Whats the diffrence between Left and Right wing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WMichael
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WMichael

Guest
Sometimes I get confused between a Left and Right winged catholic.
I’ve got some assumptions like Left wingers are more liberal, and that most Right wingers are more traditional.

Am I correct?
 
It has more to do with ideological beliefs of conservative(right wing) and progressive(left wing), on a particular issue.

It today’s political climate, the two are misplaced, for few people fall under the terms in all cases.

At any rate, according to Pope Benedict XVI, a conservative is one who is content with the status quo and resist’s change, whereas the progressive seeks to change things because he see’s flaws in the status quo which need improvement or should be replaced.

Jim
 
The difference between Left and Right wing, I think there is no any different b/w them.
 
Back in the day when I was in college, it was explained that Left and Right were continuums out from the center. Center would be middle of the road, golden mean, etc. Both Republicans and Democrats had people “in the middle” back then, and while slightly ideologically different, were enough alike to be able to negotiate compromise.

The slightly left of center were the Democrats, and slightly right of center were Republicans. As one went further left or right the stances became progressively different. The far right of the continuum was fascism, and the far left was communism. Frankly, I do not see anything that bad in either of our right and left wings, but as the electorate we need to be watchful. Is it worse to support some of the current initiatives on birth control or supportdisenfranchising some of the electorate, and passing laws which would support bigotry and violence. Both are wrong.

I think we need to strongly urge our elected officials to come back to center.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
IAt any rate, according to Pope Benedict XVI, a conservative is one who is content with the status quo and resist’s change, whereas the progressive seeks to change things because he see’s flaws in the status quo which need improvement or should be replaced.
Click to expand...
That is pretty good but how about when the change sought is a reform to a condition prior to the status quo?

:hmmm:
 
When I was in college in the Deep South over 50 years ago, a Liberal was defined as someone who listened to both sides of a political/social debate and independantly made up their own mind. A Conservative was someone who was committed to maintaining the status quo.
Today, various political and social forces have subjugated the language so that today a Liberal is someone who has beliefs bordering on those held by Marxists and/or Socialists, and Conservatives have beliefs that would embarass Genghis Khan.
The origin of the political term left and right originated in the British House of Commons where the Tory, or conservative party sat to the right of the Speaker, and the Liberal, or innovative, Party sat to the left.
 
Ohana said:
… The far right of the continuum was fascism, and the far left was communism.
Click to expand...
While it is true that if you oppress a communist, he will scream “Fascists! Fascists!” all the way to jail, the fact is this myth of their being polar opposites was started because Hitler invaded Russia in WW-II and the communists and fascists were enemies, and it has persisted. [See note below.] But this overlooks the fact that Stalin and Hitler were allies just before, so their rivalry was not based on anything ideological. Since they are both for BIG government, fascism and communism are both Leftist ideologies. The opposite end of the spectrum is NO government, more commonly known as anarchy.

[Note: “We’ve been invaded!” – Lillian Hellman rushing into a New York cocktail party, on Hitler’s invasion of Russia]
I think we need to strongly urge our elected officials to come back to center.
Click to expand...
That would be essentially a one-party rule. Do you want that?
 
Sometimes I get frustrated since many rightwingers are not pro life. And many leftwingers are pro choice Catholics.
 
right
  1. no abortions period
    2)individual responsibilities
    3)small government small confiscation of money
    4)uphold righteousness but judgmental
left
1)abortion any time
2)government responsible for individuals
3)larger government larger confiscations of money
4)forgiving but no righteousness

That’s the way I see the extremes which many people support even though they may be more open to a middleground.
 
Left wingers favor totalitarian governments and poor businesses. Right wingers favor broken governments and totalitarian businesses. 😃
 
Left wing means that they want to impose their beliefs on others. Many want to do this using the government. I have yet to see a lefty “catholic” who said “You know, I really should practice what I preach and join the Episcopalian church and stop calling myself catholic” - they would rather demand the Catholic Church change their doctrines to fit their leftist beliefs rather than either changing churches or changing their beliefs.

Right wing means “let’s not change the Catholic doctrines” It is seen as inflexible and unyielding. Doctrinal purity is important to the right.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
That is pretty good but how about when the change sought is a reform to a condition prior to the status quo?

:hmmm:
Click to expand...
Still requires a progressive mindset.

Progressive minds seek to make things better, not keep them the same because of comfort.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Still requires a progressive mindset.

Progressive minds seek to make things better, not keep them the same because of comfort.

Jim
Click to expand...
Hitler fits that definition you know

pro·gres·sive
   [pruh-gres-iv] Show IPA

adjective
1.
favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor.
making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.
 
ThinkTwice
Hitler fits that definition you know
Click to expand...
See the definition you posted below, and notice the word, “improvement.”

Hitler sought change and even sold what would be viewed as a positive change by most people here, i.e. rebuild the economy so everyone has an oppotunity to achieve economic prosperity. Return the law and order to the land, i.e. stop illegal immigration. Rebuild the tax code so that it promotes business which creates jobs.

Problem is, when he took office, those ideals went out the window and he and the Nazi party sought to retain the status quo to the point of committing mass murder.
pro·gres·sive
   [pruh-gres-iv] Show IPA
Click to expand...
adjective
1.
favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor.
Click to expand...
making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.
Click to expand...
Hope this helps

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
ThinkTwice

See the definition you posted below, and notice the word, “improvement.”

Hitler sought change and even sold what would be viewed as a positive change by most people here, i.e. rebuild the economy so everyone has an opportunity to achieve economic prosperity. Return the law and order to the land, i.e. stop illegal immigration. Rebuild the tax code so that it promotes business which creates jobs.

Problem is, when he took office, those ideals went out the window and he and the Nazi party sought to retain the status quo to the point of committing mass murder.

Hope this helps

Jim
Click to expand...
Nazism and Hitler was all about improvements and always stayed that way. Hell-bent on taking over the world and allowing the superior beings in their mind rule.(Insane we both agree)

How do you come up with status quo I have no idea when they are trying to change everything.
It’s this mindset by progressives that since they think it’s an improvement for the better they can do no wrong and often ignore that there change sometime is disastrous.

But they feel good that they tried fulfilling there personal ego.

Its a balancing act between the two and sometimes recognizing that the change was for the worse or the status quo is not good enough would aid both sides.

But lets not ignore the fact that most brutal dictators come to power with the progressive speech of improvement and change.
 
ThinkTwice said:
Nazism and Hitler was all about improvements and always stayed that way. Hell-bent on taking over the world and allowing the superior beings in their mind rule.(Insane we both agree)

How do you come up with status quo I have no idea when they are trying to change everything.
It’s this mindset by progressives that since they think it’s an improvement for the better they can do no wrong and often ignore that there change sometime is disastrous.

But they feel good that they tried fulfilling there personal ego.

Its a balancing act between the two and sometimes recognizing that the change was for the worse or the status quo is not good enough would aid both sides.

But lets not ignore the fact that most brutal dictators come to power with the progressive speech of improvement and change.
Click to expand...
Yup, and by definition, they are progressives, until they get power. Then they become staunchly conservative and at that point, the new progressives are jailed and murdered.

So the true meaning behind left and right, is relative to where the center of concentrated power is at the time.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
…
Progressive minds seek to make things better, …
Click to expand...
I disagree. They crave constant change. Whether things get better as a result of change is of little or no consequence.
For liberals, there is no finish line.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
…
Hitler sought change and even sold what would be viewed as a positive change by most people here, i.e. rebuild the economy so everyone has an oppotunity to achieve economic prosperity. Return the law and order to the land, i.e. stop illegal immigration. Rebuild the tax code so that it promotes business which creates jobs.

Problem is, when he took office, those ideals went out the window and he and the Nazi party sought to retain the status quo to the point of committing mass murder.
…
Click to expand...
…
The old Soviet system showed that, once they have gained power, Leftists suddenly become very opposed to change.
…
Rightism (“conservatism”) and Leftism are not opposites or mirror images, however, so Rightists in general are neither for nor against change. The archetypal Leftist in the economically successful “Western” democracies (a “liberal” in contemporary North American terms) is a keen advocate of change mainly to fulfil his/her ego needs – needs for power, influence, self-advertisement, self-promotion and excitement. They even now use the churches to advertise themselves and gain influence. Leftists/liberals do nonetheless dislike neo-liberal change because it threatens their access to power. The old Soviet system showed that, once they have gained power, Leftists suddenly become very opposed to change. History shows that what has always motivated conservatives is resistance to government encroachment on individual rights and liberties and that they may either favour or oppose change to promote that cause. A description of the political attitude domain in terms of two dimensions rather than a single Left/Right dimension is rejected on both empirical and theoretical grounds. The pervasiveness and evolutionary origins of Leftist egotism and reality denial are briefly considered.
…
The central proposal here may seem at first paradoxical but it is that attitude to the status quo defines Leftists rather than Rightists. It is proposed that it is not Rightists who are in favor of the status quo. They are in fact indifferent to it and may equally favor it or oppose it according to circumstances. Leftists, on the other hand, always RESENT the status quo, no matter what. Whatever else the Leftist may be, the bedrock of Leftism is a strong dislike or even a hatred of the way the world is. They have a strong desire or even a need for political change, often extreme change. This does not, of course, mean that Leftists will favor all sorts of change equally. What sort of change the Leftist favors will depend on what it is about the world that the Leftist dislikes. It will depend on the needs that drive his/her desire for change.
Click to expand...
The Rightist, by contrast, generally has no need either for change or its converse. If anything, Rightists favor progress – both material and social. So most Rightists are conservatives (cautious) not because of their attitude to change per se. On some occasions they may even agree with the particular policy outcomes that the Leftist claims to desire. They resist change, then, mainly when it appears incautious – and they are cautious (skeptical of the net benefits of particular policies) generally because of their realism about the limitations (selfishness, folly, shortsightedness, aggressiveness etc.) of many of their fellow humans (Ray, 1972b, 1974 & 1981). So it is only vis-a-vis Leftists that the Right can on some occasions and in some eras appear conservative (cautious about proposals for social change).
…
Whatever Rightists might want, however, wanting to change the existing system is the umbrella under which all Leftists at all times meet. Even at the height of British socialism, for instance, British Leftists still wanted MORE socialism. That permanent and corrosive dissatisfaction with the world they live in is alone what defines people as Leftists.
…
Click to expand...
“Leftist Political Psychology: A treatise on the personality needs underlying Leftist political views”
Dr. John J. Ray
Sunday, January 18, 2004
jonjayray1.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top