Talk:Left-wing politics

A day ago the intro said anarchism was "reformist", now it is saying that all of socialism is "revolutionary" - forgetting that there are reformist socialists: what is with the confusion?

The section of the intro describing examples of the movements is in complete shambles. It is changing everyday, and drastically from one extreme conclusion to the next. Yesterday it said that anarchism is "reformist" - which is not what most anarchists would identify themselves as. And then the next day it is describing all of socialism as "revolutionary" - when there are indeed reformist socialists. It seems as if that section was written by a very confused person who does not know what anarchism is, nor that socialism has reformist and revolutionary forms.--R-41 (talk) 22:39, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The intro did not say that all socialism was revolutionary, but I see your point, and I have removed the word revolutionary. I really would like to have an article without a lot of flags on it. Now that the word "revolutionary" is gone, do you object to the statement that some people call socialism left-wing? Do you object to the statement that some people call environmentalism left-wing? Rick Norwood (talk) 02:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

That is POV. Socialism is left-wing by definition. That is not the same as "some people" calling environmentalism left wing. Compare "Obama was born in the US" and "some say Obama was not born in the US." Different types of claims. TFD (talk) 03:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually, while as best I can tell the use of left-wing to describe socialism is universal, it is not the definition (the Left during the time of the French Revolution was not socialist). In any case, I'm trying to reach a compromise with R-41, and I can't do that unless I learn what his objection is. I think his objection is only that socialism is not always revolutionary, in which case removing the word "revolutionary" should solve the problem.

Turning to "environmentalism", that is far less obviously "left-wing". Which is why the article currently states that the term left-wing has been expanded, and that some people use "left-wing" to describe environmentalists. It is left-wing only in the sense that anything that taxes the rich or regulates corporations is destructive of what the Right consider the natural social order.

Rick Norwood (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

At issue is whether the article is about a topic or how a term can be used. When people call Obama a socialist, does that mean that the socialism article should be widened to include the mainstream policies of the Democratic Party or does it mean that some critics believe that Obama supports what we generally understand to be socialism? Regulation and taxation are not left-wing, except to some libertarians who believe they lead ultimately to total state control and ownership. Incidentally, at the time of the French Revolution the term "left" was rarely used and referred to deputies who sat on the left, not to their parties or ideologies. That meaning would only arise in the early 20th century as explained in Marcel Gauchet's "Right and Left".[1] If we want to explain how the left-right dichotomy can be applied to various periods of time, that is best addressed in left-right politics. TFD (talk) 16:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

The meaning of "right-wing" and the meaning of "socialism" have changed a great deal. It is not just a question of people calling Obama a socialist. It is a question of how responsible people use the words today.

All I'm trying to do right now is to satisfy R-41's objections so that the "dubious" flags can be removed. Rick Norwood (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I've waited a while for a response from R-41. Lacking a response, I'm going to assume that removing the word "revolutionary" answers his objection to the statement that socialism is called left-wing, and have removed the "dubious" flag. R-41: if you restore the flag, please explain your objection. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Is environmentalism left-wing.

I would like to deal with the "dubious" flag on the claim that left-wing, in modern political discourse, has been extended to a wide variety of positions, of which environmentalism is one. Since examples of people who call environmentalism left-wing have been provided, I assume the question is whether the usage is common enough to merit inclusion in the lead. It seems to me that it is, but I don't want to make a big deal out of it. R-41, would you like a larger number of references, or is your objection that the people who call environmentalism left-wing are not important enough for inclusion here? Rick Norwood (talk) 13:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

They combine elements of the left, right and center. (See Alan Ware, Political Parties and Party Systems, OUP 1996, p. 43.) In European parliaments, the Green parties sit between the socialists and the liberals, although the most left-wing greens sit with the ex-Communists. As the Green Party of Canada website says, "Many people find it hard to position the Green Party on the old political spectrum. We believe in sound fiscal management and strengthening our economy while ensuring that it is sustainable. Does that mean we are “right wing”? We believe that government must provide needed social services while protecting our environment and the rights of women, minorities and disadvantaged people. Does that make us “left wing”? We don’t think so."[2] Notably none of their leaders have backgrounds in left-wing politics or trade unionism. TFD (talk) 19:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

The affiliated Green Party of Saskatchewan however appears to be left-wing, it broke away from the socialist party which it considered too right-wing and its resolution 1998.4 says they "oppose the current capitalistic system and paradigm which exploits workers".[3] TFD (talk) 20:51, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

So, should we remove the statement that the meaning of left-wing has been expanded to include environmentalism? If you think so, then I will remove it, or you may. Rick Norwood (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Parties

It would be nice if there could be added on the page a list of historically most important and current left-wing parties, possibly grouped under different left-wing ideologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.103.74.8 (talk • contribs) 10:00, 20 January 2013

Left-wing Stop

Does anybody know what the recent creation of a redirect titled "Left-wing Stop" is all about? Rick Norwood (talk) 12:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Some animals are more equal than others...

• • In left-right politics, left-wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social equality, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality.**

Neutral POV? I think not. The Right frames its argument in favor of personal rights/responsibilities and making yourself "equal".

Under the current administration in the U.S. these roles seem to be reversed. (Truthfully, *every* left-dominated nation has *always* had a favored (predatory) class and the preyed-upon masses.)

99.5.202.164 (talk) 03:21, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

You need to provide a source that explains your opinions on right wing egalitarianism. BTW. when Farmer Jones owned Animal Farm, he did not even pretend that the animals were his equals. TFD (talk) 03:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

The libertarian Right is a minority even within the right-wing. Far more common are the right-wingers who frame their argument in terms of opposition to equality for "foreigners" or women or homosexuals. Politics makes strange bedfellows. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:28, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I consider myself on the left, but I fundamentally agree with the criticism. This is a bad article from the get-go, based on an essentialist, reductionist definition of leftism as "social equality". This definition is inconsistent and inaccurate; for example, environmentalism or pacifism are traditionally aligned with left-wing politics, but neither causes are about "equality" per se. Historically, leftism has tended to refer to political movements committed to reform and revolution (French Revolution, progressivism, feminism, marxism, etc), whereas right-wing movements have tended towards resistance to change, or a belief in a "natural order". Even so-called rightwing reform movements have tended to frame their reformist agenda in terms of a return to an imagined originary state (like the Tea Party or the Nazi volkisch movement). In the very least, a better lede would avoid the essentialist definition, and simply define leftism as "an umbrella-term that encompasses a variety of political movements..."" etc etc, or something along those lines. --72.208.60.225 (talk) 10:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

You make a good point. Today, protection of the environment or opposition to war are considered "leftist", though they would not have had that lable at the time of the French Revolution. To some extent, there seems to have been a shift from Right = upper class, Left = working class, to Right = conformist, Left = idealist. But to put that into the article, you need a reference. Better, several references. Rick Norwood (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

While environmentalism and pacifism are stances more often held by left-wing people they are not inherently left-wing stances, and one can hold these views and be right wing or apolitical. That is true for many issues, such as free trade. Whether they are left or right, depends on whether they tend to increase or decrease equality. Hence free trade in the 1911 Canadian election was left-wing because it allowed farmers to buy cheap imported equipment and sell their grain without tariffs, while in 1988 it was right-wing because it meant workers losing jobs. TFD (talk) 16:51, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

two quick replies to Rick Norwood and TFD...both of your replies to my point underscore the basic argument that I'm trying to make: the terms "left" and "right" can't be essentialized, since both terms are historical and relative...the definitions change with the times. To essentialize "equality" as definitively left-wing is an ahistorical, reductionist claim. Frankly, it seems to me that it would make more sense, as I've suggested, to make the lede more general and open-ended--something along the lines that leftism constitutes "an umbrella-term that encompasses a variety of political movements...". That is a more accurate claim then merely "left = equality" since even plenty of right-wing political movements embrace equality; for example, right-leaning libertarians believe in concepts like 'equality-before-the-law' and 'equality of opportunity'. --75.172.164.197 (talk) 23:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)