StackExchange Friday: Is There a Philosophical Basis for the Conflation of the Cultural Left and the Economic/Fiscal Left?
Excerpts from this stack exchange post. This is a fascinating discussion and way over my head. You must read it, because I've made no attempt to adequately summarize with these excerpts. In fact, the content I pulled is barely tied to the question.
Is There a Philosophical Basis for the Conflation of the Cultural Left and the Economic/Fiscal Left?
There is no accepted answer, and the discussion was so far beyond me that I can only pick out a few things that, while I may find them interesting, don't really get to the answer. So if you're looking for an answer, like I am, you'll have to read more than these excerpts, and more than the entire stack exchange post. These are just some random pieces that caught my attention.
---
As mostly just an aside, I've always found that people confuse "left" and "right" because they interchange what you've labeled as cultural and fiscal. I've always found that using the political compass model, where fiscal and social issues are on different axes, makes the language being used a lot clearer. Viewing it like this, it's obvious that there is authoritarian left as well as liberal left (with left referring to the economic spectrum). And "cultural Marxism" 99 times out of 100 is a buzz word (buzz phrase?) that certain demographics on the right use to smear certain people on the left.
---
I honestly think that it's just an example of sloppy use of words from both sides. For example, this is exactly the issue that happened recently when the two Youtubers David Pakman and Sargon of Akkad got in an argument about Stalinism. As I recall, Pakman said in a video that Stalin was left on economic policies but he wasn't truly left because he was authoritarian and then Sargon got upset and said that Pakman was trying to make a no true Scotsman fallacy for Stalin being a leftist. Again, if they used the political compass, two dimensional definitions, the argument would evaporate.
Happy Friday, and remember: no one and no thing in this world is free.
Is There a Philosophical Basis for the Conflation of the Cultural Left and the Economic/Fiscal Left?
The question(s):
- Is there a philosophical reason why cultural left and economic left go together, or is it a historical coincidence? Do they share any fundamental principles other than changing the status-quo?
- It seems to me that Left Hegelians seem to align with the cultural left, and Marx started out as a Left Hegelian, before going to formulate Communism. Is there a relation between the two? Is that the origin of the correlation?
- Is there any merit at all to the idea that the various aspects of the cultural left in today's Western discourse did indeed originate with the Frankfurt School? Did members of the Frankfurt school really want to overthrow Western values (and my reading of Adorno, Horkheimer, and Habermas is wrong) ?
There is no accepted answer, and the discussion was so far beyond me that I can only pick out a few things that, while I may find them interesting, don't really get to the answer. So if you're looking for an answer, like I am, you'll have to read more than these excerpts, and more than the entire stack exchange post. These are just some random pieces that caught my attention.
Some comments:
It helps to make a study of liberalism, and as shorthand think of true liberalism as what we call libertarianism in America. Think of let-do, or laissez-faire in both the social and economic sphere. "Cultural Marxism" is simply red-baiting. Don't be misled by this usage. Ignore it.---
As mostly just an aside, I've always found that people confuse "left" and "right" because they interchange what you've labeled as cultural and fiscal. I've always found that using the political compass model, where fiscal and social issues are on different axes, makes the language being used a lot clearer. Viewing it like this, it's obvious that there is authoritarian left as well as liberal left (with left referring to the economic spectrum). And "cultural Marxism" 99 times out of 100 is a buzz word (buzz phrase?) that certain demographics on the right use to smear certain people on the left.
---
I honestly think that it's just an example of sloppy use of words from both sides. For example, this is exactly the issue that happened recently when the two Youtubers David Pakman and Sargon of Akkad got in an argument about Stalinism. As I recall, Pakman said in a video that Stalin was left on economic policies but he wasn't truly left because he was authoritarian and then Sargon got upset and said that Pakman was trying to make a no true Scotsman fallacy for Stalin being a leftist. Again, if they used the political compass, two dimensional definitions, the argument would evaporate.
One paragraph from one interesting response:
The progressive world ended in the months after WWI. After this time, real freedom, real choices, they were at an end. I think it will take a great shock before we can return to something like that lost world, if we ever do. In the meantime you have a choice of soft drink flavors, hamburger toppings, "political parties", car colors, floor coverings, shoe varieties, and things like that.Happy Friday, and remember: no one and no thing in this world is free.
Comments
Post a Comment