On our scale here in the UK, Stein is center left, Clinton is center right.
Clinton doesn't believe in free adult education, free healthcare etc. All things we consider center.
🇳🇱
Scales are absolute, not relative. You are probably thinking torry vs labour not right vs left.
Most of the Tories like single payer healthcare. They are to the left of Hilary Clinton. Yes it is relative. I don't see Hilary as any kind of "Left".
Single payer healthcare isnt on the left rigbt access unless you specifically mean tax paid forced health care (universal) which usually is the case with single payer, but that need not be the case.
Moreover a person can be right on some issues yet overall left. Hilary is center left on a erage. Some issues will be right sone will be left.
But universal tax paid healthcare iz left in both the us and uk, to emphasize the fact that the spectrum is absolute.
You completely missed the point I made. It doesnt matter if there isnt a single one i the UK.
As i already stated while universal healthcare is clearly a leftist issue that people who are in the center or on the right can still adopt it. Even if everyone on the more right end of the spectrum is adopting sone left principle doesnt make them left so long as overall the principles thry embody average to be on the right.
That said, being an absolute scale, the UK is fsr more weighted to the left side of tbe spectrum than the right.
Yup all correct, and the reason you can make statements like "thr usa leans right" is because the left right scale is absoljte, not relative. If it were relative to every coubtry then no coubtry would lean left or right, it would be relative to the coubtrys perspective.
@freemo @georgetakei This does not refute any of my points.
It refutes only one of your points, the only one ive disagreed with... namely the claim that the left right scale is relative when in fact its absolute.
Nope.
Here are her left leaning views:
* significantly higher tax on rich than middle class (not flat tax)
* Wants overturn of citizens united (allows corperate investing of large sums into elections)
* Supports heavy sanctions/regulations to end climate change.
* Government paid early vhildhood education and child care.
*Stronger restrictions on the ability to buy a gun
* Supports the ACA (tax paid healthcare and free healthcare for thr poor)
Etc
Now while she may be weak in some of the above issues, leadi g to a closer tilt towards center than other leftists, she is very clearly showing a pattern of center-left and not right.
In fact you have listed a single right leaning issue she supports, you only listed left leaning issues she is weak on. Which woukd push her towards the center not the right.
In the developed world these are not considered socialist or "left".
They are just considered rational.
We all have proper gun regulation and education for children, and regulations against big money in politics etc.
In which European country would these be considered left?
Wbo said anythi g about socialist?
Just because something is rational doesnt preclude it from being left or right. There is no european coubtry where those principles are right principles. Anyobe who ubderstands the terms in europe would recogize them as left principles. Though some may be seen as left leaning principles all politicians on both sides agree to, they are still clearly left principles.
In virtually every
Almost all right politicians across Europe would consider those to be their principles.
No one in mainstream politics is out here saying we should unregulate guns or stop paying for children's education.
If you think those are "left" principles your spectrum is skewed to the right.
You keep missing the point. Europe is very strongly left leaning. So much so ghat no one is very far to the lrft at all. Those on thr right are still fairly close to center. As such the most right leaning politicians adopt many left leaning principles.
You have to try to listen to what is being said rather than just repeating yourself and ignoring the conversation.
I will say it again, please try to take the time to ubderstand what im saying if you wish to discuss..
A principle is either left leaning or right based on if it is designed to prioritize collectism vs individualis. Wrt to social justice and rights. If something is collectivist or individualist has **nothing** to do with how many politicians adopt it or not... 100% of people on the right can adopt leftist principles. That doesnt make the principle any less leftist, it just pushes those right politicians closer to the center on an absokute scale for having adopted it.
As such in thr Uk the right is bunched up much closer to center with extreme right nearly nonexistant. Likewise the left is spread out more and extends farther into the extreme left.
It stems from the French revolution, the terms left and right refer to the side of parliament the revolutionaries (left) sat on as opposed to the royalists (right)
It is not about individualism vs collectivism.
It is about capital / feudalism / elites vs the working populace.
Contrary to your definition, individuality and collectivism can be applied differently across the spectrum.
"Supporting the troops in a war abroad for oil" is not an individualistic principle.
Where words stem from does not dictate what they mean today. Words evolve and their meaning becomes detached from the origins.
There is certainly opinion on how much something will fall under left or right. It is absolute scale but still opinion based in constructing it. That said it is still unrelated to how popular or common a thing is (which would make it relative)
Also...
> "Supporting the troops in a war abroad for oil" is not an individualistic principle.
I specifically said right vs left is about social justice and personal rights and is divided individualistic vs collectivism.
So you are correct that is neither a right nor left principle since it doesnt deal with civil rights. It would however fall on the other spectrum of liberal vs authoritative.
So you claim the Republicans are both authoritarian AND individualistic. How does that work?
Yes. For example they support guns. That gives the individual ultimate freedom and responsibility even if it puts the collective at risk.
They dont beleive in the rich paying for the poors healthcare, leavibg each individual to sort it out on their own.
They are authoritative , much as the democrats are, in the sense that thry believe problems shoukd be solved by big governments with lots of rules and restrictions to help preserve those individual freedoms (the dems do the same but in an effort to preserve the collective ideal)
The liberal (non authoritative) right woukd be libertarians. They too beleive in the individual above the collective but feel this should be accomplished with minimal govt intervention.
There's no ideology or principle behind what they do. Republican pols are faggots who bottom for Jews and lord it over us plebs as bitchy, petty queens, living lives of luxury as society burns around them. Simple as.
@freemo @georgetakei
The US is slanted to the right.
Your politicians are sponsored by corporate interests.
They put corporations and markets above people.
Including Hilary Clinton.
Voting for a corporate stooge because they managed to find a worse corporate stooge is not much of a choice.