There's a current thread where RF members are asked to take the political compass quiz and post their results, in order to gauge where most of the RF posters stand on the political spectrum/grid. While I think it's interesting and can be somewhat informative, it seems there's a lot of room for interpretation. In fact, it seems to raise more questions than answers, especially since many U.S. politicians appeared to fall in the right/authoritarian quadrant, while most RF posters (including myself) fell into the left/libertarian quadrant.
Everyone seems to have their own ideas about the political spectrum and what constitutes "left" and "right." Recently, I've noticed that some people put the Nazis on the "far left," but that seems a bit revisionist. Traditionally, my understanding is that fascists, Nazis, and ultra-nationalists belong on the "far right" end of the spectrum. Ideologically, Communists tended to be more internationalistic in their worldview, favoring cooperation and peaceful coexistence among nationalities, ideally with the workers of the world uniting for a common cause. There's no room for nationalism under that banner.
Whether or not they actually practiced that principle is a different matter, at least in terms of looking at the political spectrum, which seems more an ideological abstraction, not realpolitik or an accurate description of the mechanisms and apparatus by which political systems operate. That, just by itself, appears to be one of the major failings of the political spectrum as a useful tool.
Another idea that I've often heard is that liberals, progressives and the left in general tend to be more open to change and new ideas, whereas conservatives and others on the right are stuck in older, traditional ways.
Other terms which relate to the political spectrum and are often tossed about "far right" and "far left," but even that can get a bit murky when they're usually used as labels concocted by those who are on the opposite end. At least when it comes those being called "far left," their views might be more moderate, although if they feel they're under attacked, they might dig in and entrench themselves to such a degree that it might appear "far left."
Everyone seems to have their own ideas about the political spectrum and what constitutes "left" and "right." Recently, I've noticed that some people put the Nazis on the "far left," but that seems a bit revisionist. Traditionally, my understanding is that fascists, Nazis, and ultra-nationalists belong on the "far right" end of the spectrum. Ideologically, Communists tended to be more internationalistic in their worldview, favoring cooperation and peaceful coexistence among nationalities, ideally with the workers of the world uniting for a common cause. There's no room for nationalism under that banner.
Whether or not they actually practiced that principle is a different matter, at least in terms of looking at the political spectrum, which seems more an ideological abstraction, not realpolitik or an accurate description of the mechanisms and apparatus by which political systems operate. That, just by itself, appears to be one of the major failings of the political spectrum as a useful tool.
Another idea that I've often heard is that liberals, progressives and the left in general tend to be more open to change and new ideas, whereas conservatives and others on the right are stuck in older, traditional ways.
Other terms which relate to the political spectrum and are often tossed about "far right" and "far left," but even that can get a bit murky when they're usually used as labels concocted by those who are on the opposite end. At least when it comes those being called "far left," their views might be more moderate, although if they feel they're under attacked, they might dig in and entrench themselves to such a degree that it might appear "far left."
), insofar as leftwing (ie socialist) people are being termed fascists. Also, apparently - I have read - the EU is a fascist organisation. There's no point in directing such people to a dictionary though, even the ones that can spell. What is the agenda behind this nonsense? The irony is of course that some of these jokers are the real fascists (as per any random dictionary). Twitter can be so depressing...
