View Full Version : Is there much difference between Left and Right.
I Stumbled Upon this neat website. Check it out if you like:
Left vs Right (World) | David McCandless & Stefanie Posavec | Information Is Beautiful (http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/leftvright_world.html)
So after having a look at all the different attributes and characteristics between the Left and the Right, I believe that there is to some extent.
Though in some instances there seem to be.
There are similiarities between society and culture as per the website.
and of course there are also fundamental differences too that you can see.
Amazing presentation, seems I can now more understand older (then me) people from my country who talk how good they lived their lives when country was ruled by communism. Maybe there was more then just nostalgia.
I definetly incline to that philosophy as well, but the "implementation" of it usually sux, and some orthodox understandings of it should be changed, but ideology has good roots, good basis.
hey, SealLion, nice find :biggrin:
graphically very appealing & well done, but as one reads the contents it becomes obvious that this presentation serves as leftist propaganda since they are presented as reasonable pacifist caring urban people (derog. flower power people), whereas the others are described as militant elitist rural conservatives (derog. hillbillies)
on the other hand, if one looks closely at what are the results of their specific politics (judging by the presentation there should be a significant difference in results, right?) while being in charge (majority of votes) ie. as the governing side, it looks like that in the end they pretty much accomplish the same, which is quite paradoxal when considering their so called 'differences' - so in conclusion, either they are not that different at all, or they both work for someone else (or both, to some extent)
seems I can now more understand older (then me) people from my country who talk how good they lived their lives when country was ruled by communism.
usually such nostalgia isn't based on reality (personal maybe but not national/general) so probably many of the complainers had a hard time adjusting to capitalism or have had special privileges/positions stripped off as capitalism entered
communism (or more accurately socialism) may have had some good ideas, but eventually every implementation of it failed miserably ending up in abuse & exploitation - capitalism is a more resilient system but, as we are aware of, the abuse & exploitation is still there - one might ask himself: maybe its all about the people (in control) that have no real interest in improving society but in accomplishing their own goals (or those of their 'masters')
some are saying that these (revolutionary/militant) theories (both left & right) have the same origin (secret societies) aimed to divide & conquer people
Amazing presentation, seems I can now more understand older (then me) people from my country who talk how good they lived their lives when country was ruled by communism. Maybe there was more then just nostalgia.
when we get old we will also say that before life was better like all people that are getting old say that,you know why,because you where just younger,nothing else,i think it has nothing to do with Communism,who was the President,what cars exist then.....
I wouldn't know, but can't completely agree with you. I heard that in times of socialistic Yugoslavia it was much easier to live, everyone got a job fairly easy, there were many actions to encourage employment, there couldn't be 11 candidates for president, who spend millions for their campaign (as happening today) while its such high unemplyment rate and when we have to pay for schoolbooks for kids in school and pay enormous money for colleges. Things before were simpler, country propserous, and maybe globally more fair.
I wouldn't know, but can't completely agree with you. I heard that in times of socialistic Yugoslavia it was much easier to live, everyone got a job fairly easy, there were many actions to encourage employment, there couldn't be 11 candidates for president, who spend millions for their campaign (as happening today) while its such high unemplyment rate and when we have to pay for schoolbooks for kids in school and pay enormous money for colleges. Things before were simpler, country propserous, and maybe globally more fair.
What an interesting opinion here. I really like that.
I think that your right shadowww about some things having been different. Easier to live as there probably isn't that much competition. Schooling is provided for and so forth. Maybe things were cheaper and most of the things that were paid for came from the government via it's tax collection.
I heard that in times of socialistic Yugoslavia it was much easier to live, everyone got a job fairly easy, there were many actions to encourage employment, there couldn't be 11 candidates for president, who spend millions for their campaign (as happening today) while its such high unemplyment rate and when we have to pay for schoolbooks for kids in school and pay enormous money for colleges. Things before were simpler, country propserous, and maybe globally more fair.
maybe you also heard about communist dictatorship, post-war crimes, mass executions, political/economic exile, torture/oppression/imprisonment/murders of people with different opinions, violation of different freedoms (speech, religion, expression,...), exploitation of gullible believers in the name of trans-ethnic solidarity & unity in the same country - all these examples show a different perspective considering easy life and so on.
as for getting jobs easy, did you know that at that time working positions were heavily oversaturated, meaning that for one job that would normally need one person to work on, there were roughly 3-7 persons employed at that time - thats why one would have a feeling that there is not much work to do and while one person was working others were fuc*ing around and having a blast - such employment measures were obviously not sustainable so the government tried to keep the illusion of prosperity as long as they could by getting large credits from foreign financial organizations, until this artificially created bubble burst leading to mass unemployment, leaving unsuspecting people wondering what the hell was going on and ultimately blaming the new (capitalist) system for the outcome
as for the president, obviously in a dictatorship regime you don't have options to choose from
afaik there are some actions to provide free (but used) books for lower school levels... education (for all education levels, including government supported colleges, ie. the college majority) is still basically free of yearly/half-yearly payments
so, with some real facts, things look quite different, rendering statements about former simplicity/fairness/prosperity for what they really are: misinformation, ignorance or propaganda
First, I do not look things as black and white, because they just aren't. I was 4 years old when SFRY collapsed so I can't say that I know how things in socialistic regime were first-hand.
All I have is my analysis and opinion from both history resources and first hand tellings from family/friends. And I consider myself pretty open minded when comes to that. Meaning, I'm well aware of bad sides of communists regime, not trying to deny them at all.
maybe you also heard about communist dictatorship, post-war crimes, mass executions, political/economic exile, torture/oppression/imprisonment/murders of people with different opinions, violation of different freedoms (speech, religion, expression,...), exploitation of gullible believers in the name of trans-ethnic solidarity & unity in the same country - all these examples show a different perspective considering easy life and so on.
Indeed I have heard. There was lot of that in the past century, as we know. Two world wars, conflict of ideologies, much ppl were innocent victims no matter to which side they belonged. We can't just point finger to communists and say they are guilty for all these crimes. I think we would both agree how much all of these things you mentioned fascistic ideology did, and on much larger scale. Because I'm most familiar of socialism in ex. Yugosloslavia and that this post wouldn't grow way too big I will limit myself to comment on situation only in "my" area.
Put yourself in a perspcective of Josip Broz Tito. His ideology was to unite all South(Jugo) Slavic people. So he did it, and it went quite well, it gave country period of peace and ppl where happy. Nothing bad in that. Yet. Now as time passes, certain differencies between united Yugoslavian people emerges. Some people felt neglected, and felt they don't have all rights as others. Also nacionalism based on history of each republics startred to spark out. People wanted change. USSR was about to break apart, and Yugoslavia was among last enclaves of socialism in Europe. And here we get to the core of problem. Would you, as a communist dictator with your idea allow yourself to just watch how your dream (unity of ppl) collapses in front of your eyes. I bet not. So he did all what was in his power to try preserve his order, which included all crimes mentioned by you. I do not approve all what he did (Bleiburg massacre) but you must understand that he did much of good things too. And we can't judge someone just by his mistakes, flaws, and wrongdoings. Need to see big picture of it.
as for getting jobs easy, did you know that at that time working positions were heavily oversaturated, meaning that for one job that would normally need one person to work on, there were roughly 3-7 persons employed at that time - thats why one would have a feeling that there is not much work to do and while one person was working others were fuc*ing around and having a blast - such employment measures were obviously not sustainable so the government tried to keep the illusion of prosperity as long as they could by getting large credits from foreign financial organizations, until this artificially created bubble burst leading to mass unemployment, leaving unsuspecting people wondering what the hell was going on and ultimately blaming the new (capitalist) system for the outcome
Thats not burden of socialism. Look at Japan today. Pure capitalistic country. And thay have exactly same situation as you described. I don't know how much you know about them but I'll tell you they employ people for just freaking everything, I wouldnot know what % of their jobs is practicly useless but its pretty high percent you can belive me on that. Its almost bizarre from persepctive of us, you would know if you ever visited Japan. :D
afaik there are some actions to provide free (but used) books for lower school levels... education (for all education levels, including government supported colleges, ie. the college majority) is still basically free of yearly/half-yearly payments
Yea, and this actions were not started by goverment at all, at least not in my country. Currently there is students here who demand (complealy legitimate) free schoolarfees for all students, regardless of their grades. Which is totally OK. Hell if one Bulgaria can have no schoolar fees, why Croatia wouldn't too? Its not that big burden on economy of country. Its just policy of our politicians who spend money on different things (primary things where they can get fast profit).
Sorry for a longer post, but I think it is worthy.
We can't just point finger to communists and say they are guilty for all these crimes.
since you were originally talking about the socialist/communist era, thats what i referred to
Josip Broz Tito. His ideology was to unite all South(Jugo) Slavic people
actually his ideology was of marxistic origins primarily oriented towards establishing a ruling/governing class that originated from the industrial working class - the unification of people was a continuation of the first Yu politics, which intentions were to create a large country under serbian dominance (afaik he wasn't aware of this until later, but chose not to interfere as it would disrupt the constructed union and greatly reduce the Yu stability/power) which is the real core of subsequent problems
Now as time passes, certain differencies between united Yugoslavian people emerges. Some people felt neglected, and felt they don't have all rights as others. Also nacionalism based on history of each republics startred to spark out. People wanted change.
these differences didn't emerge just like that, they were always there, just suppressed or tricked into a dormant state by the new ideology that promised all kinds of benefits from such a union, but as time passed it started to show its ugly nature and people naturally wanted change since they were deceived
Would you, as a communist dictator with your idea allow yourself to just watch how your dream (unity of ppl) collapses in front of your eyes.
i guess it goes against the dictator's manual, but if he was wise enough, he would have allowed all the ex-yu nations to form independent states and thus all the future bloodshed could have been avoided - just like that, with a simple dictator's order (and you can rest assured he had enough power to do it if he wanted to)
So he did all what was in his power to try preserve his order, which included all crimes mentioned by you.
well, don't know how any dictator can be exculpated for his crimes (and there are usually many), so i won't even try
Look at Japan today. Pure capitalistic country. And thay have exactly same situation as you described. I don't know how much you know about them but I'll tell you they employ people for just freaking everything, I wouldnot know what % of their jobs is practicly useless but its pretty high percent you can belive me on that.
its not the same, they may have weird jobs, but that doesn't mean they don't have anything to do, i might even add that the japanese government surely isn't taking financial credits to support their employment system
free schoolarfees for all students
i would say that if a country wants to have educated people it should allow/support for a free educational system (partly compulsory, partly optional), otherwise its possible that the education becomes a privilege of the wealthy which is an elitist concept condemned by the majority in a democratic country
Every socialistic ideology has its roots in marxism by its definition. I mostly agree on the rest, don't want to go into more details as I'm not that much interested in the history and who exploited who. I do however know that union of south slavic ppl is utopia, and will not happen due no matter which ideology lays behind it. And there is too much blood spilled for these reasons already, so burden of the past is too heavy. At least until people do not evolve to some extent to forget their differences and see they are all same people.
Czechoslovakia break apart in peace, I wish that happened here too, but what already happened can't be changed, so lets just look optimistically into future.
I can't agree with you on Japan, their debt and external deficit is really, really enormous. And their economy is very shaken by it and will not sustain them for much upcoming years. Just got this data from wikipedia: their public dept is 176.2% of their GDP in 2006 (and that percent just raises up) + they have $2.2 trillion of external debt (as of june, '09).
I'm not economy expert by any means, in fact I care very little for it, but this data sounds very bad for them.
I do however know that union of south slavic ppl is utopia, and will not happen due no matter which ideology lays behind it. And there is too much blood spilled for these reasons already, so burden of the past is too heavy. At least until people do not evolve to some extent to forget their differences and see they are all same people.
i agree on the utopia part, but considering the possibility of future unification, it may be closer than we think, this time in the form of EU, and there have been many warnings that the EU is not that benevolent at all, on the contrary - it may prove to be a tool of enslavement/exploitation by the (international) multinational or financial powers
generally, all nations should have a right to be independent or to form loose unions that have an inherent option to break apart if the union shows inadequate - until such a right is exercised throughout the world, there will still be wars/revolutions on a national level/basis (ofc this also means adequate minority rights, since no country can be 100% of just one nationality)
as for differences, imo it is good (actually essential) to have differences between nationalities and ultimately between all people, as i think diversity is an enrichment of the human species (you can compare it to biodiversity if you like), so i don't support tendencies to make people change in such way that they are 'all the same' (ie. to 'normalize' them), now this shouldn't be confused with equality (freedoms, rights,...) - the real challenge is to keep one's differences but still manage to live in 'harmony' with others
I can't agree with you on Japan, their debt and external deficit is really, really enormous.
well, we would have to firstly see how is this debt created (seems to be a worldwide common practice, with usa probably leading as a country with the largest foreign debt) and whether it can be connected to their employment system
The japanese depts are connected to their high import-rates and not to their employment-system.
The japanese have to buy everything from abroad, and can only export high-technology. When nobody buys stuff, the japanese still have to import many things for their normal life, like meat, copper or steel. Even lard. ;-)
Of course they import much, that's nothing new. They also export much as well. I never tried to deny any of that.
There is various reasons why their economy suffers and we can't point to just single one (imports/exports).
But my primary idea was to counter this statement from slikrapid:
its not the same, they may have weird jobs, but that doesn't mean they don't have anything to do, i might even add that the japanese government surely isn't taking financial credits to support their employment system
This financial credits is actually part of debt that Japan has, isn't it.
I agree with slikrapid on differences between nationalities part of his post so I didn't comment anything about that, and I don't have any significant opinion on European Union. It brings us both good and bad in its package. Croatia still didn't become part so I can't witness any changes yet. But country tries really hard to fulfill all prerequisites which can't be bad thing, to bring some order in the chaos. But when (if) referendum comes I'll vote against joinig EU but that will not matter much. As old saying says (I guess): You can't swim upstream :D
It's amazing as an introduction for those who don't live in the US and therefore aren't familiar with it, but beyond the surface it's full of stereotypes. Now I'm not saying I could do better, I'm saying that an unbiased comparison is just impossible.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.