About 95% of politics is tribalism. People aren’t really ideological, they just gravitate towards one political tribe or the other and repeat the talking points they’re told by the tribe to repeat.
Most people vote the way their parents voted. Some people rebel and those people just vote the way their peer group votes.
In political tribalism, tribal identity is important. Given the association of the word socialism with failed economic systems of the past, logically it would make sense for socialists to call themselves something else. But they won’t because a large part of political tribalism is “owning” the other tribes by being controversial. Calling themselves anything else would mean losing that, and trolling people is a big part of why people chose that tribe. Leftism is mostly an aesthetic, there’s really not much there ideologically. Leftists will just say “read Marx LOL” without ever having read Marx themselves. It’s mostly just trolling.
Putting the “other side” on the defensive accomplishes nothing. People aren’t going to leave their tribe because of some rhetorical cleverness from the other tribe. That would mean leaving their friends and family. Not something you can accomplish with just rhetoric.
In the end politics is just about appealing to that 5% that isn’t part of a political tribe and doesn’t care about which side won the most points in petty internet arguments. That and hoping the peer groups of the young “rebels” aren’t completely stupid. But with polarization that 5% is shrinking and with massive social media consumption, young people are more gullible than ever.
As opposed to pro billionaire/pro corporation then?
That can be up to the right to define
This is how I describe my political position to people who don’t understand what Left means. “oh, you mean liberal?” No.
Do the labels actually matter?
If they call you a ‘Liberal’ and then vote for the person you suggest, what is the problem?
You’re right. Nothing matters. We shouldn’t use descriptive words or explanations.
“This guy Mamdani wants the rich to pay their fair share of taxes, and use that money to help people who actually need it. Better schools, more treatment for crazy people, and get the homeless off the streets.”
You’re twisting my words and creating a strawman. I said the political label doesn’t matter, and didn’t say that you shouldn’t explain your position.
The origin of left and right come from the French revolution. In the first assembly, the pro-monarchists were sitting on the right and the “let’s try something different” folks sat on the left. So strictly speaking, the US political spectrum was entirely on the left (until a narcissist was elected and wouldn’t mind being crowned king).
What’s in a label? The problem is the lack of debate. This team think that makes every idea from the other side stupid by default. A parliamentary system will fail when people stop talking to each other.
And socialism is really only a red rag with a yellow hammer and a sickle in the US. It’s your cold war hangover. Socialists or social democrats exist in most democracies.
The problem is the lack of debate. This team think that makes every idea from the other side stupid by default. A parliamentary system will fail when people stop talking to each other.
Somewhat agreed, but there are a few things that really need to be behind debate (human caused climate change, the need for universal healthcare and universal human rights, the efficacy of vaccines, etc.). Some political organization is a good thing.
I too wish we could move past the debate about whether humans are causing climate change or not (we are). But there’s still debate to be had. “What’s the best path forward?”, for example.
i understand the sentiment but nothing will ever be seen as “good enough.” human psychology is odd. we would find any terminology divisive and unhelpful if abused and misused for decades and decades. the reason why we feel this way is because, at least here in the US, people will quite literally cower in fear if you hear Leftist or Socialist or Communist or Anarchist lol all thanks to the fascists who have successfully fearmongered and brainwashed people.
I’d say that you had a good idea except you have people openly calling antifa a terrorist organization. They are calling themselves anti-anti-facist unironically
It’s a great century to bring back https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism?wprov=sfla1
I identify as humanist - I was skeptical at first because of its name but humanism as an established stance promotes the lives of ALL creatures, not just humans, and (looking at you "pro life"rs) not just human foetuses.
Heck, I wish we’d catch on to pro- language, in general, because of the pink elephant problem. If you’re not familiar, don’t think of a pink elephant right now. Now, next week, if you remember this comment at all, what image will you associate with it?
I think that too many of us anywhere to the left of fascists adopt their framing, and then proclaim things like, we’re not going to take your guns, we’re not terrorists, et cetera.
My only thought about that is the right would immediately latch on the “pro-choice” being anti-human as they view abortion as murder. At that point they would link everything to that to try to invalidate it.
If you mean in the U.S. then there first needs to be a major left wing party. Currently there are only right wing parties there, from the point of Finnish viewer.
Maybe if Sanders would form a new party it could be called left, maybe.
The problem with that is that a group as vague and big and diverse as “the left” will never be able to force a descriptor on itself - mostly because there are people on what you can conceivably call “the left” hate each other and do not want to associate at all. Rather, any descriptor like this will come from outsiders, typically starting out as a derogatory label that combines people based on who the label-giver hates, rather than on any real similarities between the people in the group - both “left” and “right” started out like this!
Maybe someone (even you) can start some kind of an organization within the leftist movement called “pro-human party”, and see how that plays out.
Ehhh naaah. The biggest issue with the left isn’t branding. In my opinion, it’s largely because there is no such thing as “the left”. It’s not a unified group in terms of policy. It’s not a unified group, period. The left vs right thing has largely become a thing because of the US’s two party system (source being my personal experience interacting with English social media, which is NOT a good source).
Asking a “leftist” questions will get you so many different and very often contradicting answers.
Economically:
- Market socialists vs planned economy folks. These are absolutely opposite ideas. A huge group of leftists would consider markets = capitalism. I absolutely despise private ownership over means of production (especially for larger and mature institutions), but would vote for a liberal over someone promising to totally eliminate the market (USSR style or Maoist China style).
- State ownership?: Leftists want public ownership over means of production. But again, what does that mean? State ownership? But that means a supremely powerful state. Imagine the most corrupt politicians now getting the power of billionaires. Personally, fuck fuck that. Worker ownership through worker coops? That would absolutely not prevent large companies from exploiting the public. Sleazy insurance agents are still going to stay sleazy irrespective of organizational methodology. Consumer coops? Which would change nothing for workers working there (source: your local grocery coop). I’m not saying that a coherent solution exists. It absolutely does. BUT these supposed “coherent solutions” can often be diametrically opposed.
Socially: Most are generally anti racism, anti sexuality discrimination. Cool. But, what about:
- Veganism: In India, the right is more vegetarian/vegan because of religions of an Indian origin. The left being anti separation of religion and state, and pro personal liberty, promotes meat/egg consumption (they claim nutritional benefits). I am vegan myself. The left in Canada will be more vegan due to will for extension of certain rights to animals. Very very opposite positions which are equally important for those who care. You can’t group all of this together, can you?
- Weed: Eastern left tends to be way more prohibitionist than western left.
- Trans freedom: yeeeeah… Not all leftists around the world hold the same position.
- Religion: Should religion itself be eliminated, or should we allow religious freedom (such that people of all religions can practice their faith)? The opinion for this is often born out of local political realities. Again, very different positions. Example being Quebec and their laicite. I totally support their laicite (which tankies would support/tolerate). The left wing parties in Canada however strongly oppose this, while right wing parties are supportive/neutral.
Soooo yeah. Would rebranding solve anything? Not really.
But sure, such tactics could definitely work in LOCAL election races/referenda.
but some of my favorite leftists aren’t human 😭
My cat is a socialist.
You have the media saying empathy is bad. You are never going to win against the media by policing labels, that is what they do. You win by staying on message about the issues and policies.
