Right Wing Discussion Thread IX: The Right Man's Burden

[The East Marches II]

So, ending all illegal immigration isn't the goal for you?

He hates the poor in a literal sense.

This is correct I do.

[Victoriala II]

He hates the poor in a literal sense.

This is correct I do.

time to hacc into ur vast wealth

[The Parkus Empire]

Are Monarchists technically Right Wing?

Has there ever been a left wing monarch?

Alexander II

[Bakery Hill]

Are Monarchists technically Right Wing?

Has there ever been a left wing monarch?

Prince Norodom Sihanouk's party was called the "People's Socialist Community". But in many ways it wasn't very left wing.

[Salus Maior]

Are Monarchists technically Right Wing?

Has there ever been a left wing monarch?

I'm sure there has.

Probably those "Enlightened Despots".

[Genivaria]

Are Monarchists technically Right Wing?

Has there ever been a left wing monarch?

You should ask United Muscovite Nations about the 'Red Tsar'.

[Old Tyrannia]

Are Monarchists technically Right Wing?

If we aren't, then no one is. The term was literally invented to refer to supporters of the French monarchy.

[Mattopilos II]

Are Monarchists technically Right Wing?

If we aren't, then no one is. The term was literally invented to refer to supporters of the French monarchy.

Not that people refer to left and right quite in that manner anymore, given the many shifts in political theory since then, and the constant question whether left and right is really a meaningful distinction.

[Old Tyrannia]

If we aren't, then no one is. The term was literally invented to refer to supporters of the French monarchy.

Not that people refer to left and right quite in that manner anymore, given the many shifts in political theory since then, and the constant question whether left and right is really a meaningful distinction.

The only rational way of defining the left-right spectrum without radically reorganising which groups and movements are considered "left-wing" or "right-wing" is to define it as a spectrum from egalitarianism on the left to hierarchy on the right. This fits with both the contemporary and original uses of the terms. By that definition, monarchism- being hierarchical by nature- is decidedly right-wing. The only people I've ever heard argue otherwise are those occasional libertarian types who argue that "right-wing" means "more libertarian" and therefore any sort of "authoritarian" government (monarchy being inherently authoritarian in their view, even though it's not) must be left-wing. This sort of casual rewriting of history and redefining of terms to fit their narrative is something they share with their Marxist opponents. It's nonsense, of course.

[Mattopilos II]

Not that people refer to left and right quite in that manner anymore, given the many shifts in political theory since then, and the constant question whether left and right is really a meaningful distinction.

The only rational way of defining the left-right spectrum without radically reorganising which groups and movements are considered "left-wing" or "right-wing" is to define it as a spectrum from egalitarianism on the left to hierarchy on the right. This fits with both the contemporary and original uses of the terms. By that definition, monarchism- being hierarchical by nature- is decidedly right-wing. The only people I've ever heard argue otherwise are those occasional libertarian types who argue that "right-wing" means "more libertarian" and therefore any sort of "authoritarian" government (monarchy being inherently authoritarian in their view, even though it's not) must be left-wing. This sort of casual rewriting of history and redefining of terms to fit their narrative is something they share with their Marxist opponents. It's nonsense, of course.

That would assume that politics is really that one-dimensional, which we both know isn't the case. How 'hierarchical' the society is is just one factor.

[War Gears]

Does anyone think there's a reason that right wingers tend to put less emphasis on "theory" than Marxists and the left-wing does? Not that there aren't right-wing political and economic theories, but they tend not to talk about it as much or refer to it like socialists do (e.g. "Marxist theory," "Leninist theory," "anarchist theory," etc.) perhaps it has to do with the rhetorical appeals of the movements being different.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Does anyone think there's a reason that right wingers tend to put less emphasis on "theory" than Marxists and the left-wing does? Not that there aren't right-wing political and economic theories, but they tend not to talk about it as much or refer to it like socialists do (e.g. "Marxist theory," "Leninist theory," "anarchist theory," etc.) perhaps it has to do with the rhetorical appeals of the movements being different.

Right wing ideologies tend not to think of themselves as scientific I guess?

[Mushet]

The only rational way of defining the left-right spectrum without radically reorganising which groups and movements are considered "left-wing" or "right-wing" is to define it as a spectrum from egalitarianism on the left to hierarchy on the right. This fits with both the contemporary and original uses of the terms. By that definition, monarchism- being hierarchical by nature- is decidedly right-wing. The only people I've ever heard argue otherwise are those occasional libertarian types who argue that "right-wing" means "more libertarian" and therefore any sort of "authoritarian" government (monarchy being inherently authoritarian in their view, even though it's not) must be left-wing. This sort of casual rewriting of history and redefining of terms to fit their narrative is something they share with their Marxist opponents. It's nonsense, of course.

That would assume that politics is really that one-dimensional, which we both know isn't the case. How 'hierarchical' the society is is just one factor.

And that one factor is what is measured on the left-right spectrum. It's not the be-all end-all to political classificiation, it is one way to group ideologies.

[Mattopilos II]

That would assume that politics is really that one-dimensional, which we both know isn't the case. How 'hierarchical' the society is is just one factor.

And that one factor is what is measured on the left-right spectrum. It's not the be-all end-all to political classificiation, it is one way to group ideologies.

Except it isn't. Lots of different things are bunched in that 1D 'factor', including economical systems.

[War Gears]

Does anyone think there's a reason that right wingers tend to put less emphasis on "theory" than Marxists and the left-wing does? Not that there aren't right-wing political and economic theories, but they tend not to talk about it as much or refer to it like socialists do (e.g. "Marxist theory," "Leninist theory," "anarchist theory," etc.) perhaps it has to do with the rhetorical appeals of the movements being different.

Right wing ideologies tend not to think of themselves as scientific I guess?

That's the most likely case, never heard of "scientific monarchism."

[Old Tyrannia]

The only rational way of defining the left-right spectrum without radically reorganising which groups and movements are considered "left-wing" or "right-wing" is to define it as a spectrum from egalitarianism on the left to hierarchy on the right. This fits with both the contemporary and original uses of the terms. By that definition, monarchism- being hierarchical by nature- is decidedly right-wing. The only people I've ever heard argue otherwise are those occasional libertarian types who argue that "right-wing" means "more libertarian" and therefore any sort of "authoritarian" government (monarchy being inherently authoritarian in their view, even though it's not) must be left-wing. This sort of casual rewriting of history and redefining of terms to fit their narrative is something they share with their Marxist opponents. It's nonsense, of course.

That would assume that politics is really that one-dimensional, which we both know isn't the case. How 'hierarchical' the society is is just one factor.

Obviously politics isn't one dimensional, and I never claimed that it was. The left-right spectrum, on the other hand, blatantly is. You are the one assuming that the left-right spectrum must be an all-encompassing explanation of politics rather than a measurement of just one factor.

Does anyone think there's a reason that right wingers tend to put less emphasis on "theory" than Marxists and the left-wing does? Not that there aren't right-wing political and economic theories, but they tend not to talk about it as much or refer to it like socialists do (e.g. "Marxist theory," "Leninist theory," "anarchist theory," etc.) perhaps it has to do with the rhetorical appeals of the movements being different.

Well, most contemporary left-wing movements are in some way influenced by Marxism, which is a very intellectual and pseudoscientific tradition. On the other hand the political right is largely defined in opposition to the left. It is therefore generally characterised by its defence of tradition, precedent, empiricism or "feeling" as opposed to the rationalistic social theories of the political left as the best basis for policy and political or social organisation.

And that one factor is what is measured on the left-right spectrum. It's not the be-all end-all to political classificiation, it is one way to group ideologies.

Except it isn't. Lots of different things are bunched in that 1D 'factor', including economical systems.

And left-wingers tend to advocate for various forms of socialism because they view it as a more egalitarian economic system than capitalism. It comes down to egalitarianism vs social stratification.

[Mattopilos II]

Obviously politics isn't one dimensional, and I never claimed that it was. The left-right spectrum, on the other hand, blatantly is. You are the one assuming that the left-right spectrum must be an all-encompassing explanation of politics rather than a measurement of just one factor.

You might want to read what I just wrote - I never said YOU thought politics is one dimensional. Someone is a little defensive.
And sure, if we make various simplifications (and by that I mean many).

And left-wingers tend to advocate for various forms of socialism because they view it as a more egalitarian economic system than capitalism. It comes down to egalitarianism vs social stratification.

Key word is 'tend'.

[Old Tyrannia]

Obviously politics isn't one dimensional, and I never claimed that it was. The left-right spectrum, on the other hand, blatantly is. You are the one assuming that the left-right spectrum must be an all-encompassing explanation of politics rather than a measurement of just one factor.

You might want to read what I just wrote - I never said YOU thought politics is one dimensional. Someone is a little defensive.
And sure, if we make various simplifications (and by that I mean many).

And left-wingers tend to advocate for various forms of socialism because they view it as a more egalitarian economic system than capitalism. It comes down to egalitarianism vs social stratification.

Key word is 'tend'.

So, then, how do you define left and right wing politics? Please enlighten us.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Hey guys, um...
I don't like classifying religious ideology as a political spectrum, but Islamism is still on the right side. And since this is a right wing discussion thread, well...hi I guess?

Islamism is left wing, somehow.

Are you serious?!

[Ramune and Chocolate]

Does anyone think there's a reason that right wingers tend to put less emphasis on "theory" than Marxists and the left-wing does? Not that there aren't right-wing political and economic theories, but they tend not to talk about it as much or refer to it like socialists do (e.g. "Marxist theory," "Leninist theory," "anarchist theory," etc.) perhaps it has to do with the rhetorical appeals of the movements being different.

Right-wing ideologies tend to revolve around acceptance and preservation, or expansion in some, of the status quo order, which hardly necessitates the creation of theories to explain their problems which are, if any, understood not to be inherent within the system. Modern leftism tend to ridiculously dedicate itself in theories because many leftist ideologies are basically intended to concern themselves with structural violence/injustice/insert other, and uproot it from the core.

Some other right-wing ideologies are irrational and anti-intellectual (fascism, for example), favoring cathartic actions over comprehensive organizing and theorizing, a trait emulated by many post-leftists and egoists.

[War Gears]

Does anyone think there's a reason that right wingers tend to put less emphasis on "theory" than Marxists and the left-wing does? Not that there aren't right-wing political and economic theories, but they tend not to talk about it as much or refer to it like socialists do (e.g. "Marxist theory," "Leninist theory," "anarchist theory," etc.) perhaps it has to do with the rhetorical appeals of the movements being different.

Right-wing ideologies tend to revolve around acceptance and preservation, or expansion in some, of the status quo order, which hardly necessitates the creation of theories to explain their problems which are, if any, understood not to be inherent within the system. Modern leftism tend to ridiculously dedicate itself in theories because many leftist ideologies are basically intended to concern themselves with structural violence/injustice/insert other, and uproot it from the core.

Some other right-wing ideologies are irrational and anti-intellectual (fascism, for example), favoring cathartic actions over comprehensive organizing and theorizing, a trait emulated by many post-leftists and egoists.

As I pointed out in LWDT, anti-intellectual and irrationalist philosophy in Fascism is extremely overstated. There was a Fascist Manifesto of Intellectuals, and it was only opposed to an extremely specific caricature of intellectualism, while supporting epistemological and ontological theories about how nothing could exist outside thinking.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Islamism is left wing, somehow.

Are you serious?!

Liberals like it for some reason while conservatives hate it, so I guess?

:^)

[War Gears]

Hey guys, um...
I don't like classifying religious ideology as a political spectrum, but Islamism is still on the right side. And since this is a right wing discussion thread, well...hi I guess?

Islamism is left wing, somehow.

So is liking traps, but you're still here.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Islamism is left wing, somehow.

So is liking traps, but you're still here.

Traps are fucking patrician, they transcend political alignment.

[War Gears]

So is liking traps, but you're still here.

Traps are fucking patrician, they transcend political alignment.

Traps are gay leftist.