Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Anarchism : Right vs Left

rated by 0 users
This post has 6 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 192
Points 6,535
Voievod Posted: Wed, Feb 4 2009 6:27 PM

What's the difference?

I always thought the distinction was:

right = free markets

left = against markets/money, for comunal living or living in something like The Matrix or on The Axiom (see: Wall-E).

What do you guys think?

 

  • | Post Points: 80
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Wed, Feb 4 2009 6:37 PM

It is very ambigious. Today as well as historicaly.

In my opinion the left-right divide is so ambigious because it has, for the most part, not really been about the political system, but really about personal preferences. It is really more about all sorts of baggage, like if you think Voltaire was a good writter or a dilettante. Rather than about what powers you would give to the police and so on.

What the left proposed politicaly speaking in different countries and different eras varies greatly. Also what the right proposed in different eras and countries varies greatly. And there is enormous amount of overlap between what the two have at one point in time and place proposed.

The only thing where there is some consistency is their personal preferences, their vocabulary, their stated world view, their stated  role models and so on (albeit they shift in time and place too, but at least there is some sense of continuity through some soft transition).

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 573
Points 9,410
David Z replied on Wed, Feb 4 2009 6:46 PM

Ditto

There's a lot to like on the right, as well as on the left.  Myself, I think a lot of "leftism" is just plain wrong. Not to absolve the right, however: they are ignorant to a fault, and often. 

And also, what Marko said.  There's a lot of baggage on both "sides" as it were.  To take but one example, try to find all the hidden assumptions in the word "capitalism".  The left uses some variant of Marx's definition, which differs greatly from a more "right"-libertarian definition, however, the ignorant assumptions on the right aren't much better.  Put the two together, in an argument, and more often than not what ensues is the two sides talking right past one another.  It's hard to have a meeting of the minds when the question cannot even be agreed upon.

============================

David Z

"The issue is always the same, the government or the market.  There is no third solution."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Thu, Feb 5 2009 10:07 AM

Well outside of anarchism, it is a false paradigm. Both the left and right wings, are socialist. It serves as keeping the unknowing person within the box, within the paradigm. If someone is able enough to contend, that the "left" has some good aspects, and so does the "right" - they inevitably choose the 'middle ground'. Which ends up being the middle of the road policy, which steal leads to socialism.

Libertarianism is outside of that fold entirely imo.

You're either moving forwards towards freedom, or backwards towards tyranny.

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,221
Points 34,050
Moderator

Conza88:

Well outside of anarchism, it is a false paradigm. Both the left and right wings, are socialist. It serves as keeping the unknowing person within the box, within the paradigm. If someone is able enough to contend, that the "left" has some good aspects, and so does the "right" - they inevitably choose the 'middle ground'. Which ends up being the middle of the road policy, which steal leads to socialism.

Libertarianism is outside of that fold entirely imo.

You're either moving forwards towards freedom, or backwards towards tyranny.

I largley agree, but as of late would extend that left & right might also be false paradigm's in the context of even anarchism and/or liberarianism. 

If one is a libertarian and/or anarchist, but one does not want to play games with the LL's (Left-Libertarian) or whoever the RL's (Right Libertarian) are, where does one go from there? 

Never mind the other debate entirley whether or not libertarianism is any longer an effective term to utilize (i.e. similar to how anarcho-captialism could just as easily be descriebd as multiarchy or eklektarchy or perhaps even Panarchy) in of itself anymore.

"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Thu, Feb 5 2009 10:40 AM

Left vs Right is like Bruce Springsteen vs Bob Seger.

To the un-initiated, what`s the difference?

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

Just compare the Property & Freedom Society to, say, the Molinari Institute.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (7 items) | RSS