Is anyone else getting tired of the old left vs right thing?

Post Reply New Topic

To be honest I think it's tired and outdated. Left wing and right wing came from medieval France of all places; the advisor that sat to the left of the king's throne usually had the more 'radical' solutions and suggestions for the king in matters of running his kingdom and the advisor to his right usually had the more gradual or 'conservative' approach. This comes from a time when people were far more ignorant than today, quite honestly. I'm surprised that a lot of people on WP even embrace this concept; do you really think the world operates this way? We live in a three dimensional world, not a one dimensional world. It's really disheartening, to say the least.

I don't care for it. People seem to pledge themselves to one or the other and lose a great deal of objectivity. It's like they become indoctrinated the same as a religion or religious sect. It tends to define how they think and react.

Yeah, for sure there has to be a better way...I consider myself to be mostly liberal, but I am not happy with the democratic party and a lot of time liberals all get lumped in with democrats and that is annoying. I voted for the green party, yeah I'm liberal doesn't mean I feel represented or am much of a supporter of the democratic party. They had their chance to get on board with bernie and they f***d him over in favor of Hillary and claim they had no responsibility to run a fair campaign and that it doesn't matter they worked against him because people suspected it thus somehow that made it a 'non issue"...so yeah f**k the democratic party and the republican party. I want a government that represents the people I don't care if they call it left or right...but sick of this pandering to the wealthy over the general population in the government. And trump and his administration are only attempting to make it worse.

I'm tired of it. It's like any stereotype, mostly useless. A lot of people use "left" or "right" almost like a slur, without really defining the terms.

I think, the Delphi method of consensus building (under whatever name) is possibly much older than France -- basically, divide-and-conquer.

I think, if people were more anarchistic, they would ideally be able to make amends, constructively, outside of the formal, legal channels. There is no strict need to participate in a framed debate.

Many of us say that religion has divided the culture, but our legal system is based on the Greco Roman model, which existed before the Medievals. Following the collapse of Rome, their plan for continuity of government, was to legally-forbid people, to quit their jobs, no matter how bad the working conditions. We are based on the same, failed model, which created the peasant caste.

In case of an emergency, Americans and West Europeans, were said to be traitorous and foolish maroons, if they left the cities. They were supposed to be conscripted into the rebuilding effort -- presumably, against their own, better judgment. The same forced labor, as at the end of Rome, is implied. We assume that it would only last for a matter of weeks, and not for generations, but, when playing politics, one always arrives at logical extremes.

(These were from an unwanted DVD of old war footage, from the Walmart bargain bin, in a nameless town, on a highway.)

Bastiat's Broken Window Fallacy --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs

(Fictional example borrows the name of a real life person.)Zorg vs. Bastiat --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnzzWGcdMqY

I think that dialectics will end, when the people realize who is the actual change agent, so refuse to be put at eachother's throats.