"Current R and L politics : two wings of the same ugly bird?"

[hashtag45]

........

 

[hashtag45]

........

 

[hashtag45]

........

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The single line ordering of political thought is too simplistic to be useful.

I find it a problem which needs three axises in order to graph, one for strength of government, one for strength of religion and one for economic liberty.

That yields eight different quadrants of economic leaning which seems to be more appropriate because no one really can define on a line where they are, but being part of a quadrant allows for a lot of the uniqueness in individual political thought that is clearly out there.

One can say that the RW, or LWCJ always thinks the same thing, but after 16 years at lit, I have found no one that I agree with 100% 100% of the time.

 

[underguy1]

economic liberty.

Please explain.

 

[hashtag45]

........

 

[Colonel Hogan]

"Totallitarianism versus Anarchism

In the United States and most Western countries there is a mirage of two political parties opposing each other, one on the Right and the other on the Left.
Yet, when we get past the party rhetoric and slogans, we find that the leaders of both parties support all eight principles of collectivism.*
They do represent a Right wing and a Left wing, but they merely are two wings of the same ugly bird.

There’s only one thing that*makes*sense*when constructing a political spectrum and that is to put zero state power at one end of the line and 100% at the other.*Those who believe in zero power are anarchists, and those who believe in total power are totalitarians.
- Under collectivism, all problems must be solved by*the state. The more problems there*are, the*more powerful the state*must become. Once we get on that slippery slope, there is no place to stop until we reach the end of the scale, which is total government. Regardless of what name you give it, regardless of how we re-label it*to make it seem new or different, c*olle*ctivism is totalitarianism.

This leads to the stunning realization that Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Socialism, Neo-Conservatism, Liberalism, The New Deal, Progressivism, The Great Society, Technocracy, the New World Order, and most of the other political nostrums of our century merely are variants of the same thing. Its name is collectivism.*"


https://www.freedomforceinternational.org/collectivism/

The problem is magnified by the increasing hysterical response of idealogues as you approach either extreme. Anyone to the left of an arch-conservative is viewed as a Communist or Socialist. Anyone to the right of an ultra-liberal is characterized as a racist, gun nut.

This social virus is maliciously replicated and intentionally spread by professional politicians of BOTH parties who feed the hysteria for the sole purpose of WINNING whatever spoils come with being elected to public office.

It is a downward spiral we are not likely to extricate ourselves from any time soon.

 

[hashtag45]

........

 

[Darbhinder]

What a dumb stinky paki.

 

[hashtag45]

........

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Thanks 4est.

I looked into it after I read in the news that they're introducing the american system of charter schools in Australia. Not good.

I then read about a couple of people who claimed that the american education system is in decline due to a focus on "training, acquiring skills for the workforce" as opposed to critical thinking. (I'll actually paste the quotes tomorrow, because they're very interesting)
However, Andre Giroux blamed it on neoliberalism and advocated for socialism, while Charlotte Iserbyt blamed it on socialism.

Bloody hell! If such prominent intellectuals can't come to an agreement on these issues, how can they expect me and others to make sense of the current political maze?
.

One of the problems with trying to acquire skills for a workforce is that you can only start training for the current workforce and by the time you go from Kindergarten to a BS or MS, the workforce needs have changed.

It's best to go back to training for a broad-based, rounded Liberal education based on basics like math and language; fostering the flexible and adaptive over the constraint of what we needed yesterday (mostly in a political sense as in top-down planning).