Who came up with all of this Left-Right nonsense anyhow?

[johnlucas]

Since my last http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4500452">thread was locked, I'll talk upon a point I made in a reply there.

Left-Right. This political spectrum everyone keeps going on about. Who came up with this nonsense? Who decided that all political positions were placed on some one-dimensional line that could be turned and tuned with a radio dial? Or the two-dimensional plane with plot points graphed out where someone, everyone keeps moving the x-axis and y-axis to find the almighty holy "center"?

I think this is a bunch of foolishness and have thought so for a long time. The way you think is flavored by the way you speak (or text or write, etc.). When we think of everything in some left-right dichotomy we forget about the nuts and bolts of achieving a goal. Is the goal sound? Is it worthy to enact to completion? What are its benefits and do those benefits plant the seeds for future beneficial things? What are the drawbacks and what can countermeasure/neutralize the drawbacks? How can you fund this goal and its completion and what plans do you have? Stuff like that.

I'd rather not look at Left & Right, I'd rather look at Right & Wrong. Correct & Incorrect. To every problem there is an solution. To every question there is an answer. EVERYBODY is not right and often times with human beings MOST PEOPLE are not right on a problem. I'd rather see convictions with regards to the benefits of a person as well as the populace he/she is a member of and a thinking mindful way of achieving measures rooted in those convictions. What is right? What is wrong? For what's wrong how can we solve it? For what's right how can we maintain it?

Is it right for old people who no longer have the physical ability to work like a young person to NOT have a fund to live on as reward for contributing so much to the civilization in their youth? To be funded enough to live comfortably enough to contribute socially what he/she can to others in old age? Is it right to care for and respect the livelihood of our elders?

If it is, then why do some people try to break the program set up to enact this simple goal? If these people exist, why would you cooperate with their aims which are targeted to undoing that goal? And why would this even be a hard dilemma for you? Would you speak out and simply remark in all public towards those types of people that "You are wrong and it is wrong!" and mean it?

Left and Right are directions on my Nintendo Control Pad. Right and Wrong are the conclusions I expect from my political leaders.
Enough with this Left & Right insanity. And take that Center crap with you while you're at it. Do what's right and do it well.

John Lucas

P.S.: To the moderators. If my talk of the Rev-word upset you, I'll keep that in mind for next time. I'll respect your rules but never forget that some things are far beyond political parties. I trust Obama enough to give him a chance (I voted for him enthusiastically and am very happy because of his election) but I'm tired of disappointment and lack of progress. Seen it too much in my scant 32 years of living when viewing the political process. I and many others won't stand for failure this time around. I said it here before and I'll say it again. The majority in this country are neither Democrats nor Republicans but the people who DON'T vote. There's a reason why they don't vote and if Obama does good he can shrink that number to create more Democrats or at least keep new ones from joining those ranks. Too much of the populace stops voting and democracy will not work. The 44th President has his work cut out for him. He better know what he's doing.

[Deep13]

1. French revolutionary goverment that preceded the Directory. nt

[Muttocracy]

3. ...

:toast:

[jobycom]

5. I'm thinking you weren't supposed to know the literal answer.

Shhh.

[Muttocracy]

2. One thing I learned in my European History class:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution#Legislative_Assembly_.281791.E2.80.931792.29

"...The Legislative Assembly consisted of about 165 Feuillants (constitutional monarchists) on the right, about 330 Girondists (liberal republicans) and Jacobins (radical revolutionaries) on the left, and about 250 deputies unaffiliated with either faction... "

on edit, literally where they were sitting

[stray cat]

4. Smart, productive, competent on individual issues

the labels are counterproductive as there is no true definition that holds true

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Right, Left, or Centrist, governments can be corrupt or tyrranical,

The problem, as always, is those who come to power. Whether they seize it, inherit it, or are elected to it. Once in power Lord Acton's famous axiom inevitably kicks in. Also, George Washington, in his Farewell Address warned against "factions" (political parties) and the results of having them.