Whose Side are you on? Part 1

It is those on the right who take sides, unable to intellectually recognise the nuances in life that give credence to the complexities of politics. It is the right who are so sure of themselves. It is the right who polarise arguments. It is the right who see their enemy as 'Socialism' or 'the left' conflating a multitude of voices into a single manageable target. An act of intellectual dishonesty, the right attach the left, tarring the entirety with the actions or beliefs of the few, labelling all socialists as evil because of one or two bad people identifying as socialist.

The point the right miss is they are wrong to view the left as a single entity. If there is something they disagree with, they must identify that ideology and denounce it individually if they are to hold valid political beliefs.

Those reading this with a sharp wit might notice how I am guilty of the crime I identify: am I not conflating all voices of the right into a single entity when I used the term 'the right'? Perhaps, but I don't care. There is barely a whisper of nuance available in the right wing thinking for me to see them as anything but a flabby mass of boring shit. The right identify as the right. They believe in polarisation, making most right wing ideology the same thing – and it is the same thing: a pro-corporate agenda.

Practically every belief the right wing hold leads to upholding corporate power, the wealthy elite, the existing powers (who are wealthy, corporate investors). This is the part the right do not get and no matter what mental gymnastics they do in order to denounce sound left wing ideas, they always fail to notice that the politics they endorse is the politics in favour of corporate hegemony over people's democracy.

I am not here to tell you what to think. Do you think I give a shit what you think? But when you read any political view, I implore you to question who ultimately benefits from the execution of those ideas. When a view actively attacks left wing ideology it is almost always in favour of corporate power.

Comments