Why I think the term "Far Right" should be redefined

[Divair2]

Genghis Khan was a badass. Nothing else.

don't think it's kinda weird to praise someone for "being really good at raping people"?

He killed so many people he made forests grow back.

Apparently that's badassery?

[Greater Mackonia]

I don't think you can really apply the political spectrum of the modern day to a man such as Genghis Khan.

[Crimson Futures]

Genghis Khan was a badass. Nothing else.

don't think it's kinda weird to praise someone for "being really good at raping people"?

It's perfectly acceptable to praise someone for avenging his father's murder and betrayal at age 12, then going on to unite his people under a single banner, eventually leading them to overthrow the Chinese government that had been abusing them for centuries.

It's also reasonable to praise him for coming back to honor a betrothal his father had made for him when he was an infant once he had cleaned up his own affairs.

[Angleter]

No, no, no. Left-wing/right-wing is not and should not be an economic scale alone (or, for that matter, a social or cultural or civil one). This sort of stuff existed long before Political Compass, and will exist long after.

[Dejanic]

Genghis Khan was a badass. Nothing else.

don't think it's kinda weird to praise someone for "being really good at raping people"?

Hey, we're probably both related to him.

[Indira]

He is classed as far right because of his militarism, racism and nationalism. That puts him firmly on the far right. (and that's WITHOUT even checking the OTHER right wing policies of his that have probably been mentioned.)

[New Terricon]

The left-right political scale is used to define economic freedoms as well as personal. Leftist being more free while Right is more control. With that being said, Soviet Communism was Economic Right with (to an extent) a Personal Freedom leaning left. Nazism and fascism are meant to be aggressive systems that control the economy and the people. The American Republican and Democratic Parties (both arguably) are relatively leftist in their ideologies. The very word conservatism is commonly confused especially in American politics. Conservatism is the very word to describe rules and laws that limit peoples doings. American Conservatives should call themselves Libertarians if they are to consider themselves a "party for the free".

[Talonis]

Going off definitions, "Conservative" simply points one to previous policy, whereas "Liberal" goes to those supportive of new policy. The words have different meanings based on location as a result, which is both confusing, and frankly, really bad for debates and communication in general.

The derpy spectrum is just sad, because it states that everyone always has one of the same two opinions with differing vigor. On all the issues. It's as if people were trying to plant a forest, and one side (the Far Cedars) only want cedar trees, while the other (let's say the Far Hickories) want only hickory. The spectrum states that only three outcomes could result from picking a random individual: 1) They want only cedars (Far C) 2) they want only hickory (Far H) or 3) They want some manner of mix between the two (centrists / non-extremists). The issue is that issues aren't flat, and that some of us want chestnut trees, or mulberry, or perhaps just a nice fountain.

[Untaroicht]

Not a Christian, neither a lie, sorry

No, the whole "Nazi atheists" idea is a lie perpetuated by people who didn't want that kind of shit on their religion.

The Nazi's (with the exception of hitler himself, he really didn't care) were deeply engrained into the occult, specifically Germanic Neo-Paganism and the Völkisch movement.

[Silent Majority]

The left-right spectrum model isn't defined by a commitment to specific policies or even economic systems, but rather by broad attitudes towards hierarchy and privilege, and on this matter Fascists are most definitely right-wing, even if they try to position themselves as "third way" by supporting the fusion of corporate and state power, and utilizing state interventionism.

[Holochrome]

He is classed as far right because of his militarism, racism and nationalism. That puts him firmly on the far right. (and that's WITHOUT even checking the OTHER right wing policies of his that have probably been mentioned.)

That's the point he's making. If what you say is true, shouldn't Communists be on the right too?

[Meryuma]

Far right is anarchism.

Anarchism is a far-left movement. Look at the First International.

That's quite a dubious claim.

More Government <--> Less Government

Total state ownership, communism, is the far left, no state in the first place, anarchy, is the far right.

Yes, anarchy is "leftist" in that all individuals have maximum opportunity for personal liberty, but in the most basic sense it is far right.

Actually, right-wing means conservative/reactionary. The origin of the terms "left-wing" and "right-wing" were in the French Revolution, where monarchists sat on the right side and liberals (i.e. less government) on the left.

No, the whole "Nazi atheists" idea is a lie perpetuated by people who didn't want that kind of shit on their religion.

The Nazi's (with the exception of hitler himself, he really didn't care) were deeply engrained into the occult, specifically Germanic Neo-Paganism and the Völkisch movement.

They also appealed to Christian imagery and impulses. Nazi use of religion was opportunistic.

He is classed as far right because of his militarism, racism and nationalism. That puts him firmly on the far right. (and that's WITHOUT even checking the OTHER right wing policies of his that have probably been mentioned.)

That's the point he's making. If what you say is true, shouldn't Communists be on the right too?

*Leninists

[Alyakia]

He is classed as far right because of his militarism, racism and nationalism. That puts him firmly on the far right. (and that's WITHOUT even checking the OTHER right wing policies of his that have probably been mentioned.)

That's the point he's making. If what you say is true, shouldn't Communists be on the right too?

communists are not racist, and a good chunk of if not the majority of communists are explicitly anti-nationalist. workers are more divided by their class than their nationality or their race, remember?

so, no, they shouldn't.

[Gaelic Celtia]

That's the point he's making. If what you say is true, shouldn't Communists be on the right too?

communists are not racist, and a good chunk of if not the majority of communists are explicitly anti-nationalist. workers are more divided by their class than their nationality or their race, remember?

so, no, they shouldn't.

Democratic Kampuchea.

[Alyakia]

communists are not racist, and a good chunk of if not the majority of communists are explicitly anti-nationalist. workers are more divided by their class than their nationality or their race, remember?

so, no, they shouldn't.

Democratic Kampuchea.

not very good communists. hated by every other "communist" state, partially due to the fact they shit all over everyone else ideas of communism in a spectacular way. not the best example.

[Holochrome]

More Government <--> Less Government

Total state ownership, communism, is the far left, no state in the first place, anarchy, is the far right.

Yes, anarchy is "leftist" in that all individuals have maximum opportunity for personal liberty, but in the most basic sense it is far right.

No, communism is when the workers control the means of production. State capitalism, which the Soviets thought would be a transitional period, is when the state owns the means of production.

State capitalism is contradictory. Communism is intense state control.

[Holochrome]

Democratic Kampuchea.

not very good communists. hated by every other "communist" state, partially due to the fact they shit all over everyone else ideas of communism in a spectacular way. not the best example.

Is this the "they're not 'real' communists" argument? Cause it doesn't matter. Communist failed time and time again. No matter what kind.

[Gaelic Celtia]

Democratic Kampuchea.

not very good communists. hated by every other "communist" state, partially due to the fact they shit all over everyone else ideas of communism in a spectacular way. not the best example.

Whether they were hated by other communists or not does little to change the fact that they were, or thought they were, practicing communism.

There is no such thing as a "good Communist", all attempts at Pure Communism have turned to corrupt dictatorships that completely skew the original ideas of the ideology.

[Shilya]

all attempts at Pure Communism have turned to corrupt dictatorships that completely skew the original ideas of the ideology.

You got that one backwards. It's not that communism turned into dictatorships, it's that dictators forced communism on people.

[Sibirsky]

No, communism is when the workers control the means of production. State capitalism, which the Soviets thought would be a transitional period, is when the state owns the means of production.

State capitalism is contradictory. Communism is intense state control.

There is no state in communism.

[Holochrome]

State capitalism is contradictory. Communism is intense state control.

There is no state in communism.

How?

[Gaelic Celtia]

all attempts at Pure Communism have turned to corrupt dictatorships that completely skew the original ideas of the ideology.

You got that one backwards. It's not that communism turned into dictatorships, it's that dictators forced communism on people.

Fair enough, though the communism they forced on the people were still maimed versions of the original ideology.

[Gaelic Celtia]

There is no state in communism.

How?

This is exactly why it is hard to implement it in real life.

[Holochrome]

How?

This is exactly why it is hard to implement it in real life.

I'd ratheter take the word of world class professors and Wikipedia over some random bloke on the internet. Communism is state control over the economy.

[Shilya]

State capitalism is contradictory.

It's called feudalism.

The absolute monarch, who is essentially the state, owns all land and dictates all laws in it. The whole thing is built on property rights and inheritance. Under him, the people may practice controlled capitalism, while the king retains the last word.