Right-wing politics: Difference between revisions

← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:10, 24 November 2005 editLeifern (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users12,161 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Revision as of 12:15, 24 November 2005 edit undoLeifern (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users12,161 edits rev undiscussed vandalism by JMAbel - this is a whole sale reversion - see TalkNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
		⚫	{{limitedgeographicscope}}
	{{cleanup}}
⚫	{{limitedgeographicscope}}

	:''Right wing is also a term used in several sports; see ].''		:''Right wing is also a term used in several sports; see ].''

	In ], '''right-wing''', '''the political right''', or simply '''the Right''', are terms that refer to ~~the segment~~ of the ] typically associated with ~~any of several strains of~~ ] or ], or ~~simply the opposite of~~ ].		In ], '''right-wing''', '''the political right''', or simply '''the Right''', are terms that refer to segments of the ] that are typically associated with non-], ], and sometimes ] political platforms.

			It is worth noting that those who advocate "rightist" policies rarely refer to themselves as "right wing." As a matter of common usage, "right-wing" is often a blanket term for the opposition to ].
	], as well as the ] ] that many base it on, are often considered to be radical forms of right-wing politics. Most right-wingers however reject any association with fascism.

	The term ~~comes originally~~ from the legislative seating arrangement during the ], when ] who supported the ] were commonly referred to as '''rightists''' because they sat on the right side of successive legislative assemblies.		The term originates from the legislative seating arrangement during the ], when ] who supported the ] were commonly referred to as '''rightists''' because they sat on the right side of successive legislative assemblies.

		⚫	==Delineating issues==
	As this original reference became obsolete, the meaning of the term has changed as appropriate to the spectrum of ideas and stances being compared, and the point of view of the speaker. In recent times, the term almost always includes some forms of conservatism and Christian democracy.

			Although "right wing" does not equate to any particular political philosophy, a number of issues are typically invoked as lithmus tests for a right-wing orientation. These apply to a lesser or greater extent in Western democracies.
	Some consider it to include those forms of ] that emphasize the ] more than ] in wealth, but many free-market advocates, including most ] conceive of an additional spectrum (libertarianism-totalitarianism) upon which they place themselves which intersects the ] ] and places them 90 degrees away from traditional left and right, much as many anarchists (including "libertarian socialists") avoid placing themselves on the spectrum.

			===Economics===
⚫	''See ] and ] for further discussion of ~~this~~ ~~kind~~ of ~~classification~~.''

			Right-wing politics are typically biased in favor of ] mechanisms to solve economic problems, rather than governmental ]. Generally speaking, ] is favored over ], and governmental intervention is viewed as a drag on the economy.
⚫	==~~Right wing~~ issues==
	In the 20th century, outside the ], where ] was always supported by the many politicians and intellectuals, the most notable distinction between left and right was in economic policy. The right advanced ], whereas the left advocated ] (often democratic socialism) or ]. This distinction has shifted somewhat since the collapse of the ], as mainstream politicians now accept limited capitalism to a large degree, but in a socialistic form in which government mandates significant redistribution of wealth.

			===International affairs and foreign policy===
	The dominant modern strand of right wing thought is concerned with traditional values (often ] in nature) and preservation of individual and corporate rights through constraints on government power. In a hard-line form the second and third of these priorities are associated with ], but some on the right reject the most ardent assumptions of libertarianism, especially outside of the ], and a small minority of libertarians do not consider themselves to be right wing.

			Although right-wing politicians favor ] as an economic force, they are skeptical about ambitious multilateral political organizations, favoring instead diplomatic efforts among nations. They tend to integrate defense policy more closely with foreign policy and view appeasement as bad policy.
	A more obscure strand of right wing thought, often associated with the original right wing from the times of ], supports the preservation of wealth and power in the hands that have traditionally held them, social stability, and national solidarity and ambition.

			===Social issues===
	Both of the above strands of right wing thought come in many forms, and individuals who support some of the objectives of one of the above stands will not necessarily support all of the others. At the level of practical political policy, there are endless variations in the means that right wing thinkers advocate to achieve their basic aims, and they sometimes argue with each other as much as with the left.

			Those on the right wing may differ about the extent to which governments should fund social programs, but they share a concern about creating dependency and economic disincentives through such programs. In discussing the existence and scope of social programs, right-wing politicians will often profess skepticism about the effectiveness and cost of such programs.
	The values and policy concerns of the right vary in different countries and eras. Also, individual right wing politicians and thinkers often have idiosyncratic priorities. It is not always possible or helpful to try to work out which of two sets of beliefs or policies is more right-wing (see ]).

	==~~History~~ of ~~the term~~==		===Religion and politics===
	:''See the ] article for more detailed discussion of the history and development of the term''

			As a general rule, right-wing politicians are more favorable toward religious values as a factor in religious discourse.
	Since the French Revolution, the political use of the terms "left" and "right" has evolved across linguistic, societal, and national boundaries, sometimes taking on meanings in one time and place that contrast sharply with those in another. For example, ] the government of the ] claims to remain on the "left," despite an evolution that has brought it quite close to what is elsewhere characterized as "right," supporting national cultural traditions, the interests of wealth, and privately owned industry. Conversely, the late dictator of ], ], who was firmly allied internationally with the right and who brutally suppressed the Spanish left, nonetheless pursued numerous development policies quite similar to those of the ] and other ]s, which are almost universally considered to be on the "left." Similarly, while "right" originally referred to those who supported the interests of ], in many countries today (notably the ]) the left-right distinction is not strongly correlated with wealth or ancestry.

		⚫	''See ] and ] for further discussion of the right-left spectrum model of politics.''
	==Fascism and right-wing politics==
	Despite the important differences from other right-wing ideologies, fascism is almost universally considered to be a part of "the right." This is somewhat parallel to the customary inclusion of ] (and, in particular, that of the ] ] and ] ]) in "the left." Nonetheless, fascism differs significantly from other politics that are usually classified as right wing, and most right-wingers (even many far right groups) reject any association with it on the grounds that fascism is collectivist and statist rather than individualist. Most left-wingers (even many communists) reject any association with Stalinism and Maoism as well.

			==Right wing and totalitarian ideologies==
	Many of the creators of Italian Fascism had originally been supporters of the political left. Philosophers such as ], ], and ] were originally ], a group normally identified with the left and whose tactical propensity for ] became an element in Italian Fascism. In Gentile's treatise ''],'' fascism is identified as being of the ''"collective" century'' and it is declared that the ] will be the "century of the state". ] himself was originally a socialist, though he disavowed his ties by the time he was leading the fascist party and many of his old comrades were the first targets of his political police.

			As part of the political rhetoric, totalitarian ideologies such as ], ], and ] movements have been characterized as extensions of right-wing politics. This notion is rejected by those who hold right-wing views.
	] argued in his book ''Hitler's Social Revolution: Class and Status in Nazi Germany, 1933-1939'' that ] contained certain ] and socialist aspects (although more in rhetoric than in reality), and it was no coincidence that the Nazis often found themselves in a struggle with the Communists for the same constituency. The ], which later became the ], was formed in response and in opposition to a brief Communist revolt in ]. While the Nazis opposed ] and '']'' ], vigorous opposition to Communism and ] was a founding and continuing tenet of National Socialism.

	] in the 1930s and during World War II, while a distinct phenomenon, is also ordinarily understood as an expression of a right-wing philosophy; but like other forms of fascism, it is only unequivocally right wing if the terms of comparison are limited.

	In contemporary politics, neofascists and ]s are said to be ]. ] conservatives such as supporters of the former ]an dictator ] or supporters of the military ]s that ruled much of ] in the ] are also said to be far-right.

	== The Right and the War on Terror ==

	=== Overview ===

	In some countries, the contemporary Left-Right dichotomy is characterized more by contrasting positions on international conflicts than by economic differences; some thinkers, both of the left and the right, see this as a worrying tendency. For example:
	* In the ], the strongest support for the military aspects of the "]", and especially the identification of the ] ("Operation Iraqi Freedom") and the ] as being part of that "War on terror", has come from the ] faction of the American right. In contrast, the ] has been largely from the left.
	* In ], much of the current left/right dichotomy is about ] (left) versus ] (right) policies with reference to the ].**

	=== Reasons for support ===

	In the United States, most of the political right support the use of military measures against ]s — by which they mean not only paramilitary groups like ], but also groups like ], which combine paramilitary activities with more conventional political and social organizing — and "]", including some Arab dictatorships. However, the ] and the ] generally oppose all or some of these campaigns and some of the left-wing approves a proactive stance against terrorism and dictatorship, while questioning whether the Iraq war is a useful part of such a stance.

	The Neoconservative argument is that a hard line is the only correct approach to deal with terrorists and dictators. The rhetoric in support of this view often invokes the persistent stance of ] to fight ] instead of trying to appease him. Churchill himself clashed over this issue with fellow members of the UK ] during the period before Hitler's ]. Critics rarely disagree that Churchill was right about Hitler; instead, they further reject the appeasement analogy, arguing, for example, that whereas Hitler in the late 1930s likely had the military means to conquer Europe, Iraq in 2003 was no longer a serious military threat.

	United States politics, in particular, has long had a current that claims to believe it is their moral obligation to free nations from dictators and undemocratic regimes. This has not always been particularly associated with the right: it can be found in ] and many trace the roots of this thinking back to the ] and, especially, the ]. The tradition owes more to ] than to conservatism, but in the U.S. today, many advocates of this position are on the political right.

	Those who subscribe to this view argue that the Western enlightened values of ], ] and ] are the only means tending to protect rather than exploit the individual, and that the West should spread them around the globe. In this, they claim to oppose cultural and ], although critics argue that they are selective as to which countries the West should attempt to change. Neoconservatives and their allies advocate that the defense of individual liberty must be backed with a credible commitment to military action against certain states, such as those that were branded by ] as "the ]", which they say violate ], and which they describe as threats to the world's (or their own state's) security. This ideology has been articulated by right-wing leaders such as ], ] and ]. The Bush Administration's official policy is to call for democratic reforms in all undemocratic governments; former Secretary Powell publicly called for democratic reforms in meetings with Arab and Islamic states; again, critics charge that practice does not live up to this rhetoric.

	Many groups on the left agree with the ideal of spreading democracy and freedom, but disagree with the methods employed by the right. Some also mistrust what they see as the right's new-found belief in spreading democracy--much as some on the right doubt the left's commitment to liberty given communism's frequent entanglement with totalitarianism. These leftist groups argue that the US has a history of supporting foreign dictatorships where that support is seen as being in the "national interest", both throughout the Cold War and (in such cases as ], ], ], and ]) during the present "War on Terror". These leftist critics argue that many of the causes of Islamic terrorism lie in previous military or clandestine interventions by the United States.

	Conversely, many right-wingers dispute the left's commitment toward human rights, claiming that the left has consistently opposed action against terrorist regimes and attempted to silence criticism of ] by leftist ] insurgent movements. They accuse the left of apologising for terror and atrocities justified on the ground of "struggle against imperialist oppression."

	=== Israeli-Palestinian conflict ===
	Mainstream American right-wing groups also tend to support ]'s actions in the ], as they perceive Israel as being the only stronghold of ] and stability in the ]. The ] that struck Israel after the ] and the ] on the U.S. increased this sympathy for, and support of, Israel. Some on the ], many of them ]s or ], support Israel because they believe its existence is essential to bring the ]. (''See also ].'')

	There are also many Far-right groups and ]s in the United States who vigorously oppose any assistance towards Israel, and go so far as to call the United States government a ]. Similarly, ] right-wingers and ] support the Palestinians, as they see Israel and the Jews as "enemies of Islam" and the Arab people. There has been some intermingling of ideas and sympathetic rhetoric between these two groupings.

	==Political parties on the right==		==Political parties on the right==

Revision as of 12:15, 24 November 2005

The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Right wing is also a term used in several sports; see winger (sport).

In politics, right-wing, the political right, or simply the Right, are terms that refer to segments of the political spectrum that are typically associated with non-Socialist, conservative, and sometimes libertarian political platforms.

It is worth noting that those who advocate "rightist" policies rarely refer to themselves as "right wing." As a matter of common usage, "right-wing" is often a blanket term for the opposition to left-wing politics.

The term originates from the legislative seating arrangement during the French Revolution, when monarchists who supported the Ancien Régime were commonly referred to as rightists because they sat on the right side of successive legislative assemblies.

Delineating issues

Although "right wing" does not equate to any particular political philosophy, a number of issues are typically invoked as lithmus tests for a right-wing orientation. These apply to a lesser or greater extent in Western democracies.

Economics

Right-wing politics are typically biased in favor of free market mechanisms to solve economic problems, rather than governmental fiscal policy. Generally speaking, free trade is favored over protectionism, and governmental intervention is viewed as a drag on the economy.

International affairs and foreign policy

Although right-wing politicians favor globalism as an economic force, they are skeptical about ambitious multilateral political organizations, favoring instead diplomatic efforts among nations. They tend to integrate defense policy more closely with foreign policy and view appeasement as bad policy.

Social issues

Those on the right wing may differ about the extent to which governments should fund social programs, but they share a concern about creating dependency and economic disincentives through such programs. In discussing the existence and scope of social programs, right-wing politicians will often profess skepticism about the effectiveness and cost of such programs.

Religion and politics

As a general rule, right-wing politicians are more favorable toward religious values as a factor in religious discourse.

See political spectrum and left-right politics for further discussion of the right-left spectrum model of politics.

Right wing and totalitarian ideologies

As part of the political rhetoric, totalitarian ideologies such as fascism, nazism, and theocratic movements have been characterized as extensions of right-wing politics. This notion is rejected by those who hold right-wing views.

Political parties on the right

See: Right wing political parties.

External links

The Political Compass, an alternative view of the political spectrum
The Nolan Charts, other alternative political spectra (mostly libertarian-oriented)
publiceye.org - chart_of_sectors
larebil.com - Right Wing Editorial

References

Hitler's Social Revolution: Class and Status in Nazi Germany, 1933-1939 by David Schoenbaum, ISBN 0393315541

Category:

Politics