Political Philosophies various components.

>>2578232
&humanities out of 10
Would &humanities again

Made by a 9th grade highschool freshmen tier. Simplistic and wrong.

>>2578240
What's wrong about it?

>>2578242
In a simplest sense so you'll understand, imagine a slider between the two points. Then put millions of people all around those line. In a bell curve fashion.

>>2578276
They are suppose to be criteria to see if one authentically belongs to one side or the other.

>>2578232
Just more intelligent sounding Bullshit used by one side to bash the other (insofar as there are even sides...people reside on a spectrum). There are plenty of people on the right who support positions listed on the left and vice versa.

File: 1462870302375.jpg (107KB, 437x437px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 437x437px

You can be """"right-wing"""" and still have a material understanding the universe you dumbfuck. But you've already posted this a few times, so its just bait at this point.

If you actually are serious, right-left politics is a meme and you'd be better off discarding it.

>>2578232
How many times you have to shill this stupid graph OP? &humanities was a mistake

>>2579807
>You can be """"right-wing"""" and still have a material understanding the universe you dumbfuck.
But is that philosophically right wing? No.

>>2579808
triggered much?

>>2579823
There's no such thing as "philosophically right wing" because "right wing" isn't a definable thing. It's a French revolution meme.

Besides, I could believe in "sprits, souls, transcendence, etc." and still be philosophically "left wing" (using your terms).

Hate to be a wikistorian, but it's the easiest example I could find:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulcinian

Would you consider these people philosophically right wing? Your answer should be no.

File: DumbFrog.png (246KB, 550x535px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 550x535px

Is the Right in this case just code for Christian?

>>2579841
You don't need to dogmatic hold to every instance of either. So long as a left right distinction exist (which it shouldn't) this is good criteria.

>>2579824
If anything you have to be extremely triggered to be posting the same shit despite being proving wrong time and time again

>>2578232
>left
>individualism

>>2578232
Not at all.

>>2579850
One more time but in English please

>>2579852
No one's proved this wrong. They've only said "muh left right doesn't exist" because it doesn't correspond to their pre-concived notions of what is desired or not when stated in a basic level. Also no one can prove this is biased because it objectively isn't but the thought that the right wing is more than free markets triggers some people.

>>2579850
Well I guess Ron Paul is a left-wing faggot now since a libertarian can have everything on the left checked. Even the wellfare state is preferable for a libertarian before an "ethical state", if it is what I think it is.

>>2578232
What a bunch of idiotic nonsense.
I hope for your sake you're just trolling

File: Typo.png (27KB, 735x541px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 735x541px

>>2579857

>>2579870
>lolbertarinism is right wing
Of course Ron Paul is a lefty. Does he believe in separation of church and state? Open borders? immigration? Liberal democracy?

>>2579869
You truly are a master baiter

My favorite part was when you said:

>because it objectively isn't (biased)

Absolutely hilarious.

>>2579881
Sure. And I suppose Christian socialism is right wing since they can check off everything on the right side?

>>2579891
>What is national socialism?
Socialism is more right wing than liberalism in many instances.

It is correct in a very simplistic 15 year old way, yes.

>>2579876
Okay now that I've reread it a couple of times, I understand what you're saying and I disagree. It's simply not a good criteria because many of the stuff you listed is completely arbitrary or blatantly making right-wing theistic and left-wing materialist for whatever reason.

>>2579894
National socialism is a bad example since they have the majority of points on the left side.

>A nazi could easily agree on the left's point 1-3 since they're apolitical
>Change is the result of evolution, a perverted form of social darwinism in this case
>Ethnic warfare
>State is highest authority
>Evil derived from the social institutions known as international banks, run by jews
>Social change is caused by historical factors, a people and country with a destiny
>Huge investments to make sure everyone in the state got what they needed by reducing unemployment and produce products affordable for as many as possible
>Man is free to act on his instinctual urges

>>2579936
National Socialism is socialist. It's just socialist in a non-Marxist way.

>>2579936
True enlightenment on the subject is realization that national socialism and fascism are both centrist ideologies.

>>2579945
Yes and as such a bad example of right-wing socialism.

>>2578232
>>2579808
I don't think anyone on this website knows what "graph" means

>left/right bullshit
>dualism in general

File: leftrightmeme.png (249KB, 861x402px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 861x402px

I can see what it is driving at but it stretches too far. It seems to be comparing a postmodern philosophy student with a christian fundamentalist drill instructor. I don't think it provides many insights into the left wing versus right wing thing.

This is more revealing really.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_orientation

File: 514964460.jpg (110KB, 456x594px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 456x594px

>>2579948
If we're really going to go down the political spectrum route, Fascism and National Socialism are Third Position. Centrists are often moderates or balance reformers in a Liberal Democracy, and don't let anyone tell you that Radical Centrism is a thing.

>>2579962
Irrelevant to you, perhaps. These are left/right metaphysics so they are the most important of all.

Why reinvent the wheel? Read an introduction book on political philosophy instead of acting like a retard.

>>2579970
So how do you account for political positions that doesn't give a flying fuck about metaphysic?

>>2579968
Not him, but this is a pointless debate to have, because where you think personally on the political spectrum specific ideologies lie, depends wholly on what you actually believe yourself.

The only reason you say Fascism and National Socialism is Third Position is because you probably are right-wing yourself.

For a Leftist, Fascism and National Socialism are expressions of extreme right-wing because they extol the virtues of hierarchy.

>>2579982
Everything concerns itself with metaphysical as metaphysics is simply the nature of being. Even Nihilistic materialism is a form of metaphysics.

File: evola.png (35KB, 217x299px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 217x299px

>>2579986
>The only reason you say Fascism and National Socialism is Third Position is because you probably are right-wing yourself

Well I consider myself a Fascist, and I just called myself Third Position. Not that I really care about what the fuck anyone calls it. Stronk state + corporatism + Traditionalist (Think Evola without the weird metaphysical shit) social order. That's all I care about.

But I agree that it is a completely pointless debate because political spectrums are memetic in nature.

>>2580136
So you're a child.
Order is disgusting, a 'strong state' is inherently weak, corporatism goes inherently against traditionalism.

>>2581665
>corporatism goes inherently against traditionalism.
Daily reminder corporatism is not corpocracy and that the term is criminally misused in the Anglo-Sphere.

>>2578281
you mean black & white categorical thinking used by autistic manchildren and people who suffer from personality disorders to shuffle people into categories like portions on their plate.

File: Chart (13).jpg (133KB, 741x955px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 741x955px

> there exist only two political philosophies

>>2581672
Any corporations at all goes against traditionalism. Learn to read you fucking child.

>>2581678
>Newton
wew. Unless you mean his clockmaker hypothesis which is just deism.

>>2581685
>>2581675
You two don't know what corporatism is, do you?

>>2581691
haha i sure BTFO them THEY DONT KNOW WHAT THING IS

Go fuck a dog, libertarian.

>>2579970
>>2579989
Mass politics concerns the masses and most of the things mentioned are irrelevant to the average person.

They may habitually use certain thought processes without defining it abstractly, but they have no loyalty to it and they are only a little more likely to use those thought processes. It is very flaky to assume you have uncovered deep underlying differences.

For example a left wing oriented person might be more utilitarian, however when confronted with the idea of murdering someone so their organs can be harvested to save 5 people they might change their perspective.