Let’s also talk about the way “left” and “right” are represented.
Essentially, the terms come from the placement of seats in British parliament back in the day, it has nothing to do with some “poles” or “extremes”.
Yet here we are, representing it as two extremes - something it has never been. You know what extremes actually are? Total oppression of majority by the minority (edge case - one person owning everyone else as slaves) and total oppression of the minority by the majority (edge case - entire world bullying one person). You know what’s in the middle? Total equality, where nobody oppresses anyone. That’s the center, the neutral state, where no oppression takes place.
You might call it some mental construct, but we’ve actually seen a lot of examples during socialist/communist revolutions, with minority of previously rich and powerful being systematically oppressed, sent to camps etc. This is “lefter” than the far left, however, as it makes it detrimental to have any sort of power, this state of things usually doesn’t last long, which is why this is often ignored as a consideration. But it doesn’t deny the fact such “actually left” exists.
total oppression of the minority by the majority (edge case - entire world bullying one person)
Your talking about Racism (Oppression of minority groups by the majority group). Between the “Left” and the “Right” I think it’s obvious which side tends towards that more…
Just because you can identify two opposite extremes doesn’t automatically mean 1 is a Right Wing ideology and the other must be a Left Wing ideology.
I had to mention this goes in relation to minority in power, not just any minority.
The point I’m trying to make is that total equality is not an extreme it’s made out to be. It’s a neutral state, perfectly in the center between varous kinds of opposite oppression.
Let’s also talk about the way “left” and “right” are represented.
Essentially, the terms come from the placement of seats in British parliament back in the day, it has nothing to do with some “poles” or “extremes”.
Yet here we are, representing it as two extremes - something it has never been. You know what extremes actually are? Total oppression of majority by the minority (edge case - one person owning everyone else as slaves) and total oppression of the minority by the majority (edge case - entire world bullying one person). You know what’s in the middle? Total equality, where nobody oppresses anyone. That’s the center, the neutral state, where no oppression takes place.
You might call it some mental construct, but we’ve actually seen a lot of examples during socialist/communist revolutions, with minority of previously rich and powerful being systematically oppressed, sent to camps etc. This is “lefter” than the far left, however, as it makes it detrimental to have any sort of power, this state of things usually doesn’t last long, which is why this is often ignored as a consideration. But it doesn’t deny the fact such “actually left” exists.
Your talking about Racism (Oppression of minority groups by the majority group). Between the “Left” and the “Right” I think it’s obvious which side tends towards that more…
Just because you can identify two opposite extremes doesn’t automatically mean 1 is a Right Wing ideology and the other must be a Left Wing ideology.
I had to mention this goes in relation to minority in power, not just any minority.
The point I’m trying to make is that total equality is not an extreme it’s made out to be. It’s a neutral state, perfectly in the center between varous kinds of opposite oppression.