If you see intellectual history as a history of ideas, things are much clearer. Suppose one had to give a Martian a field guide to 20th-century Earthling ideology. I would broadly define “left-wing” as statist, collectivist, egalitarian (within a defined group, be it based on class, race, or nationality), enamored of the Romantic spiritualization of the political, and hostile to tradition, religious orthodoxy, natural rights, and Lockean individualism. I would define “right-wing,” particularly within the Anglo-American tradition, as pro-market, favoring limited government, respectful of religion and tradition, and protective of the individual and his rights. By any remotely similar definition, fascism belongs on the left — and, to date, not a single critic of the book has even come close to rebutting this basic point.

Jonah Goldberg (via sds)

Right on the money. The way “right-wing” and “left-wing” are generally understood is entirely erroneous.. When anarchists are viewed as left-wingers and Nazis/fascists as right-wingers, you know something went terribly wrong.

I’m reminded of this awesome video I saw a while back that accurately explains the political spectrum.

I’ll go ahead and post it.

Source: sds

7 Notes/ Hide

  1. scttkrkwd reblogged this from randyhaddock
  2. nomosshere reblogged this from thedailyfiona
  3. thedailyfiona reblogged this from randyhaddock
  4. randyhaddock reblogged this from sds
  5. apoplecticskeptic reblogged this from sds
  6. sds posted this