If we’re using a linear spectrum of left to right, how far left am I? I would consider myself on the left end of politics and was thinking of joining the Green Party in the U.S.
Here are some of the things I believe in:
Homeless people should get free housing. If I were in charge, they would live in shelters or big buildings like hotels.
Rights for all!
We should make countries better for all and not just go along with whatever the politician says, specifically where I live in the United States. Real patriotism is trying to make a better, for example, United States for everyone and not just going along with whatever our President says and defending his corrupt ideas.
Climate change is a real issue that needs to be taken care of.
LGBTQ+ people deserve representation completely and everyone should be free of discrimination.
Immigration is what shapes the United States (I use a lot of American examples because that’s where I live, sorry!) and they should not be tortured, deported, discriminated against, anything. It should be a free country and the borders should be less strict.
Weapons should be banned and crime should somehow become a very rare thing to deal with.
I personally think a better question is what the fuck are you trying to get out of posting this? I mean if you want someone to tell you what a good lefty you are you can always go on buzzfeed, so what’s the goal here?
Do you believe private property is a fundamental human right? If yes, Do you believe that people who own or run businesses should be able to pay a living wage?
Do you have a theory of political change? What is it?
Are you familiar with theories of imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism? Are you pro-reparations?
Do you believe economic degrowth is necessary to avoid climate change?
Are you opposed to the genocide in Palestine? Do you support a one or two state solution?
Are you a British Green or an American Green?
I worry that by asking these questions directly it might affect any answers but these are “further left” than your stances.
Based on what you shared I’d say you’re a “progressive liberal”, which is a right-leaning moderate position. But that’s where a lot of revolutionary leftists, including myself, started out.
What really matters to me when relating to progressive liberals is: If you’re willing to educate yourself, and getting involved in a political party like you’re doing could help.
if your positions are based on a real spiritual progressivism, or if someone acts fundamentally reformist/opportunist.crime should somehow become a very rare thing to deal with.
I love the idea that this is somehow an idea specific to one part of the political spectrum
No one cares.
Terms like “left” and “right” are subjective, and frankly, not a useful way to understand politics due to its idealistic nature. Ask ten people what “left” even means and you’ll get several answers.
Try this one. See where you fall. Always interesting to compare across countries as well.
Play this for a week: https://www.nationstates.net/
Then look where you fall in this graph
That’s a horrible graph, and really shows that the problems with placing ideology on a spectrum isn’t solved by trying to abstract it with more dimensions.
From what I read the issues can give wildly differing results, though.
That said, I’d wage that if they played it accordingly to their own IRL beliefs, most normal people would fall anywhere inbetween these;
- Inoffensive Centrist Democracy
- Democratic Socialists
- New York Times Democracy
- Left-Leaning College State
- Civil Rights Lovefest
- Scandinavian Liberal Paradise* (really should be labelled “Scandinavian Social Democrat Paradise”)
Social Democrats are subcategories of liberal, though.
Since you live in the US, this makes you a far left radical terrorist. You are now on a list.
Most of what you describe isn’t politics, it’s wishful thinking. Real solutions require trade-offs, not just good intentions. Ideals are nice, but policies need to work in the real world. Free housing means someone has to pay for it, usually through higher taxes on those who already work. Open borders sound humane until welfare systems and housing markets collapse under the pressure. Banning weapons doesn’t erase crime; it just shifts who’s armed and who isn’t. Even here in Europe, where these ideas are often praised, we’re starting to see the strain of too many entitlements and too few taxpayers.
For american standards, you’re basically a commie, lol
For the rest of the world, you would be center-left.
The thing that would push you farther to the left or back to the center would be economic issues: you’ve only talked about social issues, but what about the economy and government?
- Should the government play a big part in regulating businesses?
- Should people pay more taxes, especially if they are rich?
- Should essential services such as roads, electricity, water, postal services, healthcare and public transportation be provided and managed by the government or by private businesses?
There are also some test online that place you on the political spectrum by asking you those kinds of questions, it might be worth checking them out.
OTOH, I kinda feel bad because you live in a place where there are only effectively 2 parties (right and far right), and chosing another one is going to waste your vote essentially. People like Sanders and AOC have a huge following, but they have no chance of success imho
How far left am I?
You are possibly not left at all, for every single one of the issues you list in your post is also promoted by established right-wing parties.
Homeless people should get free housing.
Danish right-wing populist party Dansk Folkeparti explicitly support that:
Swedish right-wing populist party Sverigedemokraterna explicitly support that:
They don’t support housing for everyone because they don’t believe that non western foreigners should be allowed in to the country, and they don’t believe that people who aren’t “culturally Danish” are citizens.
So they don’t believe in housing for all
German right-wing populist party Alternative für Deutschland is led by a lesbian who calls her party "the only real protective force for gays and lesbians in Germany
They’re an explicitly transphobic party who doesn’t extend queer rights to trans people, even if they’re gay or lesbian. They actively practice discrimination against LGBTQ folk.
I think what you are showing is that far right parties often incorporate one or two left-wing policies in order to gain popularity. Cherry-picking those and putting them together does not create a realistic profile of right wing opinions.
It’s not just that. What you mentioned is a real phenomenon, but not always the case.
One other reason is when right-wing parties don’t realize that their policies are contradictory in practice. This is common in syncretic politics, like Classical Fascism, which has strong roots in both Syndicalism and Nationalism. Mussolini’s class collaborative corporatism [as in corpus, ‘body’] is a policy which sounded progressive on paper but in reality did not prevent the worker exploitation it aimed to lessen.
Another is that even reactionaries can recognize some good ideas, as long as it doesn’t contradict their personal values. I personally know conservatives with pro-environmental policies, because they appreciate and care about the ecosystem and our food supply chain. I know another strong conservative who is anti-privatization but consistently votes for a pro-privatization party! Politics is complex, not a team sport where every voter toes a line.
I think a much simpler explanation is that none of those issues are inherently right-wing or left-wing, which is what I wanted to demonstrate with my examples.
The thing that makes them right wing is the exclusions they place on their “progressive” policies. It’s always the vulnerable
Insofar as “left” and “right” are really a thing they’re just about whether or not you support monarchy or authoritarianism (right-wing) or democracy (left-wing). What you’ve said are cultural things that don’t really map to that very well.
Normally left and right are about socialism vs capitalism, and all states are “authoritarian,” including socialist democracies, in that all states are the political arm of the ruling class, be that class capitalists or workers. A socialist state is “authoritarian” against capitalists, while being democratic for the working class, and left-wing. Until we erase the basis for the state, ie until we collectivize production so as to erase class, there will be a state and thus “authoritarianism,” so it’s better for the working class to be in charge.
I don’t think it’s helpful to think in terms of left and right. That presumes that each side is roughly a mirror analogue of the other.
Think in terms of forward and backward. Will your ideas and political leanings push society forward? Will you be making the world better than you found it? Or are you trying to resist change, fighting against progress because the status quo, or the recent past, benefits you in some way?
Will your ideas and political leanings push society forward? Will you be making the world better than you found it? Or are you trying to resist change, fighting against progress because the status quo, or the recent past, benefits you in some way?
Strictly speaking, forwards and backwards can only be applied if one has both awareness and a realistic plan to help change the larger situation.
I would argue that it would impact the effectiveness of the effort, but the intention is just as important.
Like if you want to make the world a better place, you can pick up litter in your local area. You could volunteer at the library or conserve energy in whatever way is easiest for you. The desire to move forward is critical, because nobody has all the information. Nobody can know all the angles, and be aware of every impact. Everyone is just doing the best they can with the information they have.
Wanting to be better informed is also a progressive ideal. Know better, do better. We might discover that something we thought was beneficial is actually harmful. The difference between a conservative choice and a progressive choice is that when new information demonstrates that behaviors conflicts with values, the progressive changes their behaviors while a conservative changes their values.
I think what they’re getting at is that everyone is in favor of crime reduction, as an example, but that doesn’t make crime go down. It’s how you answer the how of that question that actually makes a material difference.
That’s better than thinking in terms of rigid spectrums, but I still ultimately think the division between socialism and capitalism is useful, ie the PRC is socialist while the US Empire is capitalist. Progressing forward requires socialism, but beyond that we can get lost in trying to compare how “left” people are as though that genuinely corresponds to material reality in a quantifiable manner.
Those are far too generic of things to place you on the spectrum more than, “not a conservative fuckwad that doesn’t care about others”, which itself is a huge spectrum.
As Cowbee said, a lot of the differentiation on the left is economic prescription, and your plan for how to bring that prescription in to reality. Most all of the left is socially progressive and accepts others, so that’s not differentiating much.
As seen by most people: centre-left to left-wing.
As seen by rabid Republicans: far-left, antifa thugs, etc. (But then again, Trumpists aren’t normal people, though they once weren’t as radicalised.)
