Trying to understand the far left...
...Is perplexing. Trying to find some consistency in their philosophy is almost impossible.
Free speech is desirable, except if someone questions a leftish sacred cow, like global warming, or multiculturalism.
Minorities are to be tolerated, except for politically incorrect minorities, like gun owners.
To be Jewish was once quite politically-correct. They now seem to be tending towards being anti-Semetic
Violence is bad, except when committed by politically correct minorities (in which case we must 'understand what drives them to it').
They advocate using the tools of the state against those they disagree with as a blunt weapon, but see their own transgressions against the law quite differently when it comes to protesting in mobs, or advancing their cause by questionable means.
The ends appear to justify the means. (What if The End, once achieved, is found to be a disfunctional latrine)?
They look with disdain on established religions, without seeing the acceptance on faith that they have of Marxist ideology (often in the face of strong evidence of the theorie's many failures wherever it has been tried), or of the creed of environmentalism.
They point to the imminent failure of the market economy, only to be employed or supported by the fruits of it's success.
I could go on, and on, and on. Perhaps you can think on it and add to the list?
Very perplexing.
4 Comments:
So where do I fit Prac?
Where do you think you fit?
I don't think I've ever considered you 'far left' at all.
If the mainstream is 2 SDs (standard deviations side to side, then you could think of them half as moderate left, 1/2 moderate right. But we know that isn't the only way to think of it (there is a social and economic aspect to one's beliefs).
I wrote there of those at the fringes - 2 or 3 SDs from the mean (I could just as easily wonder at those on the opposite side of the bell curve!), those who's fellow travellers are at most a few percent of the populace.
They say birds of a feather flock together. I'm still looking for my flock.
I've taken the ozpolitics test a number of times and tend to get just over 50% for greens, dems, alp and one nation and less for family first, nationals and liberals.
Probably shouldn't categorise yourself but it'd be nice you know. I'm too centrist for my own good. There's not enough like me as far as I can tell.
It just bugs me all that gets dumped into left or far left or some other moronic term and if you support even one thing out of that list - you get the label. Interventionist and Non-Interventionist might be better terms.
Hi again Vee.
I've described myself 'Radical Centrist' before. Perhaps your flock simply haven't taken flight yet. People ARE strange, specially in leadership terms. Most say they don't follow the pack, think for themselves, are individuals. My experience is there are precious few true 'individualists', and few true leaders. You can act like a leader and some will follow, but that is not, IMHO, true leadership.
Example. A while ago, I did a First Aid course. I was merely one of about 20, strangers before we met that day. There were 4 manequins for CPR, and we were asked to form into 4 groups. Sadly, it was mill, mill. Someone had to kick it off, so I walked over to the furthest manequin, raised my hand and said; "One group, here". Half congregated there, until I waved at a few of them and suggested they form another group, "over at that one", and they did!
That was one of the most illuminating episodes of my life actually. People can at times look to a leader rather than have to organise themselves or their thoughts.
And, if you you add in to that a cultural background of authoritarianism, that is how the Hitlers and Stalins and Pol Pots get to where they were able to do such damage.
(BTW, IMO, the there is little difference in practical outcome or behaviour between the far left and the far right in power. They have gone full circle so much they meet again down the bottom. It is the few controlling the many. Viva Centrists!).
Post a Comment
<< Home