Right and Left - a psychological, and personal perspective.

[David]

[sorry for the long read - I just wrote this for my blog, and thought I'd put it here for people to discuss... cheers ]

I've always been fascinated by different political ideologies, trying to understand why we choose them. Undoubtedly, the beliefs of our parents, peers, teachers, and other notable figures have a great influence during our adolescence, but after a while we develop our own ideas, and our own individual world views.

So, what leads one to be an anarchist, or a conservative, or a moderate, or a libertarian? Surely, above and beyond our upbringings, our personalities must play a large factor in this.

I guess there's nobody I know better than myself, so I make a good example for this purpose. I cared little for politics until the age of about 14 or 15. I came from a fairly politically conservative environment - my Mum fits pretty well in the mould of a conservative christian liberal/national voter, while my Dad leans further to the right as a former One Nation supporter, and assisted in the local campaign back in 1998, somewhat to my Mum's dismay.

At the time when I started exploring political ideas, I was introduced to a very black and white picture of right and left - an 'us' of conservatives, Christian fundamentalists, Republicans, John Howard and Andrew Bolt, and a 'them' of Labor, the Greens, pro-choicers and Karl Marx.

However, soon enough my (practically non-existent, anyhow) 'faith' in Christianity had disappeared, and with it went a lot of my preconceived views. Why exactly, was it wrong for people to be in same-sex relationships? Was the death penalty really an appropriate method of punishment? I still very much identified myself as a conservative, but gradually, I found myself identifying less and less with traditional conservative ideas.

Now I find myself, for all intents and purposes, a centrist - whatever that means. I still hold strong views on some subjects that might seem appropriate for a conservative (such as abortion), but I no longer see myself as having any partisan identifications, nor do I (in my own mind, or through my beliefs) identify myself as a conservative or a right-winger. Indeed, rather than the 'us' or 'them' world of my early teenage years, I now see many, many arguments, all deserving of and requiring consideration. I also see that not everybody really fits within such easily definable moulds such as 'left' or 'right', but if they do, they often align themselves with a specific ideology or political party.

So then, why is it that such people choose these sides to place themselves on? Is it, as I mused a few years back, a division between idealism and realism? Or, as those on the left might counter, a division between selflessness and selfishness?

Of course, I no longer believe it to be nearly that simple. However, I do believe that there must be simple human traits, qualities and emotions that are more dominant on either side of politics. Returning to myself - I know that my journey from a conservative to a moderate has been accompanied with a growth in experience, an increased thirst for knowledge and analysis, and perhaps most importantly, large doses of skepticism and cynicism. Are these traits more related to the 'left-wing', and is this a trend that will continue until I directly associate myself with the left side of politics, or is this as 'left' as I'm ever going to get (keeping in mind the famous Churchill quote, "If you are not a liberal by age 20, you have no heart; if you are not a conservative by age 40, you have no brain")? I honestly don't know, but all I know right now is that I avoid such labels and share an equal skepticism for both sides of politics.

Of course, another factor to consider is that perceptions of left and right change dramatically over time. A few centuries ago, Britain's right/left divide seems to have been quite squarely centred on the issue of monarchy, and yet in the last decade, democracy has been the catch-cry of America's neo-conservatives. Similarly, issues such as women's suffrage and racial equality were the domain of radicals once upon a time, but now are concepts generally accepted by all but the fringes of society.

There's the saying that all types make a world, and I have considered many times in the past that perhaps a left and a right are necessary in any functioning society - a right (forgive the blatant stereotyping for a second) to ensure the smooth running and structural enforcement of the society, and a left to provide its soul, its art, and its ability to progress. Of course, I could be completely wrong, or attributing qualities that are actually present on either side of politics.

In the end, however, I cannot see the left/right divide as a good thing. Frankly, I see it as, just like religion, culture, language and race, yet another way for people to isolate themselves in small groups. It is a shame that these 'us and them' mentalities emerge, when really, politics and philosophy should be areas that encourage free, frank and honest discussion with the goal of understanding. I hope that that is how I spend the remainder of my life - not a mouthpiece for another person's beliefs, or a devotee of a preconceived ideology. Rather, I want to always be open to any argument, any debate, and any opinion - not being conservative or liberal, tory or whig, republican or democrat, right or left. Just me.

[Donny]

Good for you, David.

Sounds like you're one of my mob - an individualist.

To wholly become a 'this' or a 'that' and commit yourself to it, potentially restricts your learning horizons.

I'm not a Buddhist but I rather like the idea of walking the middle road and learning from both sides. There may be aspects of the Whitlams, Menzies, Keatings, Howards, Churchills, Ghandis etc. you admire without agreeing with their politics.

I liken my experience with music to life/politics/ideology. There were certain genres of music I just wouldn't listen to so, as I've come to learn, I was missing out on some great sounds. When I hear a new song or tune now, the only criteria I use is, 'Do I like it?'

[Zakal]

Well said David, and a good read.

I think the last paragraph hits on what pisses me off the most about the 'divide' as you aptly call it. Like when one of my more right-wing conservative friends makes some stupid comment completley dismissing the ideas of one of our left wing friends purely because its "just another lot of leftist hippy garbage"....and its just as bad when some ingorant "leftist" makes some equally moronic sweeping generalisation about some particular "rightist" idea.

It just seems to evince a profound lack of ability to entertain a thought or idea that you dont necessarily agree with. What is that Aristotle quote? Something about it being the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it?

Both "sides" need a healthy dose of that philosophy.

Actually whats even worse than that is the perverted logic that leads one to the conclusion that "im right, therefore i must be correct" (no pun intended...perhaps would have made more sense to just word it from the 'left' perspective in this instance) or vice versa.

I simply do not see what is so wrong with one person having ideas and beliefs that are a mix of both the 'right' and the 'left'? I know I do (much to the dismay of my right or left friends depending on the idea i disagree with them over hehe). Everything on its merits, not just how it matches the pre-conceived tennets of Political Ideology X.

[David]

Thanks for the replies guys.

[Dale61]

I 'dress' to the left.

Where does that put me?

[Piethagoras' Theorem]

[John Wren]

[bwphantom]

[David]

Why do I have a feeling my thread is being completely derailed

[sherrife]

[David]

lol, the edit cleared things up a bit cheers.

Regardless, I can't disagree with your post more strongly. All paradigms are worth discussing and debating, simply because real people have them - not 'bad people' or disgusting people, but real people like you and me. Who, for whatever reason, have come to these conclusions.

Sure, you don't have to be friends with them. That's your choice. But there's a difference between that and judging their ideologies to be worthless, because frankly, that is exactly what I'm talking about in the first post. It acts as a divide between you and others, a wall that prevents discourse. I don't think that's a good thing.

We shouldn't just tolerate debate and flow of ideas... we should actively encourage it.

[Zakal]

One of the biggest problems with the "us" vs "them" mentality is that it simply polarises people on issues that should be approached rationally, making them less likely to take logical steps because of the "loss of face" aspect in admitting their "side" has completely dropped the ball.

On this issue i think the left feel the negative effects far more often given the sheer number of nations with 'right' or 'centre-right' governments. Its pretty hard to gain support for logical 'left-leaning' policies when there is such ridiculous polarisation. The same is true for logical 'right-leaning' policies under 'left' governments. Dicken's Paris in Tale of Two Cities is classic satirical example of such an environment.

Im all for calling a spade a spade, but 'party politics' is just uncessary and helps noone but those with a void to fill by belonging to something.

[sherrife]

I couldn't disagree with YOU more strongly.

I don't want to debate with committed Nazis, I want them under house arrest, for life. Reasonable conditions, and certainly no torture, but also no freedom to spread their destructive ideas.

I don't want to debate with sexists, racists or homophobes, I want them to be silenced by the strength of the open-minded majority.

Some ideas are just wrong.

[Zakal]

[bwphantom]