

Liberals

'Center' Left:

Neoliberals/Leftwing Pluralists

In theory, fiscally moderate and socially progressive.
Increasingly corrupt in practice.

Leftwing Moderates

Fiscally and socially moderate.
Slightly to the left of rightwing moderates

Leftwing:

Progressives

Fiscally social democrats (and social corporatists) and socially progressive.

Leftwing Populists

Fiscally social democrats (and social corporatists) and socially moderate.

Far Left:

Anarchists

Marxists

In theory, state socialists/class warfare, state capitalists in practice and socially very progressive.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Political Factions

Postby Gloominary » Tue May 18, 2021 3:05 pm

I tend to view society and politics somewhat cyclically.

When times are relatively good, people tend to support the center-left (leftwing moderates and neolibs) and the center-right (rightwing moderates, neocons and libertarians), when times are so-so, people tend to support the leftwing (leftwing populists and progressives) and the rightwing (rightwing populists and paleocons) and when times are relatively bad, people tend to support the far left (Marxists and anarchists) and the far right (fascists).

That being said, individuals, regions and nations tend to subtly or unsubtly gravitate towards one faction over the others.

Factions tend to start out good but become increasingly corrupt and incompetent overtime before being replaced by new factions.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Political Factions

Postby Gloominary » Tue May 18, 2021 3:20 pm

During times of growth and relative prosperity, people gravitate towards the center-left or center-right, during times of stagnation or decline and relative poverty, people gravitate towards the far left or far right.

Civilizations tend to go through long periods of growth and relative prosperity followed by long periods of stagnation or decline (sometimes to the point of collapse) and relative poverty, followed by long periods of regrowth and so on.

Within these long periods are short periods of greater and lesser growth and relative prosperity and short periods of greater and lesser stagnation or decline and relative poverty.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Political Factions

Postby Gloominary » Tue May 18, 2021 3:38 pm

The left started out in favor of reverse classicism and anti-racism/sexism, will the left end up in favor of anti-classicism and reverse racism/sexism?

Or reverse classicism and racism/sexism?

Or anti-classicism and racism/sexism?
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Political Factions

Postby Gloominary » Tue May 18, 2021 4:50 pm

At the turn of the 21st century, the right were socially conservative but not so nationalistic, will they become nationalistic but not so socially conservative?

Or socially conservative and nationalistic?

Or not so socially conservative or nationalistic?

___

Scientism and religionism are another matter.
In my view, egalitarianism isn't inherently more scientific than elitism, so while historically the left has gravitated towards scientism and the right towards religionism, there isn't much if any reason why the left couldn't gravitate towards religionism and the right towards scientism in the future, whether it's a leftwing interpretation of Christianity, Paganism or Unitarian Universalism.

___

As far as I can tell, in the 19th and early 20th century, American and British sociopolitics were aligned fundamentally differently than they were from the mid 20th to the early 21st century.
It was less about left versus right, progressive versus conservative and more about libertarian versus progressive conservative.
Big government progressives allied with big government conservatives against small government libertarians.

In America, democrats were the libertarians while federalists, Whigs and republicans were the progressive conservatives.
Libertarians tended to do better with the working class, southerners and ruralites while progressive conservatives tended to do better with the upperclass, northerners and urbanites.
Curiously libertarians were proslavery, progressive conservatives abolitionists.

The 19th century south sort of reminds me of the Roman republic and classical Athens, for all 3 were preindustrial, predominantly agrarian republics where citizens had a great deal of freedom, yet owned slaves.

Every several generations politics get realigned.
We seem to be at the onset of another realignment now.
No one can be certain how politics will realign if they do.
We could go back to the old realignment of libertarian populism versus progressive conservatism.
Another reversal would be if fiscal progressives allied with social conservatives and fiscal conservatives with social progressives.

___

We've had increasingly corrupt leftwing 'moderates' and liberals versus increasingly corrupt rightwing 'moderates' and neocons.

Here's a couple ways politics could realign:

Leftwing Populists versus Rightwing Populists

Progressives versus Paleocons

We've had increasingly corrupt progressive populists versus increasingly corrupt libertarian conservatives.

Here's another couple ways politics could realign:

Progressive Conservatism versus Libertarian Populism

Libertarian Progressivism versus Conservative Populism
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Political Factions

Postby Parodites » Thu Jul 15, 2021 8:49 pm

Gloominary wrote:Conservatives

'Center' Right:

Neocons/Rightwing Pluralists

In theory, fiscally libertarian leaning and socially moderate.
Increasingly corrupt in practice.

Rightwing Moderates

Fiscally and socially moderate.
Slightly to the right of leftwing moderates.

Rightwing:

Paleocons

Fiscally libertarian leaning and socially conservative.

Rightwing Populists

Fiscally moderate and socially conservative.

Libertarians

Far Right:

Fascists, Nazis and Authoritarian Conservatives

Fiscally corporatist/class collaboration and socially very conservative.

Liberals

'Center' Left:

Neoliberals/Leftwing Pluralists

In theory, fiscally moderate and socially progressive.
Increasingly corrupt in practice.

Leftwing Moderates

Fiscally and socially moderate.
Slightly to the left of rightwing moderates

Leftwing:

Progressives

Fiscally social democrats (and social corporatists) and socially progressive.

Leftwing Populists

Fiscally social democrats (and social corporatists) and socially moderate.

Far Left:

Anarchists

Marxists

In theory, state socialists/class warfare, state capitalists in practice and socially very progressive.






GPT wrote:Leftists are often confused with Anarchists

What is Political Extremism?

Extremism is political behaviour that is deemed illegal or dangerous by the State or by other means. In this discussion, we are mainly concerned with Extremism in relation to political parties, but any other political activities can be defined as political extremism too. So basically, extreme and extremist are not exclusive to parties or political organizations but can be applied to any person, thing, etc.

Extremism - Political

Political Extremism is defined as:

A political activity that is illegal or undesirable in the eyes of a particular governing body.

The "Far Left" is not always a clear designation. In America,
for example, the Democratic Party, the Socialist Party, and the Communist Party each claimed to be
the "Left". Even in Europe,
the French Socialist Party and the Belgian Socialist Party both called themselves the
"Left".

It is sometimes difficult to tell who is
a true 'Far Leftist' and who isn't. In this context, Leftists aren't all 'Far Leftists'. Some 'Far
Leftists' are very traditional and some are not. For example,
the Trotskyist Left are highly conservative in their economic beliefs, but most of them are very
advanced in their political thinking, often being far ahead of most other leftists.

There are many factions
in 'Far Leftism' that share the above characteristics, but are not 'Far Leftists' by definition.

There is a tendency among some people to
define 'Far Leftism' as only the ideology of 'Communism'. This is generally an unfair
description. It includes people who don't want to be ruled by 'Communism' but want to end capitalism.
It also includes various forms of Marxism which don't require a
revolutionary takeover of the state. For example, there are forms of Marxist thought that
are 'Socialist' rather than 'Communist' and which don't see
the revolution as coming from the working class. In fact, there are people who are both
'Communist' and 'Socialist', and who don't believe that a revolution is necessary. Also, there are
socialists, and sometimes anarchists, who are often 'Communist' and also anti-statist.

However, 'Communism'
is a special case. This was the ideology that
Lenin took over. The Soviets (and Communist parties) in all countries other than the USSR were
Socialist states, and some of the people who ruled them in the name of the Bolsheviks were
Socialists, as well. Although Communism is no longer the official ideology of the
Communist parties of any of the 'Communist' states, the term has stuck to describe
a movement whose leading figures call themselves 'Communist' and whose ideology has
been taken over by the leaderships of those states. As such, the term 'Communism' should only
be used in the context of the USSR and its successor countries.

Because
of the tendency to divide the 'Far Left' into separate factions, it is often assumed that there is some
fundamental difference between them. However, there is none. They share
many common values. Although the 'Far Left' don't agree on every issue, they are united by many
common principles, and by the desire to end capitalism and create a society based on common
decision-making by the community rather than the top level of government.

1. Socialism:
Economies in which the ownership and management of industry and commerce are
taken over by the working class, and administered by a democratic government with the
goal of providing a free and efficient economy in which the means of production and
consumption are owned and managed by the working class. In the socialist system,
all industry and commerce are owned and administered by the state, which provides
employment to all, and offers all the benefits of modern industrial society, such
as health care, education, and welfare, to all its citizens. Socialism must of course be
a society in which the conditions are created for the workers to live and work freely,
and therefore it is a society based on workers' control of the means of production and
consumption. Although a socialist economy is a long way off (and, in some quarters,
an idea that's been dead and buried for decades), it is still relevant today. That
is because any future society will have to establish itself from scratch; as such, it
makes sense to use existing systems for planning and organizing production, distribution
and consumption, until a socialist economy can be built on a rational, consistent and
stable basis.

2. Communism: A political
system in which all power, including military power, is in the hands of the state.
In Communist societies, all forms of society are ruled by the Communist Party.
Communism is based on the philosophy of Marxism, which was devised by the theoretician
and political leader Vladimir Lenin in the latter half of the 19th century, in
which society is divided into classes: a small, privileged elite, the bourgeoisie,
enrichs itself at the expense of the working class, the proletariat, who are ruled
by the Communist Party in exchange for their loyalty. In the end, all power is
in the hands of the Communist Party, which governs the working class, until all
political power is in the hands of the proletariat.

Communism has no place in the modern world. The Communist Party has been
ruled out in all its forms, in all countries, by the time of writing. The Communist
Party of the Soviet Union, its nearest neighbour, has already been dissolved and
is likely to disappear altogether. However, this should not be a reason for celebration.
There is no reason to celebrate anything associated with Communism. We should all
continue to learn the lessons of the past and, wherever necessary, strive to prevent
such a terrible situation occurring again.

The term “Communism” can be used as an antonym
for “democracy”. The people have the ultimate power to
control the actions of the state, but the state can only be controlled by
the people. In the final analysis, all power resides with the people, but all
power is directed by the state. In a democracy, the people vote, elect
representatives, and control the government of the country. The government and the
citizens must always consider the interests of the whole people, and not just the
interests of a single group. Communist rule is always self-interest, as is the
rule of anyone over others.

We have to be careful what we wish for though.
If politics were to realign like in '87-'91 the right could use the opportunity to destroy the Democratic party from within.
They might just do that to 'prove' they were serious.

__________________"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Here's a couple ways politics could realign:

Leftwing Populists versus Rightwing Populists

Progressives versus Paleocons

We've had increasingly corrupt leftwing 'moderates' and liberals versus increasingly corrupt rightwing 'moderates' and neocons.

Here's a couple ways politics could realign:

Leftwing Populists versus Rightwing Populists

Progressives versus Paleocons

We've had increasingly corrupt leftwing 'moderates' and liberals versus increasingly corrupt rightwing 'moderates' and neocons.

Quote:

The "left" could then become the "leftish right" and the "right" could become the "rightish left." If a certain amount of realignment happens, that, too, is quite possible. I have no way of determining what is a "left" or a "right" other than to say that we are currently in the centre of American politics. With the coming of social media, there are more and more things that make me think the centre is shifting leftward. (I'm not talking about that old chestnut about "the center is where they keep their laundry." I'm talking about more significant changes in the culture.) At some point, perhaps sooner than we think, the centre will shift significantly to the left.

The left cannot be ceded to a group of people that has been wrong for the past two or three years. If the left shifts leftward enough, they could lose some control over it and a more traditional, reactionary right could grab it.

We should not cede the left to other people. The left is the one part of our culture that has real power. If it does not keep those people in check, it will be overrun by them. We should not let that happen.

In the long term, the left has to continue to keep the cultural forces of our time in check. They are important to the future.

I have to make a confession. I used to be a lefty. I thought that it made sense to be leftwing. It made sense to make people care about poverty, to see that some people were excluded from society, to think of people as real rather than as mere resources. If you don't do that, what you have is a very narrow society. You have a place for the people that do that, but no place for the people who don't. You have a place for the rich people but no place for the poor. You have people who go to work, but you don't have people who stay home with their children.

I think the right is getting a head start, though. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's a head start.

I'm now a free market liberal. For me, that means that I think that freedom, broadly understood, is the most important thing. I don't have a sense of duty to make other people's lives better. I don't think that society needs a massive welfare state. I don't care if there's a lot of poverty. I don't think that it's the responsibility of the state to take care of people who have no money.

The left thinks that these are good things. The left thinks that if we want to see real social change, these are things we need to do. I don't have that. I think these are the kind of things that get you into trouble. They lead to bad results.

When I was a liberal, I worried about the idea of having enough money, but I also worried about the idea that somebody has a right to everything that I don't. I was pretty scared about the kind of thing that you hear about these days: If you want to buy a house, you have to live in it for a year. If you want to travel, you have to sell your home. I thought that these things were good, but I also thought that they weren't good enough. You're not free unless you're free to make the choices that you want to make.

I'm now free to make the choices that I want to make.
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
Thinker
 
Posts: 738
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm


Return to The Sandbox



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users