Why do people subscribe to choosing a political team, Left vs Right?

[wuliheron]

Dang, you took me seriously and went for the trifecta!

You have peeked my curiosity on exactly how one might compromise on slavery. Would a state have the right to keep only particularly dark Africans as property? Would we have freedom lotteries to maintain some acceptable compromise level of slavery? Require a federal slave license, with a season designed for a sustainable slave harvest? Change from 1/64 black means slavery to 1/64 white equals freedom? How does one compromise on arguably the worst thing in American if not in all human history? How can one see this as other than good versus evil, especially with the benefit of today's liberal society viewpoint?

Extremism in pursuit of liberty is no vice. Moderation in defense of liberty is no virtue.

Many of the original white colonists were indentured slaves who paid for their passage by serving their masters for an agreed upon period of time, often five years. Thus slavery is not an all-or-nothing black-and-white issue and never has been. Nor has freedom been and all-or-nothing black-and-white issue that always requires war to be resolved. For example, until a little over a century ago women had no rights to own property much less vote.

The issue of slavery was easy for the founding fathers to ignore and put off for another generation to deal with. It was only with the introduction of the cotton gin that it suddenly became an issue worth fighting over. Within ten years the number of slaves doubled and the profits from cotton went from $150,000.oo to 8 million dollars a year. Extreme capitalism at its most extreme supported by a religion that did not brook compromise.

 

[Moonbeam]

All over the earth children are socialized, controlled, by put downs to make them feel worthless if they don't tow the party line, family line, parental line. Children react to this oppression in two ways. Republicans see the benefits of repressing others, of being the top dog, and become authoritarian Nazis. The rest rebel against the injustice and against the system. They want to make it evolve.

Each side exists because of the fear of the other so each side is a bonded part of the other, opposite sides of the same coin, the desire to inflict pain because the other is evil.

 

[xj0hnx]

I agree the two party system needs overhaul.


I also (most strongly) agree that "Left or Right" is totally inadequate as a way to describe political leanings. ie - it's common for someone to take a Liberal stance on social issues, but be more Conservative when it comes to finance. This site is pretty simple, (and there are others which offer a similar spin), but http://www.politicalcompass.org/ has a decent questionaire to take which will give a decent idea of where you really stand. From there it's fairly straightforward to get an understanding of where you stand vis~a~vis a given party.

Just about correct, right leaning almost center, not quite middle libertarian.

Economic Left/Right: 1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.46

 

[wuliheron]

All over the earth children are socialized, controlled, by put downs to make them feel worthless if they don't tow the party line, family line, parental line. Children react to this oppression in two ways. Republicans see the benefits of repressing others, of being the top dog, and become authoritarian Nazis. The rest rebel against the injustice and against the system. They want to make it evolve.

Each side exists because of the fear of the other so each side is a bonded part of the other, opposite sides of the same coin, the desire to inflict pain because the other is evil.

This is known as "ethnocentrism" or the belief that one's culture is centrally important. Not every culture socializes children in this manner and the most extreme and common examples all involve fundamentalism, communism, or some other extreme school of thought.