[jcl]

Matt, on Sep 16 2009, 07:17 PM, said:

Couldn't really explain this too well myself, so I did a quick Google:
http://freerepublic....s/2336142/posts

Freepers are the creationists of political science. And biology.

Quote

There is something nonsensical about a political spectrum that spans the range between tyranny and ... tyranny. If one end of the spectrum is the home of tyranny, then shouldn't the opposite end of the spectrum be the home of liberty, tyranny's opposite?

The first spectrum he presents is nonsensical because he interprets leftness and rightness as measures of tyrannicalness and because he omits ideologies that don't fit into that interpretation, such as (left and right) anarchism. The second spectrum is just a summary of how conservative libertarians and libertarian-leaning conservatives view the standard political spectrum.

Communism has its own political spectrum. At one extreme you have authoritarian communists like Stalin and at the other you have anarchist communists like Kropotkin. You could argue that authoritarian communism should be grouped with fascism due to the similarities between their political systems in practice (and despite the differences between their ideologies) but I don't think you can reasonably argue that 'moderate' communism and especially anarchist communism are even remotely similar to fascism.

The basic problem is that communism is primarily an economic ideology and fascism is primarily a political ideology. In order to compare the two you have to select a particular instance of communism with an associated political system, like Leninism or Maoism, and use it for your comparison. That comparison will only be valid for that particular form of communism.

(Going the other way doesn't work because fascism is associated with a very narrow range of economic systems. Just one if you accept the argument that the word fascism should only be used to refer to Italian fascism.)

[irregularjoe]

Matt, on Sep 16 2009, 07:17 PM, said:

Couldn't really explain this too well myself, so I did a quick Google:
http://freerepublic....s/2336142/posts

In regards to Communism on the far left and Fascism on the far right:

Quote

There is something nonsensical about a political spectrum that spans the range between tyranny and ... tyranny. If one end of the spectrum is the home of tyranny, then shouldn't the opposite end of the spectrum be the home of liberty, tyranny's opposite?

Edit:
However... this doesn't quite fit the "ring" idea.

Intellectually this "ring/ circle" theory doesn't make much sense to me. I do understand the schematics of it, but people do not generally ride a political mery-go-round during their lifetime. Except of course the political slime that blow with the prevailing wind. But I don't think you are talking about them, are you?

[martymas]

if you come down to the soutjh pacific
you will se socialism practied in its true form
practiced to the peoples needs
australia- new zealand-all pacifis islands
and england was until tony blair turned the labor party supporting bush
and the public soon changed that
many south american countys have tiurned to socialism
thev had enough of the american right wing greedy
take all politics
the recent crash will vouch for this statement
obama is trying to stop that trend
weather he succeds or not will
be a matter if he lives long enough
god i hope so
read this

http://news.bbc.co.u...cas/8279777.stm

This post has been edited by martymas: 28 September 2009 - 07:23 PM