Left–right politics
Political parties are sometimes described as being either left-wing, right-wing, or center.
Left-wing politics are usually progressive, meaning that left-wing people are in favor of social change. They believe in direct intervention and the regulation of markets.[1]
Right-wing people believe that the government should not be behind social change, instead delegating the authority to certain individuals or groups. Definitions of "right-wing" vary; however conservatives occasionally support moves back to the way certain things were in the past (or the way people think it was in the past).[1]
Ideologies representative of the authoritarian wing of the far left include Marxism–Leninism, while the libertarian wing can be represented by ideologies such as anarcho-communism or libertarian socialism. The authoritarian wing of the far right is represented by fascism and/or neo-Nazism, while the libertarian wing can be represented by anarcho-capitalism.[1]
Name
The left and right groups get their names from the French Revolution. People in the National Assembly who wanted large changes in the French government sat on the left side of the room and people who wanted to keep the king and more tradition sat on the right side of the room and moderates sat in the middle. French newspapers started saying "left" and "right" to tell readers which member of the National Assembly thought what.[2][3]
Left–right PoliticsFar-left Media
5 May 1789 opening of the Estates General of 1789 in Versailles
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 "Why Do "Left" And "Right" Mean Liberal And Conservative?". Dictionary.com. 30 July 2020. Retrieved August 24, 2021.
- ↑ Jerry Carnes (November 25, 2020). Why are liberals "left" and conservatives "right" in politics?. 11 Alive News. https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/outreach/why-guy/why-are-liberals-left-and-conservatives-right-in-politics/85-d83a806b-3b87-4159-8b19-1c408ebd19a6. Retrieved August 24, 2021.
- ↑ H. F. Bienfait; W. E. A. van Beek (2001). "Right and Left as Political Categories. An Exercise in "Not-so-Primitive" Classification". Anthropos. 96 (1): 169–178. JSTOR 40465460.