Paul Berman offers a different view on Iraq and leftism

[Ned]

Originally posted by Berzerker

Ramo -

That's where they belong, it is illogical for anarchistic libertarians and your brand of anarchism to sit on opposite sides of the spectrum. Fascism is dictatorial, so why would it be on the same side as anarchists? If the left end is totalitarianism, fascism can't be found on the right side. If you want to put anarchism at the left end, then the right end is totalitarian. Contrary to Sava's critique of the left/right spectrum, it does make sense and only makes sense when totalitarianism is at one end and anarchism is at the other. Of course, that doesn't really help us identify all the people in between but most people are authoritarian on some issues and anarchistic on others... But the mindset of a person who presumes to have an authoritarian mandate to deprive others of their freedom even if on a handfull of issues shows an authoritarian streak...

Berz, I mostly agree with your analysis.

The more economic freedom one has, the more one is on the right. Fascism and socialism are very close in practice. The former still allows some competition. The latter provides state monopolies. This does not place the two on opposite ends of the spectrum, but very close to each other.

We have found in practice that totally unregualted capitalism leads to enormous abuse. Thus we tolerate regulation to prevent the abuse.

Fascism is more intrusive. It permits the state to dominate the boards of directors, to control wages and profits, and to control production.

Socialsim does away with independent corporations altogether and forms state monopolies and planning instead of free markets deciding which products to produce.

Anarchism and libertarian are very close to each other -- so they have to be on the right.

Communism, in its idealic form, is on the right as well.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
We have found in practice that totally unregualted capitalism leads to enormous abuse.

So does regulated capitalism as Berz will agree

Originally posted by Ned
Thus we tolerate regulation to prevent the abuse.

Uh huh

edit: rolleyes

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by MrFun
Reread my post -- human rights violations are not to be tolerated.

What constitutes human rights violations?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Iraq wasn't ruled by a capitalist. According to that "logic", the USA and every other "capitalist" country should look like Iraq.

A person being a capitalist does not automatically defines his stances in other issues.

[Theben]

If the left end is totalitarianism, fascism can't be found on the right side. If you want to put anarchism at the left end, then the right end is totalitarian. Contrary to Sava's critique of the left/right spectrum, it does make sense and only makes sense when totalitarianism is at one end and anarchism is at the other.

If you're using a scale that only incorporates personal freedom vs. state/societal security. Most people also include a host of other social issues, as well as economics. But you knew that; just chose to ignore it.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ned
The more economic freedom one has, the more one is on the right.

You are weird.

Originally posted by Ned
Fascism and socialism are very close in practice.

Exhibit A.

[Kidlicious]

[Kidlicious]

The left believes in equality. The right doesn't. It's that simple. Economic freedom has nothing to do with it.

[MrFun]

That's unfair of you to characterize the right that way.

Moderate righters believe in equality just as moderate lefties do -- but they both go about different ways towards this ideal, even when the other side strongly believes the other's approach is not achieving this.

[Ramo]

And, where are libertarians?

On the right.

That's where they belong, it is illogical for anarchistic libertarians and your brand of anarchism to sit on opposite sides of the spectrum. Fascism is dictatorial, so why would it be on the same side as anarchists? If the left end is totalitarianism, fascism can't be found on the right side. If you want to put anarchism at the left end, then the right end is totalitarian. Contrary to Sava's critique of the left/right spectrum, it does make sense and only makes sense when totalitarianism is at one end and anarchism is at the other. Of course, that doesn't really help us identify all the people in between but most people are authoritarian on some issues and anarchistic on others... But the mindset of a person who presumes to have an authoritarian mandate to deprive others of their freedom even if on a handfull of issues shows an authoritarian streak...

There's no perfect way to divide left and right, so it's better to go with tradition rather than using some crazy scale that no one else uses (except apparantly Sava and Ned ). Communists and anarchists and social democrats are on the left, while fascists and libertarians and feudalists are on the right.

What has changed between him and Clinton?

Primarily, the strengthening of police powers, escalating the war on drugs, more corporate welfare, more protectionism, rounding up, locking up, and kicking out immigrants, more military spending and war. Which can characterize a mild version of fascism pretty well.

Not much, lower taxes and more spending. Sounds moderately liberal...

Liberal? His agenda seems pretty conservative to me.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by MrFun
That's unfair of you to characterize the right that way.

Moderate righters believe in equality just as moderate lefties do -- but they both go about different ways towards this ideal, even when the other side strongly believes the other's approach is not achieving this.

Complete nonsense

[MrFun]

Why is that nonsense??

Republicans would be insulted if you tell them they oppose equality.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by MrFun
Moderate righters believe in equality just as moderate lefties do

They do? What kind of equality are you talking about?

[Ramo]

What kind or Republican supports equality? Hell, what kind of Democrat supports equality? That's a bit contradictory with capitalism.

[Pax]

I don't think that right and left are good terms to use when talking about money, sex, equality, free speech, religion, and etc.

Also what kind of government is controlled by corporations as opposed to controlling them.

Theorettically, we could have a communist country with free speech, freedom of religion, race and sex equality.

Theoretically, we can have a democracy that restricts religious practices oppresses certain members of society, and does not allow free speech at all.