General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat does "Far-Left" mean?
I've been seeing the phrase "Far-Left" used as invective at DU ever since the first criticism of Barak Obama hit the site but I don't think anyone who has used the term has ever actually defined it more precisely than "anything I don't like but can't really call republican or libertarian."
So what do DUers actually think it means?
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)would be considered far left.
last1standing
(11,709 posts)politics.
Hence this post.
So would you say the people using the term for run of the mill liberals are ignorant of it's generally accepted use or merely trying to spew childish insults?
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)someone who doesn't immediately impute evil motives to Obama is called an authoritarian despite their stance on things like marijuana, abortions, civil disobedience, and the like.
last1standing
(11,709 posts)Not everyone who doesn't support Greenwald and Snowden is authoritarian but some are based on their comments.
But it seems to me that trying to make the term "far-left" an insult at a Democratic web forum is counter-productive to say the least. Even when someone is an avowed DLCer like yourself, I would think the benefits of a more liberal group of activists is obvious. We're here to help swing the pendulum to the left after many years of hard right ideology. That can't be considered a bad thing, can it?
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)It was an epiphany for me in the early 90's that militaristic radical environmentalists did serve a purpose of making regular old environmental protection seem like a pretty normal stance to take. Just using that as an example as the whole spotted owl thing was going on and I lived in Oregon.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)last1standing
(11,709 posts)However, that said, I'm about as leftist as a capitalist can be by today's standards.
I mention this because 1) in the global world of politics, my views are rather moderate; and 2) I think it's important to realize how very far to the right our nation's politics have swung.
In economic terms, it's considered by many, even at DU, to be far-left for supporting regulations on business practices that have been proved risky otherwise or to promote a progressive tax rate similar to what was in place during the Nixon administration.
In social welfare terms, I'm far-left because I believe a strong safety net promotes business and the economy bringing more wealth to more people. Watching the poor suffer may give some a sense of moral superiority but it does nothing for their pocketbooks.
I don't consider these policies to be far-left but to many, maybe yourself, they are. I find that strange.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)It should mean:
People who think we should democratize the economy by bringing capital under collective control. Capitalism isn't working out, so we want to spread out the wealth and power more equally to all the people. Workers should have more power to control their workplaces, including the budgets.
How it is used on web forums:
People who criticize conservative Democrats.
BOG PERSON
(2,916 posts)Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Then when Jesus said that he wanted to clean the place up, he got rid of the far left people and dinosaurs.
And good for us! We have gas for cars!
leftstreet
(36,103 posts)The very mention of nationalizing banks, energy, education, healthcare, security, housing will get you branded a Black Helicopter Hammer and Sickle Hugging Commie
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)leftstreet
(36,103 posts)or something like that
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)and hopefully all will fight hard against that. if that crew makes a 10 to 15% dent in the public school attendance across the nation, it will really hurt the whole proposition.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Black Helicopter, emoprogs, and unrealistic.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)ConcernedCanuk
(13,509 posts).
.
.
Here's a good read:
The far left (also known as the extreme left) refers to the highest degree of leftism in left-wing politics. The far left seeks equality of outcome and the dismantlement of all forms of social stratification.[1] Far leftists seek to abolish all forms of hierarchy, particularly the inequitable distribution of wealth and power.[1]
The far left seeks a society in which everyone is provided equal economic and social opportunities, and no one has excessive wealth or power over others.[1]
The far left typically believes that inegalitarian systems must be overthrown through revolution in order to establish egalitarian societies, while the centre left works within the system to achieve egalitarianism.[1]
In societies that tolerate dissent, far-left groups usually participate in the democratic process to advance their goals.[2]
The far left demands radical changes to dismantle unequal societies, including confiscation of wealth that is concentrated in a small elite, and redistribution of that wealth in an egalitarian manner.[1]
Much more at link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-left_politics
CC
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Now really, that is just crazy. Rahm told us so.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)"Some attendees said they were planning to air ads attacking conservative Democrats who were balking at Mr. Obama's health-care overhaul. 'Fing retarded,' Mr. Emanuel scolded the group, according to several participants. He warned them not to alienate lawmakers whose votes would be needed on health care and other top legislative items."
Fearless
(18,421 posts)At least that's how it's used on DU.
bhikkhu
(10,715 posts)vs. "force the government to govern well and represent us against corporate interests" left.
last1standing
(11,709 posts)I've never heard of anyone on the left trying to destroy government outside of a few anarchists, yet the term 'far-left' is used quite often to label DUers.
bhikkhu
(10,715 posts)...when there was some "screw it - why not?" perspectives about. That would be anarchism, but there is a no firm boundary, and frustration makes for odd bedfellows sometimes.
People sometimes take for granted what government does do well, and the role that government does perform in society, and fall into destructive negativity. I'm not calling anyone out, but there is some element that would rather tear down the whole thing than support reasonable improvements, and working with what we have.
last1standing
(11,709 posts)That didn't happen, and I'm extremely glad they backed down for the most part, but had they insisted on Obama and the Democrats completely caving, I would have preferred default.
The reason isn't that I thought there wouldn't be suffering, I knew there would. the reason was that there would have been much, much more long term suffering for the poor and working classes if their plan had passed.
I don't think that makes me 'far-left' or an anarchist. I think that makes me a long-term pragmatist with a conscience.
Archae
(46,314 posts)To Bill O'Reilly, it's a convenient slur against nearly anyone *HE* doesn't like.
To the Teabaggers, it's anyone even mildly critical of Rush Limbaugh or Faux "news."
To me, it's groups that still worship Joseph Stalin and Mao. (Oh yeah, they still exist, I got kicked off a far-left message board for bringing up Stalin's and Mao's atrocities.)
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)But especially any suggestion that the parasites are responsible or should pay any part of the bill for their actions.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,868 posts)But the more I talk to mainstream democrats and read this board I'm more and more convinced that I'm the far left. I'm all about things like civil liberties and a strong social safety net. Call me Fidel.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)That is, the "far left", "unicorn brigade", "penguin posse", or whatever do not believe that ameliorating a fundamentally broken system is a good idea, while the "neolibs", "DLC", and "woodchuck mafia", or whatever do believe that in most situations that's the best we can do.
I generally lean towards the latter but I don't like how a legitimate philosophical/political argument like that (and there are decent points to be made by both sides) has become a way of categorizing everybody and an attempt to make windows into people's souls.
It also can be misleading (as an example, I am not terribly freaked out by the NSA revelations and I am often more or less for charter schools -- with a lot of caveats in both cases -- but I also think the minimum wage should be $25 / hour starting tomorrow, that Reid and Obama bungled the ACA negotiations, and that the Controlled Substances Act should essentially be repealed).
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)My basic beliefs are something like.
I want government sponsored universal health care, education through associate degree level, expanded Social Security, the government to undo all the privatization of traditional services, and the only things allowed to have a political opinion and contribute to a political cause actually have a pulse and the ability to speak.
In return I am willing to divert monies from private health management to governmental management (trading business bureaucrats for governmental bureaucrats). A Universal tax rate of 20% on all forms of income for individuals and companies (16% Federal, 4% state)(seriously, the idea that the US tax code takes up more that 4 pages of text is insane).
I'm not sure if what I consider myself to be matches what I believe in.