That’s not the modern definition of “left wing”. But, even if you apply that definition, she still qualifies as a conservative because she wants to return to the old system of government, that existed before Chavez. That’s not “progress”…it’s “regression”.
And authoritarianism, is a completely separate metric to that political classification system. Any government, regardless of whether you consider them progressive or conservative, can be authoritarian or not. You can have a perfectly functional democracy, with both progressive and conservative ideas taking part in the process. This cooperation is actually considered essential to a healthy democracy.
Authoritarianism is when one side or the other decides they no longer respect the will of the people, and choose to assert their agenda by force or coercion. That can just as easily be used to enforce change, as it is to prevent it.
I think at a certain point we have to agree that the objective right or left is based on the current position of the sovereign nation in question. Progress to be made here is different than progress to be made there, things we have they don’t, etc.
If that’s what you think, then you have to admit that your definition of “left” and “right”, is meaningless. Either it applies across all instances, or it’s entirely subjective.
That’s probably because you don’t actually understand the terms you’re using. You’re getting them mixed up, which would make it rather hard to use them as defined.
The way you measure socio-political systems is typically using spectrums. There are many different spectrums used to define any given system. Technically, you are correct to say that every country is different. But how you define its position relative to other countries uses multiple axes to measure those different spectrums. And given the complexity of how all those separate lines of measurement intersect…you get a multitude of potential socio-political outcomes. Nothing is ever 2 dimensional.
Authoritarianism has its own spectrum…its own axis of measurement. It is independent of other concepts, and can be measured independently, alongside any of the other criteria.
I understand that you desperately want to conclude Tankies like Maduro and others are left wing or some other trite, but the fact is they’re eastern maga.
What are you even talking about? I didn’t say anything about Maduro.
You called Machado a “leftist”. That is categorically false, and shows that you have no idea what that term even means. You are clearly just making this shit up, off the top of your head, and have no intention of arguing in good faith.
That’s not the modern definition of “left wing”. But, even if you apply that definition, she still qualifies as a conservative because she wants to return to the old system of government, that existed before Chavez. That’s not “progress”…it’s “regression”.
And authoritarianism, is a completely separate metric to that political classification system. Any government, regardless of whether you consider them progressive or conservative, can be authoritarian or not. You can have a perfectly functional democracy, with both progressive and conservative ideas taking part in the process. This cooperation is actually considered essential to a healthy democracy.
Authoritarianism is when one side or the other decides they no longer respect the will of the people, and choose to assert their agenda by force or coercion. That can just as easily be used to enforce change, as it is to prevent it.
I think at a certain point we have to agree that the objective right or left is based on the current position of the sovereign nation in question. Progress to be made here is different than progress to be made there, things we have they don’t, etc.
If that’s what you think, then you have to admit that your definition of “left” and “right”, is meaningless. Either it applies across all instances, or it’s entirely subjective.
I think it’s pretty rare to have any occurrence of the term without the context of a specific country.
That’s probably because you don’t actually understand the terms you’re using. You’re getting them mixed up, which would make it rather hard to use them as defined.
The way you measure socio-political systems is typically using spectrums. There are many different spectrums used to define any given system. Technically, you are correct to say that every country is different. But how you define its position relative to other countries uses multiple axes to measure those different spectrums. And given the complexity of how all those separate lines of measurement intersect…you get a multitude of potential socio-political outcomes. Nothing is ever 2 dimensional.
Authoritarianism has its own spectrum…its own axis of measurement. It is independent of other concepts, and can be measured independently, alongside any of the other criteria.
All Authoritarianism is bad, regressive, and conservative.
You’re like a weird, broken record of misunderstanding.
I understand that you desperately want to conclude Tankies like Maduro and others are left wing or some other trite, but the fact is they’re eastern maga.
What are you even talking about? I didn’t say anything about Maduro.
You called Machado a “leftist”. That is categorically false, and shows that you have no idea what that term even means. You are clearly just making this shit up, off the top of your head, and have no intention of arguing in good faith.