Political Heretic
03-19-2010, 04:03 AM
NOTE: I wrote this for DU in an attempt to use non-confrontational persuasive language, but if I soft-peddled something too much, feedback welcome!
-------------------------------------
America has many self-perpetuating myths about its politic, economy and culture. But I believe the most insidious is the myth that politics can be represented by a horizontal line between a Left Pole and a Right pole, with a tangible "Center."
(LEFT "FRINGE")||--------------------(CENTER)--------------------||(RIGHT "FRINGE")
This particular myth serves status quo interests resistant to social and economic justice extremely well. It implies, without any substantive justification, that the "center" is reasonable, but painting both Left and Right at polar extremes on a horizontal plane.
In American politics, "Center" represents the establishment wisdom, perpetuated by media and politicians alike, that our moderate system of a little conservatism here, a little neo-liberalism there, but only in balance and never upsetting our "norms" is rational, reasonable and responsible.
I think its time we were reminded that the above is a model. Models are not the same as reality - they are simplifications of complex reality to aid comprehension. Not all models are created equal.
This particular model is woefully inaccurate. But if we were to use this model, we could start making it look a little more accurate by demonstrating it like this:
(WORLD LEFT)||-----------------------------------(AMERICAN LEFT "FRINGE")---x-(CENTRISTS)-----||(RIGHT "FRINGE")
This is only slightly more accurate in the sense that it at least acknowledges that what is considered "Fringe Left" in American Politics is actually fairly close to "center" when considered on a global scale. The "x" by the way, is where the "Liberal" wing of the Democratic Party resides.
Still, this horizonal line still suggests that the "center" is a place between two pole extremes, this implying that the "center" is reasonable, and most accurate. Again, this is a model that serves status quo interests quite well. But does it accurately reflect the world in which we exist? What if we considered some alternative models?
^
|
|
(SOCIAL AND
ECONOMIC
JUSTICE - "LEFT")
|
|
|
|
|
("CENTER")
|
|
|
|
|
|
(FASCISM - "RIGHT")
There is absolutely no less reason to assume this political line model is any less appropriate than the horizontal line between poles. In this model, you can go only one way, from a fixed point a fascism on the hard right, to greater and greater social and economic justice.
The "Left" in this case, which stands for social equality, human rights (including rights to meaningful work, to shelter, to adequate food, to health care, to a living wage, to nondiscrimination, to peace, etc.) becomes representative of the agenda for which any decent ethically responsible human being ought to strive.
The "center" becomes not reasonable or responsible but rather weak, insufficient, capitulating - like collaborators with the enemy. It's no longer modeled as a "realistic" middle between two extremes. Now it simply represents a state of mediocrity, of failure to reach potential, of failure to thrive.
The way we model our political reality is a choice. But I ask you: why keep letting multi-billion dollar for-profit media or rich and over-privileged out of touch white men in that dominate politics constantly tell you what model to use? Especially when that model seems highly disconnected from human reality...
Just food for thought.
-------------------------------------
America has many self-perpetuating myths about its politic, economy and culture. But I believe the most insidious is the myth that politics can be represented by a horizontal line between a Left Pole and a Right pole, with a tangible "Center."
(LEFT "FRINGE")||--------------------(CENTER)--------------------||(RIGHT "FRINGE")
This particular myth serves status quo interests resistant to social and economic justice extremely well. It implies, without any substantive justification, that the "center" is reasonable, but painting both Left and Right at polar extremes on a horizontal plane.
In American politics, "Center" represents the establishment wisdom, perpetuated by media and politicians alike, that our moderate system of a little conservatism here, a little neo-liberalism there, but only in balance and never upsetting our "norms" is rational, reasonable and responsible.
I think its time we were reminded that the above is a model. Models are not the same as reality - they are simplifications of complex reality to aid comprehension. Not all models are created equal.
This particular model is woefully inaccurate. But if we were to use this model, we could start making it look a little more accurate by demonstrating it like this:
(WORLD LEFT)||-----------------------------------(AMERICAN LEFT "FRINGE")---x-(CENTRISTS)-----||(RIGHT "FRINGE")
This is only slightly more accurate in the sense that it at least acknowledges that what is considered "Fringe Left" in American Politics is actually fairly close to "center" when considered on a global scale. The "x" by the way, is where the "Liberal" wing of the Democratic Party resides.
Still, this horizonal line still suggests that the "center" is a place between two pole extremes, this implying that the "center" is reasonable, and most accurate. Again, this is a model that serves status quo interests quite well. But does it accurately reflect the world in which we exist? What if we considered some alternative models?
^
|
|
(SOCIAL AND
ECONOMIC
JUSTICE - "LEFT")
|
|
|
|
|
("CENTER")
|
|
|
|
|
|
(FASCISM - "RIGHT")
There is absolutely no less reason to assume this political line model is any less appropriate than the horizontal line between poles. In this model, you can go only one way, from a fixed point a fascism on the hard right, to greater and greater social and economic justice.
The "Left" in this case, which stands for social equality, human rights (including rights to meaningful work, to shelter, to adequate food, to health care, to a living wage, to nondiscrimination, to peace, etc.) becomes representative of the agenda for which any decent ethically responsible human being ought to strive.
The "center" becomes not reasonable or responsible but rather weak, insufficient, capitulating - like collaborators with the enemy. It's no longer modeled as a "realistic" middle between two extremes. Now it simply represents a state of mediocrity, of failure to reach potential, of failure to thrive.
The way we model our political reality is a choice. But I ask you: why keep letting multi-billion dollar for-profit media or rich and over-privileged out of touch white men in that dominate politics constantly tell you what model to use? Especially when that model seems highly disconnected from human reality...
Just food for thought.