Poll: The Net Effect of the Left and the Right Wing on Human Rights in Your Country

[Debater Slayer]

In discussions with a subset of self-identified centrists, I noticed that some of them identify as such partially or mainly due to a perception that the effects of both the left and right wings of politics are equally or almost equally problematic.

I'm interested to see whether people here consider either the left or the right to be currently better or worse than the other for human rights in their own country—with the politics of each considered comprehensively, not just in terms of either social or fiscal policies to the exclusion of the other.

I voted "The net effect of both on human rights is equal or almost equal." I view both as fundamentally harmful to human rights in my country at this time, albeit for different reasons. I don't identify as a centrist, though.

 

[Nakosis]

In discussions with a subset of self-identified centrists, I noticed that some of them identify as such partially or mainly due to a perception that the effects of both the left and right wings of politics are equally or almost equally problematic.

I'm interested to see whether people here consider either the left or the right to be currently better or worse than the other for human rights in their own country—with the politics of each considered comprehensively, not just in terms of either social or fiscal policies to the exclusion of the other.

I voted "The net effect of both on human rights is equal or almost equal." I view both as fundamentally harmful to human rights in my country at this time, albeit for different reasons. I don't identify as a centrist, though.

I see both parties wanting to give more power to the government. They just want to be the ones running that government.
The more power given to the government, the less rights the individual has.
I prefer it when there is gridlock, so the federal government has limited ability to cater to either party.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

We don't really have a left wing. Just a center and right wing. The right wing has more representatives by far that want to take more human rights from people. From LGBT issues to abortion issues to employment discrimination and employment safety issues, healthcare, housing, food and social aid access. The right wing representatives seem far more comfortable with the notion that if you don't have money or don't conform to their preferred American stereotyping, you deserve to suffer or even die. The wealth equals value angle is detestable to me.

 

[icehorse]

I'll argue that there might be three categories to consider here:

- centrists
- "classical" left and right
- current, extreme left and right

I think the extremists are both quite damaging.
I think the classical right is slightly more damaging than the classical left.

As always, I think the fact that we live in an oligarchy / kleptocracy is exacerbating all of our ills.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How far back are we going in time? If we go back to the foundation of the Republican party they may be the perpetual winners. Ending slavery was a really big deal. If you go back just 50 years the Democrats have been the leaders in supporting human rights.

 

[Altfish]

The Right-wing government in the UK doesn't agree with Human Rights

 

[Sand Dancer]

In discussions with a subset of self-identified centrists, I noticed that some of them identify as such partially or mainly due to a perception that the effects of both the left and right wings of politics are equally or almost equally problematic.

I'm interested to see whether people here consider either the left or the right to be currently better or worse than the other for human rights in their own country—with the politics of each considered comprehensively, not just in terms of either social or fiscal policies to the exclusion of the other.

I voted "The net effect of both on human rights is equal or almost equal." I view both as fundamentally harmful to human rights in my country at this time, albeit for different reasons. I don't identify as a centrist, though.

I think both the far left and far right are damaging to the country, but I voted that the right is more damaging. Currently anyway.

 

[Revoltingest]

In my personal view of human rights, the
USA right is currently worse than the left.

 

[F1fan]

How far back are we going in time? If we go back to the foundation of the Republican party they may be the perpetual winners. Ending slavery was a really big deal. If you go back just 50 years the Democrats have been the leaders in supporting human rights.

Of course back in 1856 the republicans were left wing and democrats were right wing. So liberalism would be the defenders of human rights all through the history of the USA.

 

[Quintessence]

I mean, I live in a country where the "right" has decided to relegate half the population to breeding stock again who aren't respected enough to bother making their own life and medical decisions.

Here's a story about an impoverished teenager that some old white male judge deemed unable to make decisions about her own pregnancy but apparently able to make decisions about raising twins. Logic fail of epic proportions.

She Wasn’t Ready for Children. A Judge Wouldn’t Let Her Have an Abortion.

 

[SomeRandom]

In discussions with a subset of self-identified centrists, I noticed that some of them identify as such partially or mainly due to a perception that the effects of both the left and right wings of politics are equally or almost equally problematic.

I'm interested to see whether people here consider either the left or the right to be currently better or worse than the other for human rights in their own country—with the politics of each considered comprehensively, not just in terms of either social or fiscal policies to the exclusion of the other.

I voted "The net effect of both on human rights is equal or almost equal." I view both as fundamentally harmful to human rights in my country at this time, albeit for different reasons. I don't identify as a centrist, though.

My country’s “left wing” (Labor) is rather weak, if I’m being completely honest.
Many of the party’s supporters vote for them only because in their own words, whenever Labor is in charge, they have more spending money and during these times of inflation and rising costs, that’s a pretty damn convincing reason for many. And I don’t blame them one bit lol

The LNP has seemingly alienated a lot of younger voters in recent years, I think. Their stance against SSM, their stances about renewable energy, their stances against climate change etc I think has mostly cost them the youth vote. And will do so in the coming years.

As for human rights, specifically. Well conservative positions are usually against extending rights to the Alphabet community. Again I think that will only alienate them from the younger voters in the future.

I will admit that my view of the right wing being more negative comes more from what I keep seeing happen in America. Neither of our parties are as right wing. Well maybe the National part of the LNP (Liberal National Party.)
But recent events in the US don’t exactly fill me with confidence, let’s just say.
Like I read somewhere that Reps wanted to raise the voting age since they lost the youth vote in the Midterms, by a lot. The result of Gen Z coming of age, me thinks.
(Hopefully that’s just hyperbole. But these days I’m not so sure.)
I don’t think our equivalent would ever suggest that. (Our voting age is 18 and it’s mandatory in my country. So I don’t think it would work anyway. In fact people want to lower it here!!.)

For reference
Republicans Are So Mad at the Huge Youth Turnout They Want to Increase the Voting Age

 

[Yerda]

In the UK, in my lifetime, the left has broadly advocated for protecting and extending human rights legislation. The result has been a 25 year screaming fit from the right wing newspapers, parties and voters.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

In discussions with a subset of self-identified centrists, I noticed that some of them identify as such partially or mainly due to a perception that the effects of both the left and right wings of politics are equally or almost equally problematic.

I'm interested to see whether people here consider either the left or the right to be currently better or worse than the other for human rights in their own country—with the politics of each considered comprehensively, not just in terms of either social or fiscal policies to the exclusion of the other.

I voted "The net effect of both on human rights is equal or almost equal." I view both as fundamentally harmful to human rights in my country at this time, albeit for different reasons. I don't identify as a centrist, though.

I'm a centrist, but in no way does that mean I view the left and right equally.
In Australia the right is currently worse than the left in this area.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How far back are we going in time? If we go back to the foundation of the Republican party they may be the perpetual winners. Ending slavery was a really big deal. If you go back just 50 years the Democrats have been the leaders in supporting human rights.

IMO, if you go back far enough that Republicans supported human rights, you've gone back far enough that the Republicans weren't right wing at the time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

IMO, if you go back far enough that Republicans supported human rights, you've gone back far enough that the Republicans weren't right wing at the time.

True. In many ways the Republicans went from more left to right during my lifetime.

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

Liberals support positive liberty at the cost of negative liberty.
Conservatives support negative liberty at cost the positive liberty.
Both are responsible for extending and restricting the liberties and freedoms of the populace.
What's funny though is that the Democratic and Republicans are starting to flip again.
In the beginning Democrats were conservatives and Republicans were liberal.
Then Democrats were liberal and Republicans were conservative.
And now Democrats are corporate liberals (basically conservative) and Republicans are now fighting for common man in the name of basic liberties again. It's very interesting.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Liberals support positive liberty at the cost of negative liberty.
Conservatives support negative liberty at the positive liberty.
Both are responsible for extending and restricting the liberties and freedoms of the populace.
What's funny though is that the Democratic and Republicans are starting to flip again.
In the beginning Democrats were conservatives and Republicans were liberal.
Then Democrats were liberal and Republicans were conservative.
And now Democrats are corporate liberals (basically conservative) and Republicans are now fighting for common man in the name of basic liberties again. It's very interesting.

How are Republicans fighting for the common man? From what I can see they have duped their followers into believing that but the outcome of their policies tend to go against the common man and support mainly the rich.

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

How are Republicans fighting for the common man? From what I can see they have duped their followers into believing that but the outcome of their policies tend to go against the common man and support mainly the rich.

First Step Act.
Macro Rubio, "Congress Shouldn't Vote to Impose Agreement on Rail Workers."

 

[Subduction Zone]

First Step Act.
Macro Rubio, "Congress Shouldn't Vote to Impose Agreement on Rail Workers."

There were Representatives that voted no from both parties and that voted yes from both parties. This is only one act by one Congressman. It takes a lot more than that to be able to say that one is for the people. And this was a complex issue. If a strike occurs it will harm many examples of the common man.

When it comes to easier issues I am betting that Marco is not on the side of "common man".

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

When it comes to easier issues I am betting that Marco is not on the side of "common man".

Republicans cater to their voters and Democrats cater to their voters. Some Republicans are common people like some Democrats are common people. But lately the Democratic party has sworn allegiance towards the corporate left. The Democrat Party receives more donations from the elite than Republicans, that's been a fact for well over a decade by now. The Democratic Party gives you the illusion they care more about you, they don't. But I would argue that the Republican Party really doesn't either, honestly. They are simply trying to represent the people that vote for them.