Talk:Left-wing politics/Archive 1

message: Since the definitions of Right-wing politics and Left-wing politics appear so inextricably tied together, I am proposing a higher-level page called Left-Right politics whose purpose is to discuss their definition.  That would allow the page for each wing to focus more on its unique characteristics (such as how it evolved in that country), rather than characterizing its opponents.  What do you think? Drernie 21:13, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Left-Right politics now exists. - Jmabel 06:28, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right-Left together 

message: Is 'Liberalism left-wing?
:Depends on whether in US usage, where it tends to mean center-left, or even Social Democrat, or European usage, where it means free-marketer, a position that would not be called liberal in the US. The European usage is probably more historically correct. This should all probably be discussed in Liberal. --Jmabel 06:28, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Liberalism]]

message: The link to http://www.politicalcompass.org seems to me like it would more belong in Political spectrum than here, but for the moment I'm leaving it alone. I'd appreciate another opinion or two on this. -- Jmabel 06:28, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I placed it on both the left and Right wing pages to provide an alternate view of the dicotomy of politics left and right wing provide. Jack 06:55, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: But isn't that precisely what the article "political spectrum" is about? I don't disagree with you on the issue, but it would seem to me that those articles should both refer to political spectrum (as does Left-Right politics), and that would be the place to discuss at some length the questionability of the perspective involved in these terms. -- Jmabel 07:32, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Political compass]]

message: The newly added "Neo-leftism in China" seems, at a quick read, like good material, but this article seems the wrong place for it. Is there somewhere more appropriate we could put it, get it down to a few sentences here and a link? -- Jmabel 07:19, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I copied it to Neo-leftism, you can trim what is here if you feel it necessary. I don't know a thing about it, outside of what I read here, BTW ;) Sam Spade 07:24, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Neo-leftism

message: In the last sentence of the first paragraph of the section "History of the term" I added the word "be" to the following sentence right after the word "ways" because it just didn't read right to me the way it was.  I suspect this was just a typo and "be" was inadvertently left out but maybe I am reading the sentence wrong somehow.
The "left" of 1789 would, in some ways [be] part of the present-day "right", liberal with regard to the rights of property and intellect, but not embracing notions of distributive justice, rights for organized labor, etc.
: Yes, thanks, my typo. -- Jmabel 18:07, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  typo correction - I think... 

message: As far as I know, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People still claims to be "outside politics" and thus the link's placement here is inappropriate. Even if you are convinced the NAACP is a leftist group, I think there is little reason in this case not to give them the benefit of the doubt. Also, the link doesn't add much to begin with. -- Spleeman 11:07, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  NAACP removed from list of U.S. leftist groups