Posts by Isaac Freeman
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to BenWilson,
if argument ensues about the right to use one term, the only way forward, really, is to use a new term, one devoid of existing connotation preferably, so that it has a strict meaning that can be agreed on.
Mi parolas Esperanton malbone.
If Left and Right aren't productive terms for discussing politics, I think it's equally problematic to go to the opposite extreme and insist on extreme rigour. Politics isn't mathematics, and much as I'm attracted to the idea of graphing pretty much anything, I don't think we can expect people to think that way in practice.
Apart from that, which I'm sure wasn't what you were saying anyway, I am in general agreement with you, sir.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Islander,
Maybe among squirrelly academic types, but not among the disadvantaged and thoroughly turned off voters who compromise my whanau (of whom all voted, including the 18yr olds,)
No disrespect to your whanau, nor to anyone else who identifies as Left. I'm with you on the substance.
However, I'd say it's precisely when we use vague terms that we create pointless squirrelly debates about semantics, or we talk past each other. It's hard to talk in a straightforward way with someone who mentally classifies everything you say into Left or Right, and dismisses whichever isn't their side.
I'm perfectly happy to keep multidimensional graphs as an academic curiosity. I'm only advocating for well-tested words that describe general political values: liberal, conservative, egalitarian, nationalist, green, authoritarian. You can just about always make a position clearer by substituting one of those instead of Left or Right.
I believe it also has a practical side-effect: it makes your position stronger, because it connects it with values that are harder to dismiss. "We're the party of the Left" gets you nowhere with people who think of themselves as Right. "We're the party of freedom, equality and fair play" is saying something they have to reckon with.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to BenWilson,
Of course Left/Right is a very broad brush, that omits huge detail.
I agree with pretty much everything you say about multi-dimensional politics.
Except.
I'm not sure Left/Right is sufficiently well-defined to count as a political axis. On many issues, it's much easier to identify a conservative position, a liberal position, a progressive position or a green position than a left or a right position.
Not so long ago, Roger Douglas was left, now he's considered right. Richard Nixon was right, although he'd be considered left today. Libertarians are far right, whereas anarchists are far left. Stalin's Communist Party was far left, but Hitler's National Socialist Party was far right.
On one dimension, left/right, in very broad sweeps, and defining the left/right dichotomy by the relative positions of the two GOPs, that is a correct assessment.
Perhaps you don't mean "define" as literally as I'm taking it, but I think this is precisely where we've got to in popular political discourse: Left is what Labour says and Right is what National says (insert two largest parties for other countries). Thus we get the kind of confusion we've had in this thread.
I'm not saying that there's some perfect vocabulary for politics where everyone fits perfectly into an assigned box. It's complicated. But that's precisely why we need more than two adjectives. It's like trying to talk about race with only "black" and "white", or religion with only "Christian" and "Muslim".
To return belatedly to the distant origins of this thread, I'd propose that the challenge for Labour now is to find a way to express its political values that doesn't use the word "Left". Not because Left is bad, but because it's meaningless.
-
Hard News: News media meets new media:…, in reply to Lilith __,
If we could eradicate harassment and threatening behaviour, we would still be left with the question of how to build better online communities and more meaningful connections. That was all I was saying.
Fair enough. It sounds like you're thinking of a much lower level of nastiness than I was.
-
Left and Right are perfectly simple political concepts. The Right (or Conservatives) are for maintaining the power of the monarch and the church. The Left (or Whigs) are for expanding political franchise to the professional classes.
There are no other factions, and no other issues. Rumours of a third political movement representing the labouring classes are clearly nonsensical.
-
Hard News: News media meets new media:…, in reply to Lilith __,
I don’t think internet trolling is analogous to the hate crimes, arson and murder, practiced by the KKK.
True, but a perfect analogy is perfectly useless. If one thing provides a frame for thinking about the other, that's all we can expect.
And there are plenty of trolls who either use their own names or whose identities are well known.
What's common is that the abusers believe that they're unlikely to be held personally responsible for their behaviour. KKK members have to disguise themselves to achieve this, whereas online trolls are protected by distance.
However, I think the key point is the deindividuation of the recipient of the abuse.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Lew Stoddart,
Labour is not the Greens, for whom an influential niche position is a significant achievement. It is, or ought to be, a mass movement.
I'll bite.
I'd suggest that one of the difficulties facing Labour is a lingering attachment to previous generations when it was a mass movement. The ghosts of past glories sit in judgement of the current generation, and find everything they do wanting.
Reconnecting with the past is useful inasmuch as it helps people identify their values, but it can also lead to a cargo cult mentality of trying to reconstruct the old mass movement instead of serving a new one. -
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Damn, and I hoping he’d vow to crush Labour’s enemies, to see them driven before him, and to hear the lamentations of their women. :)
Seated on his throne of skulls, gazing listlessly as the last surviving members of his own caucus are brought forward to kneel before him. "They are your enemies", whispers his sinister Grand Vizier, "They must pay for their crimes against you". "They are my enemies", he repeats, "They must pay."
Erm... just riffing here. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
-
Hard News: News media meets new media:…, in reply to Lilith __,
WHAT?! Now you tell me.
Or... do I?
WOoooooooOoOoOooooo.
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to ,
Is it left wing politics to liberalize alcohol law. Including the lowering of the drinking age, allowing heavy advertising on television, marketing in supermarkets, and to reduce funding for drug and alcohol treatment clinics, forcing most of them to close. Or is that right?
Mu. The labels are not of use here.