The left wing

[Michael Bluth]

Try to keep up, buddy: the fact that he's a successful businessman is not what makes him a leftist. His political affiliation (Democrat) and support of leftist causes (see: the Gates Foundation) does.

Try to be a little less condescending and use facts pal.

This is a link to all of Gates' donations over the past 20 years.

He has given more to Republicans than Democrats. Pretty odd for a Democrat...

Education, global health and global development aren't leftist causes. The only difference between the left and the right on the latter two issues is where the money should come from. People on the right would favour that moeny coming from private philanthropy, like the Gates Foundation...

[Leafless]

Perhaps you can explain to me, using your theory, why Bill Gates is donating billions of dollars to eliminating diseases in Africa?

Probably because he feels like he personally has not accomplished that much selling 'unperfected operating systems' that are still not refined to this day. And he is basically bored with billions earned from what could be best described as 'borderline fraud' and simply wants to join the Hollywood crowd to somehow justify his material success.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/349309.stm

[Figleaf]

Education, global health and global development aren't leftist causes.

I agree, but it's funny that so many rightists label me leftist whenever I advocate any of those things.

[Michael Bluth]

I agree, but it's funny that so many rightists label me leftist whenever I advocate any of those things.

Are they maybe labelling you as such beause you favour government footing the bill for those things?

[Figleaf]

I agree, but it's funny that so many rightists label me leftist whenever I advocate any of those things.

Are they maybe labelling you as such beause you favour government footing the bill for those things?

So right wingers think worthwhile things like those can come about thru magical wishes or something?

[Michael Bluth]

So right wingers think worthwhile things like those can come about thru magical wishes or something?

The arrogance and assumption that the only answer to social issues is government actions is probably why someone would label you a leftie.

You refere to your self as a classical liberal. But a classical liberal wouldn't advocate government action on these issues.

Social change can come through individual philanthropy, corporate philanthropy and volunteerism.

Bill Gates is from the right and proves that the only magic necessary is hard work and people taking individual responsibility for getting things done.

[Canadian Blue]

Classical liberals are basically libertarian's. I think Figleaf is a liberal in the FDR sense.

[PolyNewbie]

Most truthies I know are "right wing". I don't know any left wingers that think 911 was an inside job.

I am neither left or right wing. I am a monetary reformist.

[jenny]

Classical liberals are basically libertarian's. I think Figleaf is a liberal in the FDR sense.

DONT FEED THE TROLLS

[gc1765]

Perhaps you can explain to me, using your theory, why Bill Gates is donating billions of dollars to eliminating diseases in Africa?

Probably because he feels like he personally has not accomplished that much selling 'unperfected operating systems' that are still not refined to this day. And he is basically bored with billions earned from what could be best described as 'borderline fraud' and simply wants to join the Hollywood crowd to somehow justify his material success.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/349309.stm

If it wasn't the best system available for the best price, then Microsoft would not be making billions...that is the beauty of the free market.

Also, my post was in regards to the opening post:

"The left wing is comprised largely of people who never really created any enterpise"

Despite how you may feel about Bill Gates/Microsoft, you can't deny that it's quite the enterprise.

"I believe a lot of lefties adopt these empty platitudes without having to create, work or build anything"

You can't possibly say that Bill Gates has not created, worked, or built anything.

[BC_chick]

Think about this:

The left wing is comprised largely of people who never really created any enterpise [...]

Source?

[Figleaf]

So right wingers think worthwhile things like those can come about thru magical wishes or something?

The arrogance and assumption that the only answer to social issues is government actions is probably why someone would label you a leftie.

I fail to see how arrogance is applicable on that basis.

Government may not be the sole source of those goods, but when the market doesn't produce them in sufficient quantity, quality or price, it seems reasonable to ask government to enable the provision of them.

You refere to your self as a classical liberal. But a classical liberal wouldn't advocate government action on these issues.

That's your faulty understanding. I certainly do advocate it in appropriate circumstances, on classical liberal principles.

Social change can come through individual philanthropy, corporate philanthropy and volunteerism.

Or government action. As a classical liberal, I have no generic objection to government action as a means of coordinating shared efforts and objectives.

Bill Gates is from the right and proves that the only magic necessary is hard work and people taking individual responsibility for getting things done.

I don't know Gates political views, but his wealth came mostly from clever opportunism and a strong dose of good luck. That doesn't make him a criminal or a bad guy, but it's the truth.

[geoffrey]

Left wing, right wing. Depends on where your at. Depends on the idea. I know few people that are all left or all right. It's actually one of the dichotomies I dislike the most.

I can't think of one regular poster on this board that squarely fits into either category. Black Dog and Catchme might be the two most 'left wing' people here out of the regular group, yet I find common ground with them often being one of the most 'right wing' people here.

So it's impossible to say that all left wingers have never created an enterprise. It's even unlikely to say most haven't in comparison to right wingers. I'll agree that many right wingers tend to be more individualist, which is an important personality trait in the entrepreneur, a willingness to work for your own gain alone. It's likely that those that start small business are more likely to be conservatives... but when you look at the execs at the top of established companies, many are liberals.

Generalities are tough to make. Even within one continent, we see dramatic differences between the sterotypical left and right in both the US and Canada. The Dems share many values with the CPC that they do not share with the Liberals (increasingly liberalised free trade, stricter immigration laws, ect.) and the Republicans share values with the Liberals they don't with the CPC (more open borders, protectionism at least compared to the other side of the coin). Then again, the CPC and the GOP and the Liberals and the Dems have stuff in common too.

Comparing Canadian right and left wing to British or Austrailian politics is an even bigger gong show.

Right and left wing are adequate to describe positions on some issues, but it's hard to force anyone into an either or category absolutely.

[geoffrey]

I don't know Gates political views, but his wealth came mostly from clever opportunism and a strong dose of good luck. That doesn't make him a criminal or a bad guy, but it's the truth.

Trudeau would have disagreed with you. "Luck is the time when opportunity and preparation meet." It's the extent of common ground ideological ground between Trudeau and I. I don't believe much in luck, it's about making the right calls at the right time. Some people are better at it, they are called 'lucky' by those less skilled.

[sideshow]

Except does anyone actually see the liberals or democrats as leftist? I see them both as centrist parties with the cpc and republicans as right.

only the ndp and perhaps the bloc in my opinion can be described as left of center. and the greens appear more center to right in most matters other than maybe the environment.

[geoffrey]

Except does anyone actually see the liberals or democrats as leftist? I see them both as centrist parties with the cpc and republicans as right.

Paul Martin Liberals or Stephane Dion Liberals. Too different ships painted in different shades of Red.

Paul Martin was a centrist. Dion is far left.

[Moonlight Graham]

Jerry,

First of all, you shouldn't despise the opposite side of the political spectrum so much. Left vs Right is ying & yang, meaning generally both can be right & wrong on certain issues & neither side is more correct or better than the other, it is just a difference of opinion & beliefs.

The left wing is comprised largely of people who never really created any enterpise (and most call enterprises BAD things ), expect things to be handed to them and and don't believe in fighting for something.

Lefties actually do believe in fighting, since they are fighting all the time for different rights, causes etc. & often times with great passion & protest. Its a different kind of fighting. But I think you are referring though towards fighting as in war/violence. I'm not a pacifist, but u gotta admit that sometimes there is too much fighting in the world. Lefties believe in diplomacy over war, with violent action being the last resort. More than that, a lot of left-leaning thinkers aren't against war (sometimes its necessary) but are against how the war is carried out (disregard for civilian casualties etc.). Being against the Vietnam war or current Iraq war doesn't make you a chicken or against all war, just the bad ones.

The problem is this: I BELIEVE ALOT OF LEFTIES ADOPT THESE EMPTY PLATITUDES BECAUSE WITHOUT HAVING TO CREATE, WORK OR BUILD ANYTHING, THEY ARE AUTOMATICALLY "BETTER PEOPLE" THAN THE FILTHY MONEY GRUBBING RIGHT WING.

I think you do have a point here. You're right, a lot of lefties (especially younger ones) don't own their own business. Not sure on the stats on this though lol. Economically, lefties put social causes over personal wealth. They'd rather be taxed if it will help society than pocket that money or have others (corporations etc.) keep that money. Righties however are much the opposite, they don't like the gov't taking their money & they value independance from gov't.

I am lucky in that i've seen both sides of the coin & believed both at one time. Actually its very conflicting for me personally. My dad owned his own small business for all my life, so i've heard him complain many times about much the gov't taxes small business owners. Over 50% of his income would go to the gov't, & knowing how the gov't wastes money at a crazy rate i totally understand why he'd be upset & i'd feel the same & i sympathize with small business owners. On the other hand, i have come to be active in a bunch of important social causes such as global poverty, human rights, AIDS, & the enviroment etc. so there i know the passion lefties feel for these issues & the frustration when gov't doesn't do enough & spend enough money to fix the problems in the world.

With this climate change bullshit, we're on the verge of being hijacked by these morons. And Suzuki is at the front of the line. Absolutely no concept of economics. Just a do-gooder blow hard.

There are more important things than money & material possessions. Like the health of the Earth. Like making sure those not as fortunate as us have very BASIC necessities for living. A lot of the hardcore right-wingers are Christians or religious (i'm also christian & a god-believer), but they don't live their lives like Jesus & their own religion preaches. Jesus teaches help your fellow man, help the poor, give up material possessions & help those less fortunate, and of course the "Golden Rule". How come there are still millions starving in Africa & most of us don't give a crap?

Anyways, i think u do have a point, but its caught between piles of anti-lefty crap. Don't hate 'em, just debate 'em!

[Canadian Blue]

Yeah, the ideology thing is tiring. I would say I'm a humanist, or more commonly referred to as a factonista.

http://www.wikiality.com/Factonista

[gc1765]

Left wing, right wing. Depends on where your at. Depends on the idea. I know few people that are all left or all right. It's actually one of the dichotomies I dislike the most.

I can't think of one regular poster on this board that squarely fits into either category. Black Dog and Catchme might be the two most 'left wing' people here out of the regular group, yet I find common ground with them often being one of the most 'right wing' people here.

So it's impossible to say that all left wingers have never created an enterprise. It's even unlikely to say most haven't in comparison to right wingers. I'll agree that many right wingers tend to be more individualist, which is an important personality trait in the entrepreneur, a willingness to work for your own gain alone. It's likely that those that start small business are more likely to be conservatives... but when you look at the execs at the top of established companies, many are liberals.

Generalities are tough to make. Even within one continent, we see dramatic differences between the sterotypical left and right in both the US and Canada. The Dems share many values with the CPC that they do not share with the Liberals (increasingly liberalised free trade, stricter immigration laws, ect.) and the Republicans share values with the Liberals they don't with the CPC (more open borders, protectionism at least compared to the other side of the coin). Then again, the CPC and the GOP and the Liberals and the Dems have stuff in common too.

Comparing Canadian right and left wing to British or Austrailian politics is an even bigger gong show.

Right and left wing are adequate to describe positions on some issues, but it's hard to force anyone into an either or category absolutely.

The other problem with left vs. right is that there is a huge difference between economic and social left/right (though if someone is left/right on one social issue they tend to be on most or all social issues. for example, how many people do you know are for abortion and SSM, but are also for the Iraq war?). But someone can easily be left wing on social issues and right wing on economic issues (and vice-versa, though this is probably more rare). I can find common ground with economic right-wingers, but on social issues I'm about as far left as you can go.

[BC_chick]

But someone can easily be left wing on social issues and right wing on economic issues (and vice-versa, though this is probably more rare).

This is my breakdown of it.....

Social and Fisccal Conservative = conservative

Social liberal and Fiscal Conservative = more or less libertarian

Social and Fiscal Liberal = liberal

Social conservative and fiscal liberal = a true Christian

And of course, you are right, the last category is rare indeed.

[geoffrey]

Good points. One problem with these sterotypes though is it sets up sort of categories of people. Some would call me socially conservative for my ideas on law and order... but by the same token I'm marginally ok with abortion (though very complex) and I'm at peace with SSM. I'm one of those do whatever you want as long as I don't have to see it or pay for it types. So whats that? Am I a social conservative? Or a social liberal? Definitely not a libertarian as my views on government are far too elitist to be a populist type.

See, I think even those definitions are too strict. Someone can be socially liberal and socially conservative, in fact, I'd suggest most of us are. Same with economics. Real neoconservatives may be the best example there. Are they fiscal conservatives because they cut tax, or fiscal liberals because they increase spending?

Labelling someone with a definition is going to lead to false sterotypes about them. I've seen it many times.

"I believe in mandatory minimums for all crimes against people."

"A conservative like you must be strongly against SSM..."

You know what I mean?

[BC_chick]

If you must know geoffrey, in my last post (just before yours), I was going to refer to you as an example of a socially liberal, fiscally conservative individual.

[gc1765]

Good point about the law & order, it's one issue that many social liberals can be more to the right on.

Personally, I'm not too sure about the issue. On one hand, I don't have too much sympathy for criminals. On the other hand, I know that longer sentences are not a deterrent and will only cost more money. I would like to see criminals work in jail and/or pay money if they have it, as was the subject of a couple threads here.

[August1991]

Think about this:

JerrySeinfeld is largely a person who never really did anything except post stuff on the Internet (and choose a lame name from a has-been New York comedy show ), thinks he's right all the time and doesn't fight for anything but himself.

But because he typically spends time posting up and down this forum demonstrating against leftists, shouting about how ignorant they are, saving the world and other lofty vague goals and just generally thinking pretty damn good about himself for being such a smart, with-it kinda guy.

The problem is this: I BELIEVE JERRYSEINFELD ADOPTS THESE EMPTY PLATITUDES BECAUSE POSTING STUFF ON THE INTERNET, HE THINKS HE'S AUTOMATICALLY A "BETTER PERSON" THAN THE FILTHY LEFTISTS WHO DO NOTHING.

Jerry's platform is basically one of a loser who can elevate himself to greatness JUST BY POSTING ON THE INTERNET.

What a thought.

God help us if any of his un-thought out, pet strawman ideas ever actually went anywhere.

With this climate change denial bullshit, we're on the verge of being hijacked by some flat-earth morons. Even the oil companies aren't in the line anymore. Absolutely no concept of science or economics. Just nutjob blow hards.

----

My apologies to Black Dog for calling the strawman

[sideshow]

Think about this:

JerrySeinfeld is largely a person who never really did anything except post stuff on the Internet (and choose a lame name from a has-been New York comedy show ), thinks he's right all the time and doesn't fight for anything but himself.

But because he typically spends time posting up and down this forum demonstrating against leftists, shouting about how ignorant they are, saving the world and other lofty vague goals and just generally thinking pretty damn good about himself for being such a smart, with-it kinda guy.

The problem is this: I BELIEVE JERRYSEINFELD ADOPTS THESE EMPTY PLATITUDES BECAUSE POSTING STUFF ON THE INTERNET, HE THINKS HE'S AUTOMATICALLY A "BETTER PERSON" THAN THE FILTHY LEFTISTS WHO DO NOTHING.

Jerry's platform is basically one of a loser who can elevate himself to greatness JUST BY POSTING ON THE INTERNET.

What a thought.

God help us if any of his un-thought out, pet strawman ideas ever actually went anywhere.

With this climate change denial bullshit, we're on the verge of being hijacked by some flat-earth morons. Even the oil companies aren't in the line anymore. Absolutely no concept of science or economics. Just nutjob blow hards.

----

My apologies to Black Dog for calling the strawman

Nicely put. Net warriors are a dime a dozen. People that actually stand up for what they believe in are much more rare.

I can say that I exercise my rights-i have demonstrated, I vote in all levels of elections, have campaigned for individuals, forced my union to do its job, and I use my ability to lobby my MP, MLA and councellors when I need to. And to be honest, they are usually adequately responsive-from all parties.