Oddbean new post about login | logout Funny, I would have said the opposite. The right wants law and justice, the left wants freedom. But it all depends on the definition of those terms, which makes it hard to even talk about. I think a better distinction is that the left is visionary/utopian while the right is stagnant/realistic. Utopianism tests new ideas, but the thesis always collapses as reality modulates it. Leftism is unstable and dangerous if it fails to learn from history, but the progressive impulse is really a valuable thing. Maybe China has it right; they are extremely authoritarian and stable in the mainland, but use Hong Kong as a playground for economic innovation, that they can then import as it proves itself.
the separation, caused by the human tendency to want everything to be an eye, or everything to be the heart, instead of understanding the way parts make up the whole body, creates the camps in which disfunction thrives. (Apostle Paul paraphrase)
yeah, the progressive/conservative side of it is probably the most important left tends to progressive, and this makes it vulnerable to the erasure of history... i could talk about the problems of the "adding features" side of the engineering form of this mentality right is more practical, and this is why the modern right is what used to be called left, the liberal, and freedom oriented there's a lot of moving parts to this but i think fundamentally the thing about modern leftism focuses on equity, which is literally a law concept and the right focuses on freedom and privacy, and that is somewhat contrary to statism, so i'd say that leftism is also more statist than right the left right thing is retarded anyway, it's part of the vulnerability of humans to manipulation, we have on one side, reason, and forward time, and on the other, creativity and reverse time the two things are in constant conflict with each other, inherently