NorthernGent
Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: dcnovice
Firm made an interesting distinction between idealism and realism, but I don't think either -ism automatically fits either side. The right often idealizes traditional family arrangements, individuals' abilities to transcend circumstances, and America's sense of mission. The left, for its part, idealizes economic equality and multicultural cooperation. The right probably looks more realistically at how markets actually function and the role that personal choice/responsibility has in shaping one's life. The left is probably more realistic about the barriers that face many have-nots and the social/environmental costs of capitalism.
Dc, I agree, Firmhand was getting down to it, but the connection to left and right still needs some explaining. I don't think there is a tidy fit of idealism and realism into the left and right (which I don't think FH was saying, anyway). As an example, I display both - similar to FH actually - idealism tempered by realism, but I very much nail my colours to the mast and identify with the left (not that you will have noticed), but not because of policy - there are many areas of policy and practicality where I disagree with socialists, but, at my core, I hold values which they also hold.
In terms of your point on big government, I think it's a popular misconception that the left rigidly champion big government. The need for big government in Britain is borne out of centuries of exploitation. If the day comes when there is something approaching a level playing-field in society, then I, and many on the left in Britain, would be calling for the government to step back into the shadows and concentrate on law and justice. In Britain, the left see government as being an instrument to create a balance where we all get a share of the pie. Once that balance is achieved and entrenched in society, there will be no need, or desire, to champion big government.
In terms of getting to the bottom of values, it may be beneficial to consider why one person places primary emphasis on the individual and another person on the group. As a starting point, at their core, the left value companionship, community, friendship, respect etc and this leads them to believe that human development is the product of co-operation. In turn, this leads to the belief that everyone should get a reward for the nation's collective endeavour, without which the individual could not prosper.
As a side note, it's worth mentioning something on the market. It is another misconception that the left want to overburden the economy with regulation. I fully support private enterprise...I mean, I have worked in finance for about 12 years and 11 of those were in the private sector, so I understand the need for enterprise and innovation, and that these need room to breathe rather than being stifled. Where I depart from many on the right is a no-holds barred, survival of the fittest free-market. There is a balance to be had between economic growth and social provision. The two go hand in hand to create a healthy, prosperous society. Allowing a free-for-all is not healthy for society - back to the collective versus individiual point.
One not so fast reply deserved another.......cheers.
< Message edited by NorthernGent -- 3/24/2007 4:12:52 AM >
_____________________________
I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.
Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.
|
RE: The left and the right...... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread