This video incorrectly portrays anarchy and is historically inaccurate. The Bolsheviks in Russia overtook a monarchy. Hitler rose to power from the Weimar Republic.
@JakeTheShake from a historical perspective the account is correct...as explained in the video, both russia and germany were oligarchies that rose from chaos.
EDUCATION! We need more! Please educate the masses so that they wont take this for an explanation on politics and basic government. Stupid F**king uploader.
this is completley wrong, do not listen to this. I cant believe this, it just makes americans worse. To the person who uploaded this i say you sir, are making the global dum american problem WORSE.
If you remove the government, you remove all institutions that it comes with, such as police.
Then, a small financial elite is allowed to controll everything. This logic is always idiotic, since republic doesnt actually say anything about politics. You can have a capitalist republic or a socialist republic. Its still a republic. A republic is not a definition of controll, like democracy, fascism, monarchy, etc.
@gulbirk socialism requires govt force, but you are correct.... the ussr , would be an example of this...although, the soviet union was an oligarchy as well.
I'm curious why Republic is better than Democracy, based exclusively on the old west model. If all 35 people want the outlaw killed, it's unanimous. So instead, under a Republic, they let another group of people (a jury) decide, after what we can presume was a drawn out trial and tax payer's money spent, just to also unanimously decide the same thing that the lynch mob already unanimously decided on? The simple example shows why our "republic" is corrupted by bureaucracy.
@rockon6191 said: "I've been saying for years that the extreme of modern conservatism is anarchy, not fascism. How could wanting less government ever lead to fascism? It's great to see this video putting the spectrum into modern, pragmatic terms."
Im just gonna go out on a limb here. Isnt a brand of anarchism a so called leftist ideology, but according to this it would be the most rightwing form of government? This video is a little...dumb.
I've been saying for years that the extreme of modern conservatism is anarchy, not fascism. How could wanting less government ever lead to fascism? It's great to see this video putting the spectrum into modern, pragmatic terms.
This is nonsense. The political spectrum can be confusing - people often mean different things when they refer to ideas that are 'right' and 'left wing'. It can refer to attitudes towards change - far right being reactionary (trying to put back in place a previous situation), far left being revolutionary (trying to put in place a fundamentally different system), but it can also refer to a planned vs a free market economy. Type left-right politics into wikipedia instead.
@cubster100 The left–right political spectrum is a common way of classifying political positions, political ideologies, or political parties along a one-dimensional political spectrum. Left-wing politics and right-wing politics are often presented as polar opposites, and although a particular individual or party may take a left-wing stance on one matter and a right-wing stance on another, the terms left and right are commonly used as if they described two globally opposed political families.
@cubster100 Left generally refer to support for social change to create a more egalitarian society. y usually involve a concern for those in society who are disadvantaged relatively to others and an assumption that there are unjustified inequalities (which right-wing politics view as natural or traditional) that should be reduced or abolished.
Right-wing: enerally refer to support for a hierarchical society justified by an appeal to natural law or tradition.
@cubster100 "people often mean different things when they refer to ideas that are 'right' and 'left wing'."
Which is confusing.... This is much more straightforward, and actually the original meaning of "left vs. right". What's the point of having a standard political spectrum if people can throw around these terms and have "different meanings" for them? Also, referring people to Wikipedia doesn't necessarily help your case...
The right was originally composed of monarchists, the left was composed of commoners, which included capitalists. Overtime, as socialism began to emerge, it became apparent that capitalism didn’t seek a classless society, so from then on, it became known as right-wing (along with monarchism).
The division is equality vs hierarchy. It always has been. The different types of anarchy, tyrany, etc, end up in different areas of the political spectrum.
@pitasmith1 The thing is, Anarchism only leads to more government which we've learned from history.
I hate how these occupy idiots call themselves anarchists just because they hate capitalism and support Obama. If you're a true anarchist, you support no government.
I disagree with this guy and I agree with slug99 (slug99 means the vid. doesn't cover constructivism in any way). Socialism does not belong next to communism - it is effectively left of centre (yes that's right centre is spelt centre not center). The horse shoe theory is a better way of understanding politics, because there are clearly differences between fascism and communism . This guy obv. doesn't understand anarchy. Read a book or go to uni. if you want to learn more.
@JohnJ469 A lot of times, it's more economic than political. Even Hitler said that there was little difference between Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.
At first,the Nazis were more towards the left, but being that the conservative arms factories wouldn't support them because of their socialist ways, the Nazi party had to change and go more to the right in order to obtain power. The Nazis still kept a lot of their socialist ideas.
@thejcjmguy So what is the difference between fascism and communism? People might say that fascists are racist; commies aren't. If that's completely true, then why did Hitler allie with Japan and other countries? Why didn't he just pick countries that only had blonde hair blue-eyed people? Which would be impossible. Unless he were to kill off everyone in each country he conquered, and only left the blue-eyed blonde hair ones.
@SunshineSuperman0999 He would even have to kill off most of his own party because not all Nazis were blue-eyed and blonde.
And what about the millions that Stalin had killed? Sure, they were in his own country, but they were still of different races.
Fascists hate gays; commies don't. Yes, the Nazis did persecute gays. The Nazi party was also helped to be founded by a gay. (Ernst Rohm) Many in the party were gay, even high brass like Rudolph Hess.
@SunshineSuperman0999 Castro didn't like gays. Watch that movie with Javier Bardem were he has to escape Cuba because he's being persecuted by the Castro government.
Even Hitler said that there was little difference between Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.
@SunshineSuperman0999 It's called being a pragmatist. He allied with the SU for a while, Warsaw Pact, before betraying them and would likely have done the same to Japan eventually. Hitler needed help in the pacific to prevent American involvement in Europe - Japan was the solution. Also I would say that some "communists" were racist and/or genocidal because communism in theory is different to practice Did you know that Stalin committed more genocide than Hitler, which included ethnic cleansing?
@thejcjmguy just like i thought, using this or that to serve their own needs. just like the nazi party being more to the left at first. they needed the support of the right-winged arms factories who would give it to them because of the nazi party's socialist way. so things had to change.
but wasn't stalin's genocide more towards his own? (Russians) then again, hitler's was towards his own also. (german jews)
@SunshineSuperman0999 Yes the Nazi party began with left wing tendencies, the Rohm was eliminated, but wasn't so much the factories as the business men; communist propaganda often associates Hitler with rich businessmen. Stalin's genocide was political, but included mass genocide as well. Look it up I can't be bothered to explain it here :P
@thejcjmguy that's why i tell people that stalin wasn't communist, and hitler was a fascist, they just used those ideologies to control people. the russian commie big shots preached about the evils of capitalism, yet lived like capitalist themselves.
another thing too,when russia was a super power, how was their military built up? i'm sure it was built up through the work of the people; capitalist factors had to come into play somehow.
Awesome Video ...I would like to see it played on that big screen TV in NYC...! During one of these OWS gatherings...The very fabric of this Nation has been systematically destroyed and the only HOPE is that enough people can grasp a hold of some basic principles of truth ...that are displayed very well in this Video...Thanks for the post..!
The closest thing I can think of to right-wing anarchist thought would be maybe something out of 19th century Russia, certain Agrarian Populists there or maybe some of Lev Tolstoi's writings...but even then it is a mixture of conservative instincts and left-wing views of authority.
Thank you for trying to be rational, unlike some other commenters. If the video is only concerned with State power, so that anarchism simply is deemed far right and fascism far left, your spectrum appears to be concerned with property or capitalism. Ideologies highly concerned with abstract liberty or equality are both competing types of left-wing thought, as they are profoundly anti-conservative, not concerned with a social order that can maintain itself.
@craigslistflow Am a mutualist and proud of it. This video is really just a pile of crap. A giant one. Created by the John Birch Society, reporting those damn commie agents for Americuh since who knows when.
@DinodudeEpic You are a lying asshat. Birch had NOTHING to do with this. This is 100% historically accurate.
If you can disprove a word please do so. If you had a point it was impossible to detect.
Left and right only ever evolved because the commies and the Fascist were so violent that delegating bodied in Europe put them on opposite sides of the assemblies! They both wanted the exact same supporters and power and credit! Not surprising in the least
-_- not in the explanation of far-left nor far-right it is explained in the spectrum of zero government to full government rule, said that at the start...
1. "you are an ignorant" --that is not a noun. See 'ignoramus', moron.
2. If "they" are textbooks and mainstream media, I don't believe their use of political terms either.
3. The problem is that the Right has always been concerned with social order and the Left with abstract revolutionary ideas. The video has this backwards. Anarchy is far left and monarchy is on the right.
@DiscoDude82 This video is void of substance and is totally and ignorantly false or skewed. Do you have a problem with me shouting that truth aloud? I won't stop for you.
@DiscoDude82 This video is void of substance and is totally and ignorantly false or skewed. Do you have a problem with me shout that truth aloud? I won't stop for you.
@DiscoDude82 This is video is void of sustence and is totally and ignorant false or skewed. Do have a problem with me shout that truth aloud? I won't stop for you.
This is the John Birch society. They believe it's okay to spread lies to further their fundamentalist christian government agenda. So there's no such thing as a dictatorship, because it's a group of people, so says these uneducated morons who try to rewrite history and brainwash the ignorant
This is a good video in its explanation, but what it is describing is best termed as the "Power Spectrum" or "Political Power Spectrum" since what it shows is the various concentrations of political power across the board, from 0% to 100%. In this scenario, it isn't a left/right proposition, but an all/nothing illustration that should be used.
Forms of government do fall into the left/right illustration used, including Oligarchy, Democracy, Republic, etc., but they should not be confused.
This is silly - all it comes down to is power or no power. Communism, Socialism, Nazism, Fascism, etc. --- all in one category. Right-wing means no government? Wow. If this video was honest and informed it would explain that the US system is an oligarchy and always has been. Look at the individuals who wrote the Consitution, they were the oligarchy. Today, the US is still an oligarchy exactly how he defines it in this video... wow.
This is silly - all it comes down to is power or no power. Communism, Socialism, Nazism, Fascism, etc. --- all in one category. Right-wing means no government? Wow. If this video was honest and informed it would explain that the US system is an oligarchy and always has been. Look at the individuals who wrote the Consitution, they were the oligarchy. Today, the US is still an oligarchy exactly how he defines it in this video... wow.
Left, center, and right was developed of the typical way that mp's sat in parliament in Great Britain. It was where our founders were somewhat influenced in the political arena. Parliament is rectangular, not round. So, people who were politically liberal sat largely on the left of the chambers. Those who were conservative tend to separate themselves, and ended up on the right. Those who were kind of in the middle, ended up sitting in the middle. This became a way of discussing where you were o
The video is not discussing left, right, and center. It is discussing the political spectrum. A spectrum moves from total accumulation on one side and opposite accumulation on the opposite. Left, center, and right as we define it in American politis
No, just no. Take for example socialism and communism. Communism was defined by Lenin and Marx as "stateless, moneyless, classless", so should be far-right. Socialism can be stateless, namely workers' self-management combined with common ownership. Anarchism advocates common ownership and workplace democracy, and is thus socialist. So, anarchism, communism, socialism are all both far-right and far-left.
So, because Lenin and Marx marketed their twisted ideologies with words that makes it true? LOL
What % of GDP does a Communist country control and spend? The terms you're trying to find are not true.
Ever consider that the one guarantee of a marxist/socialist is that they lie?
"Shut you you're stupid" is never a good way to convince anyone... it's what the Marxist thugs used. Shouting louder or swearing doesn't make you right. Truth comes from God.
It's the other way around dummy. The West twisted the words of Lenin and Marx around. Communism is defined as "stateless, moneyless, classless". So a communist country (which is an oxymoron since communism abolishes the nation-state) spends 0% of a non-existent GDP.
Truth comes from God? LOL. Ok nevermind, can't argue with that.
@GodOfTheInternets "Anarchism advocates common ownership and workplace democracy, and is thus socialist." Right... But WITHOUT government. The political spectrum is only concerned with GOVERNMENT involvement. Anarchism is INDIVIDUAL collectivism while socialism is GOVERNMENT MANDATED collectivism. Get it?
Which makes absolutely no sense since Anarchism is a form of socialism by its very definition. Communism and socialism should not be on the left on this idiotic political spectrum.
@GodOfTheInternets does it matter what side of the chart it's on? Also, in the real world anarchy doesn't resemble socialism...and the utopian vision of both have never lived up to the promise. real world= Anarchy= chaos...then normally transition to tyrany ie: total govt ownership or socialism.
@mayej This political spectrum was invented by the John Birch society solely as anti communist propaganda. First off, they lie about the current political spectrum, it's a four way scale not a two way. Fascism isn't necessarily far right in the real political spectrum, Ayn Rand style objectivism is the far right. In this spectrum far right doesn't exist in the modern world and everything bad is on the far left. If far right doesn't exist and far left is all things bad what's the use? PROPAGANDA
@THEINVENTABLETHREAT "If far right doesn't exist and far left is all things bad what's the use? PROPAGANDA" You miss the point: Far right = NO government. Far left = TOTAL government. The only propaganda is that of the media talking heads who throw around the terms "right" and "left" without having a clue what they mean.
@mattchappelart1 I don't think you understand that this political spectrum isn't real, It doesn't exist in any academic or historical context. The JBS invented it and I give them the benefit of the doubt when I say it's propaganda because if it's not, they were too lazy/stupid to educate themselves on the basic meaning of the true academic political spectrum. Left and Right is purely an economic scale. Up down is totalitarian vs libertarian. It makes lots of sense, look it up.
what about leaving people alone to determine their own lives? rather than power hungry "democrats" aka politicians decide for us. every vote for a politician gives you the right to decide what handcuffs you're gonna wear.
this is complete bullshit, left wing just means social change, and right wing means orthodox roots Nazism is right wing because religion being tied into politics and racism are old beliefs
@wtfkidproductions Boy do you need a history lesson. Almost the majority of liberals believe that this is false, guess what, it is fact. Start studying history to learn how you are throwing away your rights.
@wtfkidproductions You mean the campaign to suppress denominational and Christian youth organizations, denominational schools, and the use of defamation against the clergy, orchestrated to start on the same day over the Reich? You mean the infiltration of churches, arrest and assault of pastors, and the "re-education" of church congregations? Here's some advice: Cut out the bullshit.
The political spectrum should be looked at like a grid. Corporatism is on the far-right, socialism is on the far-left, and anarcho-capitalism is in the middle. Authoritarianism would be toward the top, libertarianism would be toward the bottom. Totalitarianism would be in the top-left corner, fascism would be in the top-right corner, and anarchy would be in the middle on the very bottom.
@classiclibertarian Boy do you need a history lesson. Almost the majority of liberals believe that this is false, guess what, it is fact. Start studying history to learn how you are throwing away your rights.
(cont) and the working class was more oppressed than ever. Also, everything that is not proletarian is bourgeois, there is no third way. And this has nothing to do with values, since classes are economic categories.
im sorry but your wrong. this just isnt the definition-whoever taught this to you was wrong. this is not what the politicl spectrum looks like and you need to be sorted out. are you suggesting that facsism is when the government has no power?
@mattchappelart1 you are completely wrong. This is for everone, DO NOT LISTEN TO THIS CANNIBIS SMOKER. YOU ARE ALL COMPLETLEY WRONG. I FIND IT HARD TO UNDERSTAND HOW KNOLEDGE COULD BECOME SO PERVERTED. BUT THEN THE OBVIOUS ANSWER IS THAT YOU'RE ALL AMERICAN, WHICH WOULD EXPLAIN QUITE A FEW THINGS.
@mattchappelart1 You are correct. Everything that Fascism, Communism and Nazism stands for is on the far Left. I laugh at history books that say Nazis and Itlalian Fascists are Right wing. Where idiots get Right wing out of National Socialist German Workers Party is beyond belief. Obviously with a name like socialist123 they will never understand.
Do you not realize that 1) this thing about left-wing being total government and right-wing being no government is ridiculous, as it is exactly the other way around. Right-wingers want more power in either the government or corporations. Real left-wingers, such as communists want to eliminate the reason for there being a state and thus the state itself 2) the US is an oligarchy 3) Anarchy means order and is not impossible if the people are smart enough to keep it.
The idea that Fascism is left wing only and that Right Wing is no government is ridiculous, take a look at what is going on now in the US with Obama and previously with Bush, both who seem to be ruled by the Corporations. The only valid system is REAL Democracy which the Spanish people are fighting for now, without using violence and with no leaders only the people!!
The biggest problem with this video is that it simply doesn't even bother exploring the history of the concept of left-right politics. If you did you'd see that this video is basically just proposes an alternative to the historical use of this concept, which is that left means more government and right means less, it doesn't actually explain how the left-right concept actually works.
@Slug99 The original definiton of left wing was the radicals, I.e. Fascists, Commies, on the far-left, no govt on the far-right much like the French parliamentary system in 1789 is what this guy is getting it. Those who don't define fascism as right wing don't define their terms. Fascism is total govt. ideology that is a hybrid of socialism, capitalism, communism, and other ideologies to form a "lessened" left. The left claims they're right wing. That was a political pissing contest between them
@Patchman123 Actually, the originial definition in the French parliament was the aristocrats on the right and the repr. of the bourgeoisie on the left. Later, when the aristocrats didn't exist anymore, the repr. of the bourgeoisie moved to the right, and the repr. of the working class (i.e. socialists and communists) were on the left. Politics is, basically, class struggle. Fascism is the open dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and the ultimate goal of communists is the abolition of the state.
No, fascism is not bourgeois dictatorship. That is where the Marxist analysis is off. In practice, where fascism has gotten into power, it started out as a radical anti-bourgeois movement and ended up making agreements with sections of the conservative, nationalistic parts of the bourgeoisie and aristocracy. The idea that fascism represents bourgeois values and targets the proletariat especially is ridiculous Marxist fantasy, I am sorry to say.
@maxime32 Fascism was described by Mussolini as the merger of the state and corporations. It was supposed to replace class conflict with class collaboration and was thus inherently anti-communist, and anti-proletarian. The only reason why they started out as a supposedly anti-bourgeois movement was that they needed the support of the working class in order to get to power. If you look at, e.g. Nazi Germany, you will see that fascism was the best thing that could happen to the bourgeoisie (cont)
@Patchman123 The right wing has always been defined by conservatism. The right of late 18th century were those that supported the old orders like aristocracy. Fascists are right in that they want have a society which is far more akin to a functioning monarchy, where the state is a supreme entity and where all are direct servants to the leader or a group of such. Thus they are conservatives and right wing. Socialism aim for society which is different from that and the current,therefore left wing.
@Slug99 Actually, the concept of Right and Left, comes from the ages of the kings. In every meeting, the king sat in his tron, and there was an isle in the middle, they had chais to left side of the throne and chairs on the rights side of the throne. The people who sat on the left side, were from the village, and the people that sat on the right side of the room, were the clerks, the people close to the king, the same people who have privileges.
@Slug99 If you had a point it was impossible to detect.
The fact is that true right and left are measured on a scale of personal liberty to slavery...PERIOD
This is NOT an alternative...this is the historic and ONLY correct way to see it.
Left and right only ever evolved because the commies and the Fascist were so violent that delegating bodied in Europe put them on opposite sides of the assemblies! They both wanted the exact same supporters and power and credit! Not surprising in the least
@mitch7788 The left-right has far more to do with power of government, it's about the policies of the government. While a socialist and a fascist might agree with the methods of implementing their policies, they wildly disagree what those policies are. Fascists generally want a nationalistic state where a small elite control society, similar to how monarchies where run while a socialist might want a democratic society, a kind of dictatorship where the majority rules.
@mitch7788 The left-right has far more to do with power of government, it's about the policies of the government. While a socialist and a fascist might agree with the methods of implementing their policies, they wildly disagree what those policies are. Fascists generally want a nationalistic state where a small elite control society, similar to how monarchies where run while a socialist might want a democratic society, a kind of dictatorship where the majority rules.
How can monarchy be a dictatorship when countries like Britain are monarchies without dictatorships, along with Serbia, which HAD a monarcy, along with Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia only took a total government when parliament was abolished in 1929, following a coup. Not all monarchies are dictatorships. The Royal Family of Holland is an advisory role, along with Denmark, Norway, Belgium, and Sweden. THESE countries are monarchies that aren't dictatorships. See what I mean? This is it.
Monarchy means rule by one, which is, not ironically, also the definition of a dictatorship. The term 'monarchy' on its own does not imply a royal court and other feudal trappings. If you think the monarchs of Britain, Denmark, Norway, etc. are only in "advisory roles" (you'd be wrong, but that's another issue), then they are not really monarchs, just heads of state like a weak president in a parliamentary system.
Secondly, monarchy does not mean the government uses total power to control the people. It is authoritarian, but usually not totalitarian. By contrast, democracies can be totalitarian, and in fact, a totalitarian society, even if there is no multiparty pluralism, does rely on the participation of the masses (this is part of the socialistic element of fascism). Monarchies/typical dictatorships rely on their subjects being passive and apolitical.
@maxime32 because you aren't educated enough to understand that legislating morality (social conservatism) puts more power into the hands of govt--thus it is left wing.
No, you are so uneducated you do not understand that the political spectrum is not all about STATE power, but to the extent that it is, the received tradition of the use of the term implies that a strong State concerned with maintaining social order is RIGHT-WING while anarchist derivations are LEFT-WING.
Because Monarchism is stringently authoritarian and your pothead anarchist desires control, order and civilization to be undone completely. The anarchist wants NO government.
@maxime If you had a point it was impossible to detect.
The fact is that true right and left are measured on a scale of personal liberty to slavery...PERIOD
This is NOT an alternative...this is the historic and ONLY correct way to see it.
Left and right only ever evolved because the commies and the Fascist were so violent that delegating bodied in Europe put them on opposite sides of the assemblies! They both wanted the exact same supporters and power and credit! Not surprising in the least
Yes, democracy is flawed by design. If you can convince 50.1% that something is right then you win. or it is like two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch.
@1Openminded1 The problem is that any solution you have to that problem would essentially be a minority rule rather than majority rule. I mean unless you're proposes no government, there must be someone who is in charge of what it does. Democracy would be the better solution since a minority rule can easily turn into a situation where the wolves just eat the sheep regardless of how many there are.
A true governments purpose should be to maintain the welfare of its people, because the government is supposed to be THE PEOPLE, not the rich guys looking out for themselves. America is not a Democracy or a republic, it's an Oligarchy right now and u see THE PEOPLE suffering under their tyranny and greed. If the government were good, it would maintain an equilibrium where the majority had what they needed and were not in want of things, thus nearly eliminating crime and suffering.
Greek qoute, "Without LAW there can be no FREEDOM" Luckily the Earth already has its own Natural Law and we don't need an Oligarchy telling us what to do.
If a republic is based on the law, that all people are created equal, and a true jury of peers are established, then perhaps the republic is the way. However there is not one that I know that has truly been just in law, and letting the people be freer.. How is the US (my country) truly freer, when our laws are as intrusive and invasive as some of those spoken of under Hitler? A man in Alaska, woman in Florida, child in Arizona, all should have equal value under law. Every human.
@ObscurityBound true however, there is a always a difference in ideal and actuality. also a difference between is and direction...... right now we are an is with a direction toward oligarchy..... started in the 30's.... noone alive is at fault except more toward the same.
democracy literally mean (dêmos) "people" and (Kratos) "power". = people power. how do you decide in a true democracy how things gets done? by majority rule. that also is the same for a true republic except the law prevents the majority from doing certain things. democracy however by definition is not restrained by any rules, ..... also in the video it says democracy is not a stable form and it will always ends up either a oligarchy or a republic. the narrator did not lie
@YESobamaCANfuckupUSA Then how do you explain that there are rules/laws in a democratic country? Can you prove that it will always end up either a oligarchy or a republic?
again you dont get the point, im talking about pure democracy. what your thinking of is constitutional democracy = which is somewhat like a republic or an oligarchy
the american governemt. it was in anarchy = did not work, democracy = even the founders said its the most barbaric form of governemt .......... then the republic
it is wrong to say that democracy is not restraint. Ofcourse there can be rules in a democracy. Hence the video is flawed. Clearly a pro-american, pro-republic propagandist.
This video is factually incorrect. I say this not from bias or belief. This is wrong. Ask a political scientist at any major university and they will refute this entire seven minutes of drivel. Anyone who says this is correct has not been educated in the field of political science. It is disrespectful to the field of political science to have this sort of thing circulated. It undermines the work that so many have done over the years.
ONLY IN AMERICA YOU WOULD HAVE THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM BACKWARDS. No one considers monarchy as the extreme left wing. Similarly no one outside the US believes that anarchy is the extreme right.
Why do Americans have such a tremendous pride for their founding fathers ? They were NOT good people. They had slaves, they endorsed policies that promoted severe class struggle. They wanted to limit the voices of the poor and working class. Please don't think of your country as a noble & perfect entity
then why is there room in the constitution to change laws and make amendments? Also, why bother with elections if the government is not meant to change laws?
Okay I'm really confused. it says in wiki that the leftists are usually individualists and the rights are usually populist when it comes to cultural issues. What? Shouldn't it be the other way around? left being communist and pro-government instead of pro-individuals?
@jupiterflunk92 search youtube "political spectrum" and watch "Saving the World 1 Video at a time: The Political Spectrum". That guy explains using a two axis grid, (economic axis and a social axis) makes a whole lot more sense than a 1 axis spectrum.
As a non American, I can assure you that most of the world/academia reject this theory in this video, largly because this perspective is interpreted as an attempt for the right in the US to dodge all the gritty facts about the "traditional" extreme right. Also extreme right (Nazism) and left (Communism) can easily be destinguished by anyone who can be bothered to take a politcal science course. Although both may be authoritarian in extreme, their ideological foundations are totally different.
and guess what, the founders also believe in this spectrum. ok, can you name me one thing that the nazi did that is considered 'fascist' but not in the soviet. and can you name me one thing that the soviet union did that can be considered socialist that is also not implemented in the nazi germany.
the spectrum you are looking at is inadequate, it is self contracting.also what makes the left left and the right right?
I like how this guy does not include the other 2 parts to his video, that break down the reality of how things work and stand in 100% opposition to the big gov, socialist trivel he usally involves self with.
In the West we live in plutocratic Oligarchies where a wealthy minority control two party systems of representative pseudo-democracy to legitimize the awesome concentration of power and wealth of a ruling class in each and every Western nation.
Hitler and Mussolini -- the exemplars of fascist ideology -- were in league with industry. The Nazi government didn't control German businesses in the 1930s, German industrialists supported Hitler. He in turn kept German communists from revolution by sending them to the death camps. Hitler actually saved German capitalism.
"Fascism should more properly be called 'corporatism,' since it is the ultimate merger of business and the state." ~ Benito Mussolini
One of the qualities of fascists: Forced suppression of the opposition.
What's the matter? No one's ever told you the truth about fascism & Nazism before? Do you get all of your information from unsourced and idiotic You Tube videos?
Read Franz Neumann's book 'Behemoth,' written by a German during Hitler's rule. It's a complete picture of Hitler's relationship with Germany's elite industrial families and the massive profits they earned during WW2.
The biggest problem with this spectrum is there is no economic axe. Thus there are serious flaws in this presentation like communism and fascism being in the same front while in reality they are the exact opposit of each other in economic terms. But let me be more frank; This presentation is incomplete and misleading.
So anarcho-communism is Right-wing? What about Left anarchism?
Some people say that the Left-Right spectrum doesn't have anything to do with government, but that the Left want egalitarianism while the Right want a free market.
@zzL33Tzz socialism is a form of government where the economy is controlled by the government, therefore giving them complete control. Anarchy should not be far left, because far left is greater government control, wheras anarchy is the lack of a government, meaning it should be far right. Nazism is also complete government control, meaning it should go to the left. This is merely putting the spectrum the way it should be, government control to the left, and lack of it to the right.
No, control of the economy just means that they are in control of the money that is in the country, and under socialism it is concentrated on public spending and funding the people, it has nothing to do with control of the people.
Anarchy is as far left as you can get mate, left and right is NOT decided on government intervention, it is almost good and evil. On the left, they favour the people and their welfare (free healthcare etc), on the right they care about profit at any cost.
Socialism is total goverment? OK, how do you explain the socialist goverments in Europe? They are democracies based on socialistic ideologies! They are far from totalistic!
the lie that Nazi's were of the left is ridiculous. The spectrum you show is simplistic and misleading. There are so many types of socialism from libertarian socialism to Stalinism, they bear little resemblance to each other. Nazi's jailed and murdered socialists and communists. the social democratic parties of Europe today have no relation to stalinism or nazi's whatsoever. Socialist Brittish Labor Prime Minister Atlee devoted his life to defeating Nazi's and Stalinists.
This video incorrectly portrays anarchy and is historically inaccurate. The Bolsheviks in Russia overtook a monarchy. Hitler rose to power from the Weimar Republic.
JakeTheShake 1 week ago
@JakeTheShake from a historical perspective the account is correct...as explained in the video, both russia and germany were oligarchies that rose from chaos.
rogerable77 1 week ago
EDUCATION! We need more! Please educate the masses so that they wont take this for an explanation on politics and basic government. Stupid F**king uploader.
solowenz 2 weeks ago
this is completley wrong, do not listen to this. I cant believe this, it just makes americans worse. To the person who uploaded this i say you sir, are making the global dum american problem WORSE.
socialist123 3 weeks ago
There will always be someone in charge, PERIOD.
If you remove the government, you remove all institutions that it comes with, such as police.
Then, a small financial elite is allowed to controll everything. This logic is always idiotic, since republic doesnt actually say anything about politics. You can have a capitalist republic or a socialist republic. Its still a republic. A republic is not a definition of controll, like democracy, fascism, monarchy, etc.
gulbirk 3 weeks ago
@gulbirk socialism requires govt force, but you are correct.... the ussr , would be an example of this...although, the soviet union was an oligarchy as well.
rogerable77 1 week ago
doesn't this only show one axis of the political spectrum?
Unclesamslair 3 weeks ago
I'm curious why Republic is better than Democracy, based exclusively on the old west model. If all 35 people want the outlaw killed, it's unanimous. So instead, under a Republic, they let another group of people (a jury) decide, after what we can presume was a drawn out trial and tax payer's money spent, just to also unanimously decide the same thing that the lynch mob already unanimously decided on? The simple example shows why our "republic" is corrupted by bureaucracy.
slantana 3 weeks ago
Political spectrum does not depends on Statism, but rather on how they face Hierarchy
Right wing is usually defined by defending the current hierarchy and leftists tend to be against hierarchy
rodasnepervilo 3 weeks ago
@rockon6191 said: "I've been saying for years that the extreme of modern conservatism is anarchy, not fascism. How could wanting less government ever lead to fascism? It's great to see this video putting the spectrum into modern, pragmatic terms."
4:15 That is your answer.
jonh2o 3 weeks ago
THIS IS EXCELLENT!
Mille3ever 3 weeks ago
Im just gonna go out on a limb here. Isnt a brand of anarchism a so called leftist ideology, but according to this it would be the most rightwing form of government? This video is a little...dumb.
Auraruth8 4 weeks ago
I've been saying for years that the extreme of modern conservatism is anarchy, not fascism. How could wanting less government ever lead to fascism? It's great to see this video putting the spectrum into modern, pragmatic terms.
rockon6191 1 month ago
This is nonsense. The political spectrum can be confusing - people often mean different things when they refer to ideas that are 'right' and 'left wing'. It can refer to attitudes towards change - far right being reactionary (trying to put back in place a previous situation), far left being revolutionary (trying to put in place a fundamentally different system), but it can also refer to a planned vs a free market economy. Type left-right politics into wikipedia instead.
cubster100 1 month ago
@cubster100 The left–right political spectrum is a common way of classifying political positions, political ideologies, or political parties along a one-dimensional political spectrum. Left-wing politics and right-wing politics are often presented as polar opposites, and although a particular individual or party may take a left-wing stance on one matter and a right-wing stance on another, the terms left and right are commonly used as if they described two globally opposed political families.
NatedogJr 1 month ago
@cubster100 Left generally refer to support for social change to create a more egalitarian society. y usually involve a concern for those in society who are disadvantaged relatively to others and an assumption that there are unjustified inequalities (which right-wing politics view as natural or traditional) that should be reduced or abolished.
Right-wing: enerally refer to support for a hierarchical society justified by an appeal to natural law or tradition.
NatedogJr 1 month ago
@cubster100 "people often mean different things when they refer to ideas that are 'right' and 'left wing'."
Which is confusing.... This is much more straightforward, and actually the original meaning of "left vs. right". What's the point of having a standard political spectrum if people can throw around these terms and have "different meanings" for them? Also, referring people to Wikipedia doesn't necessarily help your case...
mattchappelart1 3 weeks ago
Monarchism is left…lol really?
The right was originally composed of monarchists, the left was composed of commoners, which included capitalists. Overtime, as socialism began to emerge, it became apparent that capitalism didn’t seek a classless society, so from then on, it became known as right-wing (along with monarchism).
The division is equality vs hierarchy. It always has been. The different types of anarchy, tyrany, etc, end up in different areas of the political spectrum.
Minarchist088 2 months ago
Anarchism is a legitimate way for a society to function.
In fact it is the only proper way.
pitasmith1 2 months ago
@pitasmith1 The thing is, Anarchism only leads to more government which we've learned from history.
I hate how these occupy idiots call themselves anarchists just because they hate capitalism and support Obama. If you're a true anarchist, you support no government.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@SunshineSuperman0999
Look at what Cuba got out of Anarchy. 50+ years of Fidel, and counting.
This Occupy crowd doesn't have a clue what it is advocating. Reminds me of the doped up Utopian Dream crowd of the 60's.
TXranger55 2 months ago
@TXranger55 Cuba is not an anarchy...
Anarchism advocates getting rid of the government and replacing competition with cooperation. There's more to it than what this video portrays.
pitasmith1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012!
dvnwnd07 2 months ago
Comment removed
trilobright 3 months ago
I disagree with this guy and I agree with slug99 (slug99 means the vid. doesn't cover constructivism in any way). Socialism does not belong next to communism - it is effectively left of centre (yes that's right centre is spelt centre not center). The horse shoe theory is a better way of understanding politics, because there are clearly differences between fascism and communism . This guy obv. doesn't understand anarchy. Read a book or go to uni. if you want to learn more.
thejcjmguy 3 months ago
@thejcjmguy If you mean communism as theorised I would agree.
However could you point out some actual differences between Communism and Fascism as they have been practiced for the last 100 years?
JohnJ469 2 months ago
@JohnJ469 A lot of times, it's more economic than political. Even Hitler said that there was little difference between Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.
At first,the Nazis were more towards the left, but being that the conservative arms factories wouldn't support them because of their socialist ways, the Nazi party had to change and go more to the right in order to obtain power. The Nazis still kept a lot of their socialist ideas.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@thejcjmguy So what is the difference between fascism and communism? People might say that fascists are racist; commies aren't. If that's completely true, then why did Hitler allie with Japan and other countries? Why didn't he just pick countries that only had blonde hair blue-eyed people? Which would be impossible. Unless he were to kill off everyone in each country he conquered, and only left the blue-eyed blonde hair ones.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@SunshineSuperman0999 He would even have to kill off most of his own party because not all Nazis were blue-eyed and blonde.
And what about the millions that Stalin had killed? Sure, they were in his own country, but they were still of different races.
Fascists hate gays; commies don't. Yes, the Nazis did persecute gays. The Nazi party was also helped to be founded by a gay. (Ernst Rohm) Many in the party were gay, even high brass like Rudolph Hess.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@SunshineSuperman0999 Castro didn't like gays. Watch that movie with Javier Bardem were he has to escape Cuba because he's being persecuted by the Castro government.
Even Hitler said that there was little difference between Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@SunshineSuperman0999 It's called being a pragmatist. He allied with the SU for a while, Warsaw Pact, before betraying them and would likely have done the same to Japan eventually. Hitler needed help in the pacific to prevent American involvement in Europe - Japan was the solution. Also I would say that some "communists" were racist and/or genocidal because communism in theory is different to practice Did you know that Stalin committed more genocide than Hitler, which included ethnic cleansing?
thejcjmguy 2 months ago
@thejcjmguy just like i thought, using this or that to serve their own needs. just like the nazi party being more to the left at first. they needed the support of the right-winged arms factories who would give it to them because of the nazi party's socialist way. so things had to change.
but wasn't stalin's genocide more towards his own? (Russians) then again, hitler's was towards his own also. (german jews)
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@SunshineSuperman0999 Yes the Nazi party began with left wing tendencies, the Rohm was eliminated, but wasn't so much the factories as the business men; communist propaganda often associates Hitler with rich businessmen. Stalin's genocide was political, but included mass genocide as well. Look it up I can't be bothered to explain it here :P
thejcjmguy 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thejcjmguy that's why i tell people that stalin wasn't communist, and hitler was a fascist, they just used those ideologies to control people. the russian commie big shots preached about the evils of capitalism, yet lived like capitalist themselves.
another thing too,when russia was a super power, how was their military built up? i'm sure it was built up through the work of the people; capitalist factors had to come into play somehow.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
@SunshineSuperman0999 stalin and mass genocide: i know there was the purges.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
Comment removed
thejcjmguy 3 months ago
Comment removed
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
Awesome Video ...I would like to see it played on that big screen TV in NYC...! During one of these OWS gatherings...The very fabric of this Nation has been systematically destroyed and the only HOPE is that enough people can grasp a hold of some basic principles of truth ...that are displayed very well in this Video...Thanks for the post..!
dmhappy2777 3 months ago
The closest thing I can think of to right-wing anarchist thought would be maybe something out of 19th century Russia, certain Agrarian Populists there or maybe some of Lev Tolstoi's writings...but even then it is a mixture of conservative instincts and left-wing views of authority.
maxime32 4 months ago
@craigslistflow
Thank you for trying to be rational, unlike some other commenters. If the video is only concerned with State power, so that anarchism simply is deemed far right and fascism far left, your spectrum appears to be concerned with property or capitalism. Ideologies highly concerned with abstract liberty or equality are both competing types of left-wing thought, as they are profoundly anti-conservative, not concerned with a social order that can maintain itself.
maxime32 4 months ago
wow, the statists really hate this vid huh? makes me sick that so many people beg and plead to be told what to do.
Britslovesocialism 4 months ago
@craigslistflow Am a mutualist and proud of it. This video is really just a pile of crap. A giant one. Created by the John Birch Society, reporting those damn commie agents for Americuh since who knows when.
DinodudeEpic 4 months ago
@DinodudeEpic You are a lying asshat. Birch had NOTHING to do with this. This is 100% historically accurate.
If you can disprove a word please do so. If you had a point it was impossible to detect.
Left and right only ever evolved because the commies and the Fascist were so violent that delegating bodied in Europe put them on opposite sides of the assemblies! They both wanted the exact same supporters and power and credit! Not surprising in the least
mitch7788 4 months ago
-_- not in the explanation of far-left nor far-right it is explained in the spectrum of zero government to full government rule, said that at the start...
ShotsAndHotSpots 4 months ago
@CaronteEmpire
1. "you are an ignorant" --that is not a noun. See 'ignoramus', moron.
2. If "they" are textbooks and mainstream media, I don't believe their use of political terms either.
3. The problem is that the Right has always been concerned with social order and the Left with abstract revolutionary ideas. The video has this backwards. Anarchy is far left and monarchy is on the right.
maxime32 5 months ago
god this is biased
11phish 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DiscoDude82 This video is void of substance and is totally and ignorantly false or skewed. Do you have a problem with me shouting that truth aloud? I won't stop for you.
Adeikov 5 months ago
@DiscoDude82 This video is void of substance and is totally and ignorantly false or skewed. Do you have a problem with me shout that truth aloud? I won't stop for you.
Adeikov 5 months ago
@DiscoDude82 This is video is void of sustence and is totally and ignorant false or skewed. Do have a problem with me shout that truth aloud? I won't stop for you.
Adeikov 5 months ago
THIS IS BIASED!
Adeikov 5 months ago
@Adeikov No shit, Sherlock. If you want unbiased, go read a history textbook.
DiscoDude82 5 months ago
@DiscoDude82 LOL. History is written by the... unbiased?
ivorydemosthenes 5 months ago
This is the John Birch society. They believe it's okay to spread lies to further their fundamentalist christian government agenda. So there's no such thing as a dictatorship, because it's a group of people, so says these uneducated morons who try to rewrite history and brainwash the ignorant
THEINVENTABLETHREAT 5 months ago
This is a good video in its explanation, but what it is describing is best termed as the "Power Spectrum" or "Political Power Spectrum" since what it shows is the various concentrations of political power across the board, from 0% to 100%. In this scenario, it isn't a left/right proposition, but an all/nothing illustration that should be used.
Forms of government do fall into the left/right illustration used, including Oligarchy, Democracy, Republic, etc., but they should not be confused.
Polissance 5 months ago
This is silly - all it comes down to is power or no power. Communism, Socialism, Nazism, Fascism, etc. --- all in one category. Right-wing means no government? Wow. If this video was honest and informed it would explain that the US system is an oligarchy and always has been. Look at the individuals who wrote the Consitution, they were the oligarchy. Today, the US is still an oligarchy exactly how he defines it in this video... wow.
GrassrootsWorldview 5 months ago
This is silly - all it comes down to is power or no power. Communism, Socialism, Nazism, Fascism, etc. --- all in one category. Right-wing means no government? Wow. If this video was honest and informed it would explain that the US system is an oligarchy and always has been. Look at the individuals who wrote the Consitution, they were the oligarchy. Today, the US is still an oligarchy exactly how he defines it in this video... wow.
GrassrootsWorldview 5 months ago
Left, center, and right was developed of the typical way that mp's sat in parliament in Great Britain. It was where our founders were somewhat influenced in the political arena. Parliament is rectangular, not round. So, people who were politically liberal sat largely on the left of the chambers. Those who were conservative tend to separate themselves, and ended up on the right. Those who were kind of in the middle, ended up sitting in the middle. This became a way of discussing where you were o
deeseification 5 months ago
The video is not discussing left, right, and center. It is discussing the political spectrum. A spectrum moves from total accumulation on one side and opposite accumulation on the opposite. Left, center, and right as we define it in American politis
deeseification 5 months ago
I think the ones disagreeing with this video are ones who have discovered the flaws in their beliefs and are grappling with how to make sense of it.
mayej 6 months ago 16
@mayej
No, just no. Take for example socialism and communism. Communism was defined by Lenin and Marx as "stateless, moneyless, classless", so should be far-right. Socialism can be stateless, namely workers' self-management combined with common ownership. Anarchism advocates common ownership and workplace democracy, and is thus socialist. So, anarchism, communism, socialism are all both far-right and far-left.
Shittiest political spectrum ever.
GodOfTheInternets 4 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets
So, because Lenin and Marx marketed their twisted ideologies with words that makes it true? LOL
What % of GDP does a Communist country control and spend? The terms you're trying to find are not true.
Ever consider that the one guarantee of a marxist/socialist is that they lie?
"Shut you you're stupid" is never a good way to convince anyone... it's what the Marxist thugs used. Shouting louder or swearing doesn't make you right. Truth comes from God.
clarkga7 3 months ago
@clarkga7
It's the other way around dummy. The West twisted the words of Lenin and Marx around. Communism is defined as "stateless, moneyless, classless". So a communist country (which is an oxymoron since communism abolishes the nation-state) spends 0% of a non-existent GDP.
Truth comes from God? LOL. Ok nevermind, can't argue with that.
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets "Anarchism advocates common ownership and workplace democracy, and is thus socialist." Right... But WITHOUT government. The political spectrum is only concerned with GOVERNMENT involvement. Anarchism is INDIVIDUAL collectivism while socialism is GOVERNMENT MANDATED collectivism. Get it?
mattchappelart1 3 weeks ago
@mattchappelart1
Which makes absolutely no sense since Anarchism is a form of socialism by its very definition. Communism and socialism should not be on the left on this idiotic political spectrum.
GodOfTheInternets 2 weeks ago
@GodOfTheInternets does it matter what side of the chart it's on? Also, in the real world anarchy doesn't resemble socialism...and the utopian vision of both have never lived up to the promise. real world= Anarchy= chaos...then normally transition to tyrany ie: total govt ownership or socialism.
rogerable77 1 week ago
@mayej This political spectrum was invented by the John Birch society solely as anti communist propaganda. First off, they lie about the current political spectrum, it's a four way scale not a two way. Fascism isn't necessarily far right in the real political spectrum, Ayn Rand style objectivism is the far right. In this spectrum far right doesn't exist in the modern world and everything bad is on the far left. If far right doesn't exist and far left is all things bad what's the use? PROPAGANDA
THEINVENTABLETHREAT 1 month ago
@THEINVENTABLETHREAT "If far right doesn't exist and far left is all things bad what's the use? PROPAGANDA" You miss the point: Far right = NO government. Far left = TOTAL government. The only propaganda is that of the media talking heads who throw around the terms "right" and "left" without having a clue what they mean.
mattchappelart1 3 weeks ago
@mattchappelart1 I don't think you understand that this political spectrum isn't real, It doesn't exist in any academic or historical context. The JBS invented it and I give them the benefit of the doubt when I say it's propaganda because if it's not, they were too lazy/stupid to educate themselves on the basic meaning of the true academic political spectrum. Left and Right is purely an economic scale. Up down is totalitarian vs libertarian. It makes lots of sense, look it up.
THEINVENTABLETHREAT 3 weeks ago
what about leaving people alone to determine their own lives? rather than power hungry "democrats" aka politicians decide for us. every vote for a politician gives you the right to decide what handcuffs you're gonna wear.
charleyfarleyish 6 months ago
this is just SLIGHTLY biased...
96Optimistic 6 months ago
to those arguing about left/right.. read up on the left/right paradigm
ScorpionProduktions 6 months ago
i think whoever made this video needs to inform themselves a bit more before trying to tell other people how to define their terms.
sheepblitzer 6 months ago
this is complete bullshit, left wing just means social change, and right wing means orthodox roots Nazism is right wing because religion being tied into politics and racism are old beliefs
wtfkidproductions 7 months ago
@wtfkidproductions Boy do you need a history lesson. Almost the majority of liberals believe that this is false, guess what, it is fact. Start studying history to learn how you are throwing away your rights.
termase 6 months ago
Comment removed
CarlosMarti123 5 months ago
@wtfkidproductions You mean the campaign to suppress denominational and Christian youth organizations, denominational schools, and the use of defamation against the clergy, orchestrated to start on the same day over the Reich? You mean the infiltration of churches, arrest and assault of pastors, and the "re-education" of church congregations? Here's some advice: Cut out the bullshit.
CarlosMarti123 5 months ago
The political spectrum should be looked at like a grid. Corporatism is on the far-right, socialism is on the far-left, and anarcho-capitalism is in the middle. Authoritarianism would be toward the top, libertarianism would be toward the bottom. Totalitarianism would be in the top-left corner, fascism would be in the top-right corner, and anarchy would be in the middle on the very bottom.
classiclibertarian 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@classiclibertarian Boy do you need a history lesson. Almost the majority of liberals believe that this is false, guess what, it is fact. Start studying history to learn how you are throwing away your rights.
termase 6 months ago
i believe in Technocracy, power residing in people with skill and who actually know what they are doing, a Technocratic Oligarchy if you will.
CTFxCsoldierNumber27 7 months ago
(cont) and the working class was more oppressed than ever. Also, everything that is not proletarian is bourgeois, there is no third way. And this has nothing to do with values, since classes are economic categories.
SomeoneCrazy2 7 months ago
Does that make anarchists far-right, even though they are STAUNCHLY far-left, like Chomsky and all those idiots?
Patchman123 7 months ago
im sorry but your wrong. this just isnt the definition-whoever taught this to you was wrong. this is not what the politicl spectrum looks like and you need to be sorted out. are you suggesting that facsism is when the government has no power?
socialist123 7 months ago
@socialist123 Fascism is absolute LEFT, with the state having supreme power. Absolute RIGHT would be anarchy with zero government.
mattchappelart1 3 weeks ago
@mattchappelart1 you are completely wrong. This is for everone, DO NOT LISTEN TO THIS CANNIBIS SMOKER. YOU ARE ALL COMPLETLEY WRONG. I FIND IT HARD TO UNDERSTAND HOW KNOLEDGE COULD BECOME SO PERVERTED. BUT THEN THE OBVIOUS ANSWER IS THAT YOU'RE ALL AMERICAN, WHICH WOULD EXPLAIN QUITE A FEW THINGS.
socialist123 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
GSPatton89 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mattchappelart1 You are correct. Everything that Fascism, Communism and Nazism stands for is on the far Left. I laugh at history books that say Nazis and Itlalian Fascists are Right wing. Where idiots get Right wing out of National Socialist German Workers Party is beyond belief. Obviously with a name like socialist123 they will never understand.
GSPatton89 3 weeks ago
and 4) Hitler came to power because people wanted a strong leader to help them out of the Depression, not because they wanted anarchy
SomeoneCrazy2 8 months ago
@SomeoneCrazy2
They suggest that the USA is NOT an oligarchy. WRONG! We are an oligarchy with where a elite few rule our government, JUST ASK OBAMA!
Patchman123 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Do you not realize that 1) this thing about left-wing being total government and right-wing being no government is ridiculous, as it is exactly the other way around. Right-wingers want more power in either the government or corporations. Real left-wingers, such as communists want to eliminate the reason for there being a state and thus the state itself 2) the US is an oligarchy 3) Anarchy means order and is not impossible if the people are smart enough to keep it.
SomeoneCrazy2 8 months ago
Comment removed
SomeoneCrazy2 8 months ago
The idea that Fascism is left wing only and that Right Wing is no government is ridiculous, take a look at what is going on now in the US with Obama and previously with Bush, both who seem to be ruled by the Corporations. The only valid system is REAL Democracy which the Spanish people are fighting for now, without using violence and with no leaders only the people!!
bright1948light 8 months ago
The biggest problem with this video is that it simply doesn't even bother exploring the history of the concept of left-right politics. If you did you'd see that this video is basically just proposes an alternative to the historical use of this concept, which is that left means more government and right means less, it doesn't actually explain how the left-right concept actually works.
Slug99 8 months ago 12
@Slug99 The original definiton of left wing was the radicals, I.e. Fascists, Commies, on the far-left, no govt on the far-right much like the French parliamentary system in 1789 is what this guy is getting it. Those who don't define fascism as right wing don't define their terms. Fascism is total govt. ideology that is a hybrid of socialism, capitalism, communism, and other ideologies to form a "lessened" left. The left claims they're right wing. That was a political pissing contest between them
Patchman123 7 months ago
@Patchman123 Actually, the originial definition in the French parliament was the aristocrats on the right and the repr. of the bourgeoisie on the left. Later, when the aristocrats didn't exist anymore, the repr. of the bourgeoisie moved to the right, and the repr. of the working class (i.e. socialists and communists) were on the left. Politics is, basically, class struggle. Fascism is the open dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and the ultimate goal of communists is the abolition of the state.
SomeoneCrazy2 7 months ago
@SomeoneCrazy2
No, fascism is not bourgeois dictatorship. That is where the Marxist analysis is off. In practice, where fascism has gotten into power, it started out as a radical anti-bourgeois movement and ended up making agreements with sections of the conservative, nationalistic parts of the bourgeoisie and aristocracy. The idea that fascism represents bourgeois values and targets the proletariat especially is ridiculous Marxist fantasy, I am sorry to say.
maxime32 7 months ago
@maxime32 Fascism was described by Mussolini as the merger of the state and corporations. It was supposed to replace class conflict with class collaboration and was thus inherently anti-communist, and anti-proletarian. The only reason why they started out as a supposedly anti-bourgeois movement was that they needed the support of the working class in order to get to power. If you look at, e.g. Nazi Germany, you will see that fascism was the best thing that could happen to the bourgeoisie (cont)
SomeoneCrazy2 7 months ago
@Patchman123 The right wing has always been defined by conservatism. The right of late 18th century were those that supported the old orders like aristocracy. Fascists are right in that they want have a society which is far more akin to a functioning monarchy, where the state is a supreme entity and where all are direct servants to the leader or a group of such. Thus they are conservatives and right wing. Socialism aim for society which is different from that and the current,therefore left wing.
Slug99 7 months ago
@Slug99 Actually, the concept of Right and Left, comes from the ages of the kings. In every meeting, the king sat in his tron, and there was an isle in the middle, they had chais to left side of the throne and chairs on the rights side of the throne. The people who sat on the left side, were from the village, and the people that sat on the right side of the room, were the clerks, the people close to the king, the same people who have privileges.
Carlosjavierestrada 4 months ago
@Slug99 If you had a point it was impossible to detect.
The fact is that true right and left are measured on a scale of personal liberty to slavery...PERIOD
This is NOT an alternative...this is the historic and ONLY correct way to see it.
Left and right only ever evolved because the commies and the Fascist were so violent that delegating bodied in Europe put them on opposite sides of the assemblies! They both wanted the exact same supporters and power and credit! Not surprising in the least
mitch7788 4 months ago
@mitch7788 The left-right has far more to do with power of government, it's about the policies of the government. While a socialist and a fascist might agree with the methods of implementing their policies, they wildly disagree what those policies are. Fascists generally want a nationalistic state where a small elite control society, similar to how monarchies where run while a socialist might want a democratic society, a kind of dictatorship where the majority rules.
Slug99 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mitch7788 The left-right has far more to do with power of government, it's about the policies of the government. While a socialist and a fascist might agree with the methods of implementing their policies, they wildly disagree what those policies are. Fascists generally want a nationalistic state where a small elite control society, similar to how monarchies where run while a socialist might want a democratic society, a kind of dictatorship where the majority rules.
Slug99 4 months ago
@Slug99 the video would need to be longer in order to explain other stuff.
SunshineSuperman0999 2 months ago
Entirely ridiculous. How can monarchism and social conservatism be left-wing and your neighbourhood pothead libertarian/anarchist be right-wing?
maxime32 8 months ago
@maxime32
How can monarchy be a dictatorship when countries like Britain are monarchies without dictatorships, along with Serbia, which HAD a monarcy, along with Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia only took a total government when parliament was abolished in 1929, following a coup. Not all monarchies are dictatorships. The Royal Family of Holland is an advisory role, along with Denmark, Norway, Belgium, and Sweden. THESE countries are monarchies that aren't dictatorships. See what I mean? This is it.
Patchman123 7 months ago
@Patchman123
Monarchy means rule by one, which is, not ironically, also the definition of a dictatorship. The term 'monarchy' on its own does not imply a royal court and other feudal trappings. If you think the monarchs of Britain, Denmark, Norway, etc. are only in "advisory roles" (you'd be wrong, but that's another issue), then they are not really monarchs, just heads of state like a weak president in a parliamentary system.
maxime32 7 months ago
@Patchman123
Secondly, monarchy does not mean the government uses total power to control the people. It is authoritarian, but usually not totalitarian. By contrast, democracies can be totalitarian, and in fact, a totalitarian society, even if there is no multiparty pluralism, does rely on the participation of the masses (this is part of the socialistic element of fascism). Monarchies/typical dictatorships rely on their subjects being passive and apolitical.
maxime32 7 months ago
@maxime32 because you aren't educated enough to understand that legislating morality (social conservatism) puts more power into the hands of govt--thus it is left wing.
Britslovesocialism 4 months ago
@Britslovesocialism
No, you are so uneducated you do not understand that the political spectrum is not all about STATE power, but to the extent that it is, the received tradition of the use of the term implies that a strong State concerned with maintaining social order is RIGHT-WING while anarchist derivations are LEFT-WING.
maxime32 4 months ago
@maxime32 This is RECENT and in fact REVISIONIST history.
This is the leftard interpretation of left and right .
Not the least bu surprising as one of their favorite thing to do is rewrite history.
mitch7788 4 months ago
@maxime32
Because Monarchism is stringently authoritarian and your pothead anarchist desires control, order and civilization to be undone completely. The anarchist wants NO government.
TheBiggestWolf 4 months ago
@maxime If you had a point it was impossible to detect.
The fact is that true right and left are measured on a scale of personal liberty to slavery...PERIOD
This is NOT an alternative...this is the historic and ONLY correct way to see it.
Left and right only ever evolved because the commies and the Fascist were so violent that delegating bodied in Europe put them on opposite sides of the assemblies! They both wanted the exact same supporters and power and credit! Not surprising in the least
mitch7788 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This description of the political spectrum is wrong on every conceivable level.
StatelessLiberty 8 months ago 2
Is this part of a longer movie?
Rufflekz 8 months ago
Yes, democracy is flawed by design. If you can convince 50.1% that something is right then you win. or it is like two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch.
1Openminded1 8 months ago
@1Openminded1 The problem is that any solution you have to that problem would essentially be a minority rule rather than majority rule. I mean unless you're proposes no government, there must be someone who is in charge of what it does. Democracy would be the better solution since a minority rule can easily turn into a situation where the wolves just eat the sheep regardless of how many there are.
Slug99 8 months ago
Violence is never the answer, only LOVE will save us.
1Openminded1 8 months ago
A true governments purpose should be to maintain the welfare of its people, because the government is supposed to be THE PEOPLE, not the rich guys looking out for themselves. America is not a Democracy or a republic, it's an Oligarchy right now and u see THE PEOPLE suffering under their tyranny and greed. If the government were good, it would maintain an equilibrium where the majority had what they needed and were not in want of things, thus nearly eliminating crime and suffering.
1Openminded1 8 months ago
Greek qoute, "Without LAW there can be no FREEDOM" Luckily the Earth already has its own Natural Law and we don't need an Oligarchy telling us what to do.
1Openminded1 8 months ago
If a republic is based on the law, that all people are created equal, and a true jury of peers are established, then perhaps the republic is the way. However there is not one that I know that has truly been just in law, and letting the people be freer.. How is the US (my country) truly freer, when our laws are as intrusive and invasive as some of those spoken of under Hitler? A man in Alaska, woman in Florida, child in Arizona, all should have equal value under law. Every human.
ObscurityBound 9 months ago
@ObscurityBound true however, there is a always a difference in ideal and actuality. also a difference between is and direction...... right now we are an is with a direction toward oligarchy..... started in the 30's.... noone alive is at fault except more toward the same.
lukyll 9 months ago
Ah yes, Freedom propaganda! Those property rights loving bastards!
rahbwells 9 months ago
It seams to me like this is American republic propaganda!
macke111 9 months ago
@macke111
prove it wrong then
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 8 months ago
@YESobamaCANfuckupUSA in video about democracy it says "the majority isnt restraint." = meaning no rules. That is ofcourse bullshit.
HxabsolutexP 8 months ago
@HxabsolutexP
democracy literally mean (dêmos) "people" and (Kratos) "power". = people power. how do you decide in a true democracy how things gets done? by majority rule. that also is the same for a true republic except the law prevents the majority from doing certain things. democracy however by definition is not restrained by any rules, ..... also in the video it says democracy is not a stable form and it will always ends up either a oligarchy or a republic. the narrator did not lie
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 8 months ago
@YESobamaCANfuckupUSA Then how do you explain that there are rules/laws in a democratic country? Can you prove that it will always end up either a oligarchy or a republic?
HxabsolutexP 8 months ago
@HxabsolutexP
again you dont get the point, im talking about pure democracy. what your thinking of is constitutional democracy = which is somewhat like a republic or an oligarchy
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 8 months ago
@YESobamaCANfuckupUSA I see I used different definition than yours.
HxabsolutexP 8 months ago
@HxabsolutexP
the american governemt. it was in anarchy = did not work, democracy = even the founders said its the most barbaric form of governemt .......... then the republic
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 8 months ago
@YESobamaCANfuckupUSA That is not evidence or proof that it will always end that way.
HxabsolutexP 8 months ago
it is wrong to say that democracy is not restraint. Ofcourse there can be rules in a democracy. Hence the video is flawed. Clearly a pro-american, pro-republic propagandist.
HxabsolutexP 10 months ago
WELL IN CASE YOU DIDNT GET IT FROM THE VIDEO.....REPUBLICANS BELIEVE:
small government (limited regulations on business)
low taxes (for every single person no matter how rich or poor)
big military (speak softly and carry a big stick)
strong borders (to stop people with diseases or criminals from entering WHILE letting in huge numbers of people)
pro life
pro gun (because if you ban all guns, the criminals will not follow the ban and keep their guns and use them illegally)
iluvpoliticzz 10 months ago
ok this guy is a lunatic! he's talking out of his ass!
khadijaq 10 months ago
Apparently, there are A LOT of liberal university-educated morons on YT.
This video brilliantly explains the concept.
DigiLusionist 10 months ago
100% accurate. Nice work jonh2o.
conservativethinker 10 months ago
This person must have gotten their degree at
ACME Looniversity.
oofay789 11 months ago
@oofay789
can you name me onething hitler did that is fascist that mao did not. name me one thing mao did that is considered socialist that hitler did not do.
the founders must be really dumb then.....
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 8 months ago
This video is factually incorrect. I say this not from bias or belief. This is wrong. Ask a political scientist at any major university and they will refute this entire seven minutes of drivel. Anyone who says this is correct has not been educated in the field of political science. It is disrespectful to the field of political science to have this sort of thing circulated. It undermines the work that so many have done over the years.
Denison2013 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Denison2013 Yes, it undermines the Communists, Socailists, Anarchists and Progressives by spreading truth.
conservativethinker 10 months ago
ONLY IN AMERICA YOU WOULD HAVE THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM BACKWARDS. No one considers monarchy as the extreme left wing. Similarly no one outside the US believes that anarchy is the extreme right.
Why do Americans have such a tremendous pride for their founding fathers ? They were NOT good people. They had slaves, they endorsed policies that promoted severe class struggle. They wanted to limit the voices of the poor and working class. Please don't think of your country as a noble & perfect entity
goozbaghali 11 months ago
then why is there room in the constitution to change laws and make amendments? Also, why bother with elections if the government is not meant to change laws?
ComradeAH1994 11 months ago
this video is complete bullshit.
gilmour6754 11 months ago
@gilmour6754 your a retard
wroteoffagain 11 months ago
Okay I'm really confused. it says in wiki that the leftists are usually individualists and the rights are usually populist when it comes to cultural issues. What? Shouldn't it be the other way around? left being communist and pro-government instead of pro-individuals?
jupiterflunk92 11 months ago
@jupiterflunk92 search youtube "political spectrum" and watch "Saving the World 1 Video at a time: The Political Spectrum". That guy explains using a two axis grid, (economic axis and a social axis) makes a whole lot more sense than a 1 axis spectrum.
DeltaSyn 11 months ago
As a non American, I can assure you that most of the world/academia reject this theory in this video, largly because this perspective is interpreted as an attempt for the right in the US to dodge all the gritty facts about the "traditional" extreme right. Also extreme right (Nazism) and left (Communism) can easily be destinguished by anyone who can be bothered to take a politcal science course. Although both may be authoritarian in extreme, their ideological foundations are totally different.
mamyot1234 11 months ago
@mamyot1234
and guess what, the founders also believe in this spectrum. ok, can you name me one thing that the nazi did that is considered 'fascist' but not in the soviet. and can you name me one thing that the soviet union did that can be considered socialist that is also not implemented in the nazi germany.
the spectrum you are looking at is inadequate, it is self contracting.also what makes the left left and the right right?
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 8 months ago
THANK YOU! Whenever i argued with my friends about politics they would say "oh, on the far right is fascism". Far right is anarchy.
TheOrigionalArroyo 11 months ago
Republics can be democracy
893160007 1 year ago
Autocracy never existed? Louis XIV is a great example of an absolute monarch. There's been plenty of them.
MegaCalvinHobbes 1 year ago
I like how this guy does not include the other 2 parts to his video, that break down the reality of how things work and stand in 100% opposition to the big gov, socialist trivel he usally involves self with.
marcef100m 1 year ago
94 people don't have adult or common sense comprehension skills.
jbeyers84 1 year ago
This excerpt from "Overview of America" is one of the best videos produced by The John Birch Society.
1Bircher 1 year ago
@1Bircher yea, but notice how he leaves the rest of it out as it smack his socialist agend in the face.
marcef100m 1 year ago
did you study well your political science subject? bobo
stpboning 1 year ago
This video has no understanding of Socialism/Communism.
arsenal140 1 year ago
In the West we live in plutocratic Oligarchies where a wealthy minority control two party systems of representative pseudo-democracy to legitimize the awesome concentration of power and wealth of a ruling class in each and every Western nation.
Tuathalful 1 year ago
This video is complete idiocy.
Hitler and Mussolini -- the exemplars of fascist ideology -- were in league with industry. The Nazi government didn't control German businesses in the 1930s, German industrialists supported Hitler. He in turn kept German communists from revolution by sending them to the death camps. Hitler actually saved German capitalism.
"Fascism should more properly be called 'corporatism,' since it is the ultimate merger of business and the state." ~ Benito Mussolini
bapyou 1 year ago 2
@bapyou shut up stupid..
bustballz 11 months ago
@bustballz "shut up stupid."
One of the qualities of fascists: Forced suppression of the opposition.
What's the matter? No one's ever told you the truth about fascism & Nazism before? Do you get all of your information from unsourced and idiotic You Tube videos?
Read Franz Neumann's book 'Behemoth,' written by a German during Hitler's rule. It's a complete picture of Hitler's relationship with Germany's elite industrial families and the massive profits they earned during WW2.
bapyou 11 months ago
@bapyou wow, are you a dumbass..lol
bustballz 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Here is the sum total written by bustballz in the comments section of this video:
"shut up stupid" and "wow, are you a dumbass..lol"
bustballz is one of You Tube's rising geniuses, soon to be featured in the pages of Harvard's faculty magazine. Stupid dumbass! lol
bapyou 11 months ago
The biggest problem with this spectrum is there is no economic axe. Thus there are serious flaws in this presentation like communism and fascism being in the same front while in reality they are the exact opposit of each other in economic terms. But let me be more frank; This presentation is incomplete and misleading.
TheBlindPowerslave 1 year ago
anarchist killing? lol. this video sucks
seigneurvoland666 1 year ago
So anarcho-communism is Right-wing? What about Left anarchism?
Some people say that the Left-Right spectrum doesn't have anything to do with government, but that the Left want egalitarianism while the Right want a free market.
What is your view on this definition?
AngelZlayer 1 year ago
@zzL33Tzz socialism is a form of government where the economy is controlled by the government, therefore giving them complete control. Anarchy should not be far left, because far left is greater government control, wheras anarchy is the lack of a government, meaning it should be far right. Nazism is also complete government control, meaning it should go to the left. This is merely putting the spectrum the way it should be, government control to the left, and lack of it to the right.
agent4844 1 year ago
@agent4844
No, control of the economy just means that they are in control of the money that is in the country, and under socialism it is concentrated on public spending and funding the people, it has nothing to do with control of the people.
Anarchy is as far left as you can get mate, left and right is NOT decided on government intervention, it is almost good and evil. On the left, they favour the people and their welfare (free healthcare etc), on the right they care about profit at any cost.
zzL33Tzz 1 year ago
Socialism is total goverment? OK, how do you explain the socialist goverments in Europe? They are democracies based on socialistic ideologies! They are far from totalistic!
altr0403 1 year ago
the lie that Nazi's were of the left is ridiculous. The spectrum you show is simplistic and misleading. There are so many types of socialism from libertarian socialism to Stalinism, they bear little resemblance to each other. Nazi's jailed and murdered socialists and communists. the social democratic parties of Europe today have no relation to stalinism or nazi's whatsoever. Socialist Brittish Labor Prime Minister Atlee devoted his life to defeating Nazi's and Stalinists.
claywoman 1 year ago 2
@claywoman wrong, they do share one large thing in common: they both feature large government power.
agent4844 1 year ago