Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is there a growing division and radicalisation between the left-wing and right-wing? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, there has always been a division and yes I know that "left-wing" and "right-wing" are broad and cover a lot of things, but I am talking generally here.

    I think there is a greater division and radicalisation, compared to say 10 or 20 years ago when the left and right appeared to merge into the centre and neither were particularly extreme or zealous in their respective ideologies.

    Now, we have the polar divisions of Trump vs Clinton in the US, UKIP gaining ground in the UK, Labour electing a very left-wing leadership and the general rise of the far-left and far-right across Europe, particularly in terms of protest groups.

    Views?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If only these plebians would come over to the Libertarian master race where everyone can mind their own business and get along peacefully.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    They feed off one-another. It's a positive feedback, in a way. The Trump phenomenon and the far-Right movements in Europe are partly a creation of the Left. The more the Left-wing establishment tries to control things, force political correctness onto people, suppress free speech, fail to police or acknowledge the rising threat of Islamism, and the more they antagonize the Right, the more extreme the backlash will get.

    Meanwhile, the people in the Centre feel like the few sane individuals remaining.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm a bit sick of the whole left right thing tbh,
    I value peace and liberty, oppose violence and slavery,
    government should legislate and use taxes to invest

    nough said take your other crap elsewhere
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I think the biggest growing and most important gap is the authoritarians v the cultural libertarians
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It's all about what a person can see and how they interpret it. A person will always just join a political party if they feel that they are fighting for same rights as them. The problem with the too left and too right movements is the intensity of how they want to do things.

    This is why the media is important to parties, the more cleaner your presentation to the public is, the more dirtier you can be without anyone noticing or caring.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VV Cephei A)
    If only these plebians would come over to the Libertarian master race where everyone can mind their own business and get along peacefully.
    I think you will find the left are the most peaceful group out the lot
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oliver_94)
    I think you will find the left are the most peaceful group out the lot
    As long as you agree with them if you don't they come for blood
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Yes, there has always been a division and yes I know that "left-wing" and "right-wing" are broad and cover a lot of things, but I am talking generally here.

    I think there is a greater division and radicalisation, compared to say 10 or 20 years ago when the left and right appeared to merge into the centre and neither were particularly extreme or zealous in their respective ideologies.

    Now, we have the polar divisions of Trump vs Clinton in the US, UKIP gaining ground in the UK, Labour electing a very left-wing leadership and the general rise of the far-left and far-right across Europe, particularly in terms of protest groups.

    Views?
    The fact that living standards have been stagnating, particularly in the United States, but also elsewhere in the West, since the neoliberal economic agenda was imposed on societies three to four decades ago, can partly explain why we're seeing the rise of people like Corbyn and Sanders on 'the left' and people like Trump and Farage on 'the right'.

    Many people are angry and they're disenfranchised, and those towards the 'extremes' of 'the political spectrum' are at least perceived to have answers, whereas those in 'the centre' do not. Of course, their answers differ wildly, but you will find UKIP supporters who support Corbyn (I know a few) and Trump supporters who support Sanders, and vice-versa.

    There has been a rise in political polarization across the board, though: so-called 'moderates' on both sides are more polarized too, and this may in part be due to the fact that a moderate candidate who supports compromise will simply get 'primaried' in the United States.

    This is only part of the story, though: centrism is just as ideological as the so-called 'left' and 'right', and one could make the argument that we've not seen polarization disappear at all in the past; rather, the 'centrists' waged war against the more 'partisan'.

    The solution to all of this is to look at politics on a policy-by-policy basis. Approach it from the perspective of 'what policy will increase the general well-being of the population', and don't take absolutist positions on 'rights', such as the 'right to privacy'. Recognise that there's some truth in what almost everyone in politics is saying, and therefore read all of the arguments against your position. If you identify with 'the left', read the National Review, the Telegraph or watch Fox News. If you identify with 'the right', read the Guardian or watch Democracy Now.

    The solution to political polarization isn't centrism. Centrism explicitly states that nothing perceived as 'too ideological' should be included in policy agenda. For Blair, for instance, that meant that the idea of renationalisation of, say, the railways, which the majority of the public support, was out of the question. For centrists, policies aren't judged on their merits, just as policies aren't judged on their merits for leftists or rightists.

    Unfortunately, I don't think there has been a term coined for looking at politics on a policy-by-policy basis.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    It's all just bant mate no one cares
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viddy9)
    The fact that living standards have been stagnating, particularly in the United States, but also elsewhere in the West, since the neoliberal economic agenda was imposed on societies three to four decades ago, can partly explain why we're seeing the rise of people like Corbyn and Sanders on 'the left' and people like Trump and Farage on 'the right'.

    Many people are angry and they're disenfranchised, and those towards the 'extremes' of 'the political spectrum' are at least perceived to have answers, whereas those in 'the centre' do not. Of course, their answers differ wildly, but you will find UKIP supporters who support Corbyn (I know a few) and Trump supporters who support Sanders, and vice-versa.

    There has been a rise in political polarization across the board, though: so-called 'moderates' on both sides are more polarized too, and this may in part be due to the fact that a moderate candidate who supports compromise will simply get 'primaried' in the United States.

    This is only part of the story, though: centrism is just as ideological as the so-called 'left' and 'right', and one could make the argument that we've not seen polarization disappear at all in the past; rather, the 'centrists' waged war against the more 'partisan'.

    The solution to all of this is to look at politics on a policy-by-policy basis. Approach it from the perspective of 'what policy will increase the general well-being of the population', and don't take absolutist positions on 'rights', such as the 'right to privacy'. Recognise that there's some truth in what almost everyone in politics is saying, and therefore read all of the arguments against your position. If you identify with 'the left', read the National Review, the Telegraph or watch Fox News. If you identify with 'the right', read the Guardian or watch Democracy Now.

    The solution to political polarization isn't centrism. Centrism explicitly states that nothing perceived as 'too ideological' should be included in policy agenda. For Blair, for instance, that meant that the idea of renationalisation of, say, the railways, which the majority of the public support, was out of the question. For centrists, policies aren't judged on their merits, just as policies aren't judged on their merits for leftists or rightists.

    Unfortunately, I don't think there has been a term coined for looking at politics on a policy-by-policy basis.
    I was right with you up until you suggested anyone should read the Guardian, it's a rag. The Guardian and the Daily Mail should be outlawed.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    No. I think they are getting closer in developed countries.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I used to be a proper Randy libertarian, would have abolished the NHS for shits n giggles
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The terms left-wing and right-wing are not as clear-cut as they once were. Each country is facing their own struggle and has their own apparent solutions to these problems.

    Look at France. The supposedly Socialist government responded to its failed left-wing programme by appointing a former investment banker as minister of the economy and is trying to liberalise labour laws. Meanwhile the so-called far-right Front National, has a protectionist economic message which more or less mirrors the program of the communist party under George Marchais in the 1970s. In economic terms, the French dispute is not left vs right. It is free-trade liberalism vs protectionism.

    Meanwhile in America the widening inequality has made people wary of establishment politicians. For some the problem is Wall Street and so the solution is Sanders. For others the issue is immigration and China and so the solution is Trump. If you listen to Trump's rhetoric on the death of American industry, you'll see both Trump and Sanders are a response to the monetarist free market policy America has imposed since the 80s.

    In the UK, there isn't the same appetite for radical change, as we can see from the Tory victory in 2015. Corbyn winning the labour leadership is indicative of grassroots support for socialist policies within the Labour movement, but there is no such enthusiasm across the UK. When you look at the problems facing the Tory party right now Corbyn should be dominating in the polls. That he is not shows that left-wing figures like him are still on the fringes.

    So there is no real polarisation, more a contest between orthodox institutions in power and alternatives, be they protectionists, socialists or blustering buffoons,

    The terms left and right-wing don't mean that much in substance, but people like to buy into that partisanship and blame all problems on lefties or right-wing scum. It's a reassuringly simple and clear-cut vision of the world.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    I was right with you up until you suggested anyone should read the Guardian, it's a rag. The Guardian and the Daily Mail should be outlawed.
    The Guardian is a broadsheet.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    The Guardian is a broadsheet.
    I don't actually think it's been a broadsheet for a few years now, they downsized it a while back. Though whether it's a broadsheet or not, doesn't change the fact it's about as useful for an objective take on the news as the Daily Mail.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    I don't actually think it's been a broadsheet for a few years now, they downsized it a while back. Though whether it's a broadsheet or not, doesn't change the fact it's about as useful for an objective take on the news as the Daily Mail.
    It's as objective as the telegraph.

    it isn't a tabloid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    It's as objective as the telegraph.

    it isn't a tabloid.
    But then, the telegraph is pretty loyally tory on most everything. If I was gonna advise someone on what papers to read, I'd say stick to the Times/Financial Times/Sunday Times and the Independent/the I.

    No, it's not a tabloid, it's somewhere between the two. I think it's called a Berliner? Something like that anyway.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Views?
    I think the division and radicalization has always been around. In times of economic downturn people do p more polarized. What I think it more interesting is the splitting of the left/right, and the Centre becoming more of a side than a middle ground.

    What I mean by this is that you have people on the left that are potentially more aligned with some of the right than others of the left, and vice versa. A lot of this is due to stances of things like freedom of speech, immigrant labour, and military intervention.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.