I think far left are socialists and far right are nationalists.

What is the left now, and what is the far left? Who is the far left? — frank

Is this strictly a political question? Do you measure the leftness of the left solely in terms of proximity to Marx , or can ‘left’ mean progressive or radical in a different sense? What about a philosophical far left? Do you think Foucault, Deleuze and Derrida were to the left or the right of Marx politically? What about philosophically? It seems to me the ‘far left’ is a notion concocted by conservatives like Jordan Peterson, who is constitutionally incapable of distinguishing between figures like Derrida and Marx, and between postmodernism and socialism.

I personally find the categories of left and right to result in lazy tribal thinking. I find it much more helpful if a person examines an idea on its merit, because right and left seem to be personal tribal identity, and cause people to avoid even considering certain ideas for fear of going against their identity.

That being said, the left is typically about egalitarianism with equal opportunities. The far left would be a large change in societal laws that result in more equitable and baseline starting points in society. One example I can think of would be universal income. This would result in a baseline standard that all people had to work with. Some of course would use that opportunity better than others, but every one would have at least that.

Another example of far leftism would be wanting to consider a person's entire background and evaluate their advantages or disadvantages before deciding how you will treat them in any situation. So for example, if a person came from an uneducated background, you would take the extra time and effort to change your language, approach, and education. Think about a bank teller offering a loan to someone at a particular interest rate. The far left would require that the bank teller explain to the person how much it will cost them over the years, and give alternative options. Someone not left would just offer them the loan, and leave it up to them to make the decision themselves, regardless of their education.

The more left you are, the more the powerful are expected to expend effort and sacrifice for the less powerful. The more right you are, the more acceptable it is for the powerful to exert themselves without any concern of the consequences of those less powerful than they are.

I think it depends on each country's circumstances. At least where I live extreme left represents or stands for avoiding monarchy, banks, riches and catholic church. In an economical way they want to increase the taxes on the wealthiest companies and make a fairer distribution. In an educational program, they stand for public schools instead private. They also defend the rights of LGTBIQ and feminism.
Interesting to point out that some of them feel kind of euroskeptic.

I think far left are socialists and far right are nationalists. — SpaceDweller

Sounds good.

Is this strictly a political question? Do you measure the leftness of the left solely in terms of proximity to Marx , or can ‘left’ mean progressive or radical in a different sense? What about a philosophical far left? Do you think Foucault, Deleuze and Derrida were to the left or the right of Marx politically? What about philosophically? It seems to me the ‘far left’ is a notion concocted by conservatives like Jordan Peterson, who is constitutionally incapable of distinguishing between figures like Derrida and Marx, and between postmodernism and socialism. — Joshs

I got into Hayek recently, and you can't separate his economic view from its political context (which is a little self contradictory). But his proposals are meant to address a problem that has to do with emergence of fascism. However his viewpoint may have later been hijacked, he was trying to be one of the good guys.

Since Hayek is relevant now and Marx is really completely irrelevant, I'd want to judge leftism by how it relates to Hayek. So by his perspective, leftism is about how organized a society is top down. It's about how information in the economy is processed. Per Hayek, the market is the superior organic organizer of information. He saw totalitarianism as the best way to protect the free market, tho. Thoughts?

Is identity politics a sign of leftism?

Interesting to point out that some of them feel kind of euroskeptic. — javi2541997

What's that mean?

:up:

↪Philosophim Is identity politics a sign of leftism? — frank

No. Both left and right partake in identity politics. I would say the left uses identity to achieve equitable egalitarianism while the right uses identity to continue to assert and justify the powerful to do whatever they want regardless of the consequences to those less powerful.

I also want to make it very clear that both taken to their extremes are awful, but both taken to a certain extent are very beneficial to society. There is no winner here.

Since China and Russia are capitalist states now, is there really any true representative of leftism today?

What is the left now, and what is the far left? Who is the far left? — frank

China and Russia are not fully capitalist states. The governments in each hold their thumb on the economies, choosing winners and losers. As such, the left-wing is for more government control over all aspects of society, whereas the right-wing is for less government control. The right-wing is really just a transfer of power from the government to the corporations or the church where the corporations or the church will have greater control or impact on society which includes the government itself.

The extreme on both sides is about more power being consolidated with a select few. The only difference is who is wielding the power over the rest of us - the government or corporations/church.

The far-left is the faction that wants government to have complete and total control over everything - how we spend our money, what we are allowed to say, etc. While it may seem that the far-left values and fights for the little man or minorities, they are really just using identity politics to create a problem of victimhood for certain groups as a reason to acquire more power over everyone's lives.

Moderates and independents are generally for less control over our individual lives whether that control be from the government or from corporations or the church.

What's that mean? — frank

It means that they are not agree on how European Union works. They see the institution as pure capitalists defending the interests of a few. So, they question if European Union really stands for human rights and class workers. Their euroscepticism is just a criticism of the modern era and I don't think it is big as much as Brexit

I would say the left uses identity to achieve equitable egalitarianism while the right uses identity to continue to assert and justify the powerful to do whatever they want regardless of the consequences to those less powerful. — Philosophim

So the difference is about social safety nets. The extreme left would have the state take care of everyone's needs?

we spend our money, what we are allowed to say, etc. While it may seem that the far-left values and fights for the little man or minorities, they are really just using identity politics to create a problem of victimhood for certain groups as a reason to acquire more power over everyone's lives. — Harry Hindu

You're saying the left fears individual autonomy. People need to be controlled, guided, and cared for.

On the one hand, this is just valuing life. On the extreme, it wants to reduce all citizens to children.

means that they are not agree on how European Union works. They see the institution as pure capitalists defending the interests of a few. — javi2541997

Isn't it?

Isn't it? — frank

Absolutely.

Put it another way:
left wing cares about social equality.
right wing cares about rich.

This is the case in almost any country in the west, including:
1. US - Democrats vs Republicans
2. France - Marine le Pen vs Macron
3. Undefeated hungarian Orban vs opposition

etc..

Countries such as Russia and China are one sided, there is no strong opposition.
China and Russia are "capitalist left wing" of some sort, a hybrid of it's own.

You're saying the left fears individual autonomy. People need to be controlled, guided, and cared for.

On the one hand, this is just valuing life. On the extreme, it wants to reduce all citizens to children. — frank

The same could be said of the moderates and extremists for both the left and the right. Again, the difference lies in who wields the reins of power over individuals. Both extremes are forms of collectivism, while the moderates of both sides value individual liberty.

It seems that you are going to received skewed explanations of what is the extreme versions of the left and right. Left-wingers are always going to try to make their side look like saints.
Example:

Put it another way:
left wing cares about social equality.
right wing cares about rich. — SpaceDweller

The right does the same thing. It seems that if you want an unbiased view of both sides you will need to ask someone that is a member of neither side.

What is the left now, and what is the far left? Who is the far left? — frank

All the above = @StreetlightX

So the difference is about social safety nets. The extreme left would have the state take care of everyone's needs? — frank

The state would take care of whatever they deemed the minimal bottom line for equality, but they would not take care of the powerful. This would likely come at the poweful's expense. The extreme right would have the state take care of the needs of the powerful, and that may result in everyone's else's expense. Both will use the state for their agenda.

Since China and Russia are capitalist states now, is there really any true representative of leftism today? — frank

I wouldn't characterize either the PRC or USSR as ever having been "representative of leftism". Libertarian socialist / Green movements & Human Rights activists/NGOs rather than nation-states IME represent the hard left today.

Whatever it is, it always reads to me as big government, nanny-statism with an emphasis on identity politics, activism, and anti-capitalism. It’s no so much extreme as it is routine. It’s fashionable.

Whatever it is, it always reads to me as big government, nanny-statism with an emphasis on identity politics, activism, and anti-capitalism. It’s no so much extreme as it is routine. It’s fashionable. — NOS4A2

The extreme right favors big government, nanny-statism with an emphasis on identity politics, activism, and pro-wealth acquisition for those who already have power. (Sometimes this is claimed to be capitalism, it is often times not).

The extreme's of both side are detrimental to a country, usually devolve into some kind of authoritarianism and manipulate the populace for control.

This thread is about the left wing, though.

This thread is about the left wing, though. — NOS4A2

Correct. But to identify the left wing, you must show how it is different than the right wing. You cannot talk about one without the other.

Huh. It took until the resident fascist to actually mention the single qualifier for being on the left at all, let alone the far left.

Expected, I guess. With the exception of the left, fascists have always had a relatively clearer understanding of political stakes involved in the political spectrum than others. Which is why they tend to murder socialists first long before going after anyone else ("first, they came for the socialists..." as the poem goes).

I’m not sure that’s true. To identify the left wing all you have to do is ask them.

I’m not sure that’s true. To identify the left wing all you have to do is ask them. — NOS4A2

My point was your identification of the far left was not unique to being on the left.

It’s true. The left used to be about freedom and individualism. Now it’s statist, reactionary, and collectivist. That’s why the old divisions hardly work anymore.

I wouldn't characterize either the PRC or USSR as ever being "representative of leftism". Libertarian socialist / Green movements & Human Rights activists/NGOs rather than nation-states IME represent the hard left today. — 180 Proof

:up: They had devolved into dictatorships, cults of personality. Christopher Hitchens described North Korea as a Necrocacy, The Father (deceased), The Son (the portly Kim), and..."one short of a trinity" remarked the late, inimitable Hitchens.

It’s true. The left used to be about freedom and individualism. Now it’s statist, reactionary, and collectivist. That’s why the old divisions hardly work anymore. — NOS4A2

No, you are false. We are talking about the extreme. The extreme left and right use the exact same system of division, controls, and authoritarianism. The difference are the targets.

big government, nanny-statism with an emphasis on identity politics, activism, and anti-capitalism. — NOS4A2

Let me give you examples.

Big government: Texas recently banned people from getting abortions, including if you're raped. This is state power over individual freedom. Florida recently mandated school district can't say anything that makes people uncomfortable regarding sexuality. The proper way would have been for local school districts to each handle this as the community wanted.

Nanny-statism with identity politics- The far right has used government to divide blacks out of districts to ensure Democrats do not win seats. Dog whistles have been confirmed to be used for years. I already mentioned gays, we can talk about single mothers back in the 80's. The far right nanny's not the populace, but the powerful. Tax breaks, deregulation, as well as tax incentives for large businesses that create lower tax burden's than the rest of the population. Law enforcement that will break up protests by people to ensure business continues without interruption. Favorable bankruptcy laws and stock market laws favor the wealthy while a lower status individual who takes out a college loan is enslaved to it for life.

Activism: Oh boy. Lies that the election was stolen and we need to make sure "our" guys are in charge of counting next time? Anti-abortion and anti-gay activists. Anti-teachers and finding ways to criminalize drug use and poverty that disrupts wealthy people's lives instead of helping out.

Anti-capitalism: True capitalism means the government largely stays out of business except to regulate and prevent bad actors. This does NOT mean that you don't tax businesses. The far right loves government interference here. Florida's retaliation against Disney because it had a different opinion. Massive tax breaks and deregulation for businesses, especially those that donate. Favorable laws and taxes for the powerful industries like the oil, coal, and medical lobby.

There are plenty on the left and the right who are not extreme. They favor different targets, but go about using minimal government, government with oversight, and compromise. Very few people are extreme because very few people are fully right or left. Most of us have a blend of left and right views based on different situations if we don't brain wash ourselves into thinking party identity is somehow our identity as well.

Isn't left and right born out of WW2?

Hitler: far right
Stalin: far left

Ideologies are dead ofc. my point is that since then left and right changed but mention of right\left started with WW2 and cold war narrative.

Isn't left and right born out of WW2?

Hitler: far right
Stalin: far left

Ideologies are dead ofc. my point is that since then left and right changed but mention of right\left started with WW2 and cold war narrative. — SpaceDweller

What actions of Stalin makes him a leftist?