Political Misrepresentation?

[birdie1971]

The more I study current affairs and history, the more I've come to realise something. The political left are probably the most dangerous people in the whole of human history and yet it is the political right that is constantly labelled as dangerous, violent and intolerant in the media.

This seems odd to me as it is those on the left of the political spectrum who enslave people and kill the most. The Nazis for example, are invariably described by most people as 'far right' yet they were National Socialists (ie. the far left). Their policies included (but were not limited to): free public health, re-nationalisation of big industry, guaranteeing workers holidays and other rights, promoting healthy living, environmentalism, removal of the class system, etc.

The communist regime in Russia was about as far left as can be imagined and they killed around 100 million of their own people. Benito Mussolini, the Italian leader, more often than not is described as a fascist and far right-winger. Yet he, like Hitler, believed in the (original) concept of totalitarianism – the idea that the state will care from you from cradle to grave (as opposed to the negative definition of 'totalitarianism' today that means absolute control by the state) and from whom Hitler copied many of his left-wing ideas – some of which are listed above.

Fascism and Nazism are always described (quite rightly in my opinion) as despicable, violent and ugly political ideologies and yet they are both demonstrably left-wing in nature.

Why are those on the right of the political spectrum tarred with the brush of intolerance and totalitarianism when it is those on the left with their hand on the handle?

[baza]

Read it through twice and I think I agree with you,

[birdie1971]

Baza

Thank you for taking the time.
Weird isn't it?

[fraser]

As Churchill said the anti fascists of today are the fascists of the future, mind you they are a few on here will argue till they are blue in the face the far left are angels!!!

[MallyJ]

Of course the probelms could be causd by extremism.....surely when anything is taken to the extreme it becomes a problem?

[waterboatman]

I agree with you birdie.

[TheChair]

As MallyJ says - it has nothing to do with left or right, it's about extremism.

[ichkeria]

Mally is correct.
It's pointless trying to label Stalin or Hitler for example as left or right. Extreme politics of left or right involves the hijacking of the state and ultimately totalitarianism. There were elements of Nazi Germans which were socialistic and elements of the USSR which were fascistic

[mikey4444]

Birdie....with respect, I think you need to continue with your studies a bit longer.

Mally is right....its about extremism.

[naomi24]

Birdie, An astute observation.

Mikey, // its about extremism. //

The next time you bang on with your dire warnings of the rise of the far right. I’ll remind you of that. Birdie’s education isn’t lacking.

[ichkeria]

Ok, I guess I mised the "astute" bit :-)
There is not a lot of difference between murderous communists and murderous fascists.

Who knew?

[Cloverjo]

I agree with Mikey, Mally, TheChair and ichkeria. It is about extremism, and I'm sure that none of the lefties on here would argue that the extreme left are angels.

[naomi24]

ichkeria, did you miss the bits that didn't mention murder - you know, the bits about the state caring for people from cradle to grave, and all that?

[mikey4444]

Jo...no, of course we wouldn't. It is about extremism.

There was nothing remotely left wing about Mussolini and Hitler, and that is why I am questioning birdies logic here. This debate is all a bit one-sided if you ask me.

[naomi24]

Mikey, see my post at 09:57. 'Logically' does that kind of 'caring society' sound right wing to you?

[-Talbot-]

Didn't Mussolini start off life as a socialist rabble-rouser?
Maybe I have it wrong ...

[ichkeria]

"ichkeria, did you miss the bits that didn't mention murder - you know, the bits about the state caring for people from cradle to grave, and all that? "

I am not sure I would agree that totalitarian states care for people from the cradle to the grave exactly.
What they all have in common is that if you do as you are old you will have an easy life.
if you don't do as you are told: trouble!
But I don't imagine that it was the socially progressive aspects of either Communism or Nazism that were the worst things about them.
They are disturbing similarities between extreme political persuasions of "left" and "right".
The tenor of the op's argument appears to be:
"I don't like "left wing" and therefore I will brand all extremists as such.
It would be equally daft for someone to say:
"I don't like right wing" and therefore all extremists are right wing
Daft, and ultimately meaningless. While we tie ourselves in knots over who's a "leftie" and who's a "fascist"

[Old_Geezer]

I think there is little point in considering a question where any group that is a danger is simply labelled left wing. The basis of the conjecture that it is the left alone that is dangerous, has no decent foundations. For example, both Fascism and Nazism are clearly of the far right. In reality the left values the working masses more whilst the right values those who have the skill to arrange things to benefit themselves, and 'their group', more.

[Jackdaw33]

Unlike the Bolsheviks, Hitler and Mussolini came to power via the ballot box. How do you explain that?

[ichkeria]

"In reality the left values the working masses more whilst the right values those who have the skill to arrange things to benefit themselves, and 'their group', more. "

That is more a distinctive between "old Labour" and "Conservatism" in the UK, but the further to the political extremes you go the more the differences become blurred. But the "libertarian" right is a long way from the totalitarian right. Just as social democrats are a long way from communists.
I agree that when you come to talk of totalitarian or extreme regimes, it makes not a lot of difference, and the "left" and "right" labels are essentially pointless. A bit like pricing goods that you get foisted on you rather than have the choice of buying.

[ichkeria]

"Unlike the Bolsheviks, Hitler and Mussolini came to power via the ballot box. How do you explain that? "

Not sure of what relevance that is, but the Bolsheiks came to power (on the back of an earlier revolution) in a backward societly that had never had elections anyway.
Allende was a marxist who was democratically elected and removed in a fascist coup.
Viktor Yanukovich was a notoriously corrupt criminal who was "democratically" elected in Ukraine. I can't see that how they came to power matters a lot.