"It" Which Shall Not be Named

Many people on the right say "we are Capitalists". Either they don't know that the word Capitalism is a pejorative invented by Karl Marx or else they know this but use the word anyway as an appropriate badge, whatever its source. In fact they may see it as a badge of honour: The epithet given by an enemy.

The problem is, "Capitalism" is not even an appropriate word for describing what we on the right support. In this, as in most things, Marx got it wrong.

What is the appropriate word, then? What word should we on the right use?

There isn't one.

And that's the way it should be.

There isn't a word, and we don't have a system to apply a word to, anyway.

The only theoretically appropriate word would be something uselessly generic, such as "reality". "We support reality"? meh

The left needs a word and a system because they are creating an alternate reality; an invented system with an invented type of people ("Soviet Man") populating it, and so it is meaningful and useful to give their system a label and a definition. We call their system Socialism and we can get a functioning definition of it from any good dictionary.

However, we on the right are not opposing "our" system to their system. It's not a "Battle of the Brands", or "Coke versus Pepsi". We don't have a system to oppose to the left's. The left are battling reality all by their selves. We are on the sidelines; we're dad watching junior trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole. The main thing is to keep junior away from sharp objects, until he learns better.

PS. The titles of two of the most important books by the great Austrian economist, Ludwig von Mises, illustrate the point: One is called Human Action and is descriptive of natural economic activity, the other is called Socialism and defines, describes and draws out the implications of that invented system.

Von Mises was the economist who, in the beginning of the 20th century, proved mathematically that socialism would not and could not work (because there is no way for a socialist system to determine efficient prices). Many prominent economists spent fruitless years trying to find a flaw in von Mises' argument, while at the same time ignoring the devastating reality in the new Soviet states that was playing out in front of their noses, and incidentally proving von Mises correct. But then, ignoring/replacing reality is the point of inventing a system.

Fight the Injustice!

The core component of politics is: Forcing people to contribute. Without the force there is no politics.

From North Korean despotism to Swiss (or Californian) direct democracy this core remains. Although they are very different systems the central injustice stays intact: Some people are forced to contribute against their will.

This injustice does not suddenly go away when 50%+1 of the people agree on an action. In this case 50%-1 of the people are being force to contribute to something they don't agree with. That is a plain injustice. It doesn't even go away when 100%-1 agree on an action. Injustice against one person is still an injustice.

So, to all our friends on the left whose almost daily mantra is a railing against injustice? To be consistent you must also do what we on the right seek to do: Limit politics to the smallest sphere possible. Fight the Injustice!

What is "Left" and "Right" in politics?

Maggie Thatcher was right wing but shook up the established order. In the true sense she could not therefore be called conservative. She was the proponent of change in her time. (see also Hayek, who wrote an essay "Why I am not a conservative"). A contemporary, Leonid Breshnev, was left wing but also determined to prevent change in his country. He could not therefore be called a progressive. He was against those calling for change.

Regimes of the Right and Left have been variously militaristic or pacifistic, nationalistic or internationist, expansionist or isolationist. So what is the difference between left and right, and what is extreme left and extreme right?

The difference is essentially one of economics: The right believes in the free market, the left believes in central planning. The right believes in planning by individuals for themselves and the left believes in planning by the State for everyone.

So what is extreme left? The answer is fairly obvious: Communism. The State owns (or directs) all the means of production.

So what is extreme right? The answer is not quite as obvious: Anarchy (used in the secondary sense of "self government"). There is no central authority.

That stupid "wheel of politics" which shows left and right extremes eventually meeting at the same point was invented by the Communists and, stupidly, taken up by Loser -er- Libertarians. It's not a wheel; it's a straight line from total government control to no government at all.