This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"PLEASE CHANGE,"Those on the Left often called themselves "republicans", while those on the Right often called themselves "conservatives". TO "Those on the Left often called themselves "Leftist", while those on the Right often called themselves "conservatives"." 173.94.253.2 ( talk) 23:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Apparently social liberals fall on the left side of the spectrum in this article, yet nowadays certainly they do not. This should be amended â Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.73.98 ( talk) 12:15, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
The problem is that the left-right political spectrum has lost all meaning, when the president of the United States can describe meek, mild-mannered Joe Biden as an "extreme leftist". Today, those on the right describe anyone who is not 100% loyal personally to Donald Trump as an "extreme leftist". When politics becomes a personality cult, ideas are essentially off the table for discussion. Rick Norwood ( talk) 12:16, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken changed the word republicans to progressives in the following sentence: "Those on the Left often called themselves "republicans", while those on the Right often called themselves "conservatives"." [1] The sentence is sourced to Gauchet's article, "Right and Left," p. 257, where he discusses the origin of the terms. [2] The sentence is describing the use of terminology in France at the beginning of the 20th century. The main left-right division at the time was between conservatives who wanted to return to monarchy and republicans who did not. The republicans literally sat on the left side of the National Assembly.
I had reverted this originally noting, "The term progressive was only used in the U.S. at the time and referred to people on the left and right." Beyond My Ken reverted me with "Nor true."
In fact List of presidents of France#French Third Republic (1870â1940) shows that may of them called themselves republicans and none called themselves progressives. If there are sources that say they did not call themselves republicans, but called themselves progressives, then it should be provided before the text is changed.
TFD ( talk) 22:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
The article seems to missing sources for the expression âleft wingâ or âright wingâ. After the February 1917 revolution in Russia, the Duma met in the right wing of the Tauride Palace in Petrograd and the Soviet met in the left wing. Anyone know of the use of âwingâ before 1917? Oliver Low ( talk) 20:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Upon consulting source number 6, Bobbio, Norberto (2016). Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction. John Wiley & Sons. p. 112. ISBN 978-1-5095-1412-0 ( /info/en/?search=Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#cite_note-Bobbio2016-6), I could not find any reference to sitting positions. This is, however, a well known fact, so if someone has a proper source there would be no need to remove that piece of information.
I do however have the following French sources, from the Larousse French dictionary's website, https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/droite/44839 and https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/gauche/54713, but it would be nicer to have an English source.
Shine Couture ( talk) 15:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
You might consider decoupling the terms "freedom", "anti-authoritarian", and "egalitarian" from the terms "left wing" and "liberal". Increasingly, left politics embraces limiting freedoms (such as the freedom of speech), assigning rights and privileges based on ethnic groupings (increasing or decreasing the value of individuals based on skin color), and allocating strong authority to their notions of intellectually superior classes (educators, social scientists, lawyers, atheists). 2600:1700:BA0:3730:1CFA:94D2:13C5:CB3F ( talk) 20:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
[5] â VORTEX 3427 ( Talk!) 05:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
I have restored Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary's characterization of the left-right contrast. User Dronebogus reverted it on the grounds of being neither notable nor neutral. I hold that it is notable because it is one of the most famous entries in Bierce's famous Dictionary. More importantly, it is both neutral and relevant to the immediately preceding apt and neutral characterization (party of movement vs party of order) because it expresses in a neutral fashion each side's fundamental critique of the other. Leftists argue that existing institutions need reform because they are seriously harmful and unjust, and rightists argue that the reforms proposed by the leftists, if implemented, would have side effects worse than than the disease they are attempting to cure. Because these positions concern the result of an unperformed experiment (implementing the reforms) neither side can convince the other.
As the article notes in other places, the term liberal (more so than conservative) has diverse meanings, but it is clear that Bierce is using it in the 20'th century North American sense of left (i.e. reformist, progressive) rather than, say, economically libertarian.
Let's continue the discussion here, rather than reverting again, and if we can't agree seek additional opinions. CharlesHBennett ( talk) 09:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
I thought of that too, but decided to put in the lede because it was so concise (therefore not unduly bloating the lede), and because it extended the previous sentence on movement (i.e. change) vs order. Together they cast the left-right duality in an NPOV, "presume good faith" light as complementary and not completely reconcilable visions of how to achieve a good society, rather than, as typically happens in political campaigns, rather than a way of accusing the other side of selfishly attempting to grab power so as to abuse public trust. Thus I think the Bierce characterization is better where I put it. CharlesHBennett ( talk) 13:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Indeed though it's clearly satiric, it's less cynical than some of the Dictionary's other entries, e.g. for Marriage
or Cannon. It accurately states what the Left believes is wrong with the Right and vice versa. CharlesHBennett ( talk) 13:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but I do not agree. The word liberal was widely used, and Americans thought of America as a liberal country. Note that Bierce characterizes liberals as forward looking, favoring change, though with his usual cynical twist. The word conservative was also common at the time, though not with reference to any particular party. And, as Bierce notes, conservatives opposed change. Nothing particularly British about either attitude. It is true that left and right were not commonly used, though they existed. But the quote resonates with the way the words are used today. Rick Norwood ( talk) 19:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"PLEASE CHANGE,"Those on the Left often called themselves "republicans", while those on the Right often called themselves "conservatives". TO "Those on the Left often called themselves "Leftist", while those on the Right often called themselves "conservatives"." 173.94.253.2 ( talk) 23:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Apparently social liberals fall on the left side of the spectrum in this article, yet nowadays certainly they do not. This should be amended â Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.73.98 ( talk) 12:15, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
The problem is that the left-right political spectrum has lost all meaning, when the president of the United States can describe meek, mild-mannered Joe Biden as an "extreme leftist". Today, those on the right describe anyone who is not 100% loyal personally to Donald Trump as an "extreme leftist". When politics becomes a personality cult, ideas are essentially off the table for discussion. Rick Norwood ( talk) 12:16, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken changed the word republicans to progressives in the following sentence: "Those on the Left often called themselves "republicans", while those on the Right often called themselves "conservatives"." [1] The sentence is sourced to Gauchet's article, "Right and Left," p. 257, where he discusses the origin of the terms. [2] The sentence is describing the use of terminology in France at the beginning of the 20th century. The main left-right division at the time was between conservatives who wanted to return to monarchy and republicans who did not. The republicans literally sat on the left side of the National Assembly.
I had reverted this originally noting, "The term progressive was only used in the U.S. at the time and referred to people on the left and right." Beyond My Ken reverted me with "Nor true."
In fact List of presidents of France#French Third Republic (1870â1940) shows that may of them called themselves republicans and none called themselves progressives. If there are sources that say they did not call themselves republicans, but called themselves progressives, then it should be provided before the text is changed.
TFD ( talk) 22:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
The article seems to missing sources for the expression âleft wingâ or âright wingâ. After the February 1917 revolution in Russia, the Duma met in the right wing of the Tauride Palace in Petrograd and the Soviet met in the left wing. Anyone know of the use of âwingâ before 1917? Oliver Low ( talk) 20:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Upon consulting source number 6, Bobbio, Norberto (2016). Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction. John Wiley & Sons. p. 112. ISBN 978-1-5095-1412-0 ( /info/en/?search=Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#cite_note-Bobbio2016-6), I could not find any reference to sitting positions. This is, however, a well known fact, so if someone has a proper source there would be no need to remove that piece of information.
I do however have the following French sources, from the Larousse French dictionary's website, https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/droite/44839 and https://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/divers/gauche/54713, but it would be nicer to have an English source.
Shine Couture ( talk) 15:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
You might consider decoupling the terms "freedom", "anti-authoritarian", and "egalitarian" from the terms "left wing" and "liberal". Increasingly, left politics embraces limiting freedoms (such as the freedom of speech), assigning rights and privileges based on ethnic groupings (increasing or decreasing the value of individuals based on skin color), and allocating strong authority to their notions of intellectually superior classes (educators, social scientists, lawyers, atheists). 2600:1700:BA0:3730:1CFA:94D2:13C5:CB3F ( talk) 20:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
[5] â VORTEX 3427 ( Talk!) 05:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
I have restored Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary's characterization of the left-right contrast. User Dronebogus reverted it on the grounds of being neither notable nor neutral. I hold that it is notable because it is one of the most famous entries in Bierce's famous Dictionary. More importantly, it is both neutral and relevant to the immediately preceding apt and neutral characterization (party of movement vs party of order) because it expresses in a neutral fashion each side's fundamental critique of the other. Leftists argue that existing institutions need reform because they are seriously harmful and unjust, and rightists argue that the reforms proposed by the leftists, if implemented, would have side effects worse than than the disease they are attempting to cure. Because these positions concern the result of an unperformed experiment (implementing the reforms) neither side can convince the other.
As the article notes in other places, the term liberal (more so than conservative) has diverse meanings, but it is clear that Bierce is using it in the 20'th century North American sense of left (i.e. reformist, progressive) rather than, say, economically libertarian.
Let's continue the discussion here, rather than reverting again, and if we can't agree seek additional opinions. CharlesHBennett ( talk) 09:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
I thought of that too, but decided to put in the lede because it was so concise (therefore not unduly bloating the lede), and because it extended the previous sentence on movement (i.e. change) vs order. Together they cast the left-right duality in an NPOV, "presume good faith" light as complementary and not completely reconcilable visions of how to achieve a good society, rather than, as typically happens in political campaigns, rather than a way of accusing the other side of selfishly attempting to grab power so as to abuse public trust. Thus I think the Bierce characterization is better where I put it. CharlesHBennett ( talk) 13:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Indeed though it's clearly satiric, it's less cynical than some of the Dictionary's other entries, e.g. for Marriage
or Cannon. It accurately states what the Left believes is wrong with the Right and vice versa. CharlesHBennett ( talk) 13:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but I do not agree. The word liberal was widely used, and Americans thought of America as a liberal country. Note that Bierce characterizes liberals as forward looking, favoring change, though with his usual cynical twist. The word conservative was also common at the time, though not with reference to any particular party. And, as Bierce notes, conservatives opposed change. Nothing particularly British about either attitude. It is true that left and right were not commonly used, though they existed. But the quote resonates with the way the words are used today. Rick Norwood ( talk) 19:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)