Left and Right

This a longer response to what I believe is a wrong view of Left and Right outlined by Christopher Hitchens. He seems to believe that radicalism equates to the left and conservatism to the right. I believe this is wrong and that there are radical and conservatives on the left and right.

The French Revolutionary origins of the left, right division could lead you to Hitchens view but as politics has changed a more generalised view is more appropriate. My definition reaches back to what I believe is a fundamental conflict in humans between the needs of the individual versus the needs of the group. In modern times this is often characterised in economic terms as public versus private.


So I see the left as biased towards collective action over individual action and the right as biased the other way. The centre ground is then the perfect balance between the two. In modern politics I assume most see themselves as perfect, evidence based centrists and from there the centre right have a bias toward the private sector in the absence of sufficient evidence and the centre left have a bias toward public sector solutions. The left and hard left would then be those that prefer public solutions in spite of evidence and the right likewise.

On social issues it might be assumed that the right would take a more libertarian view, allowing individuals to decide their own lives and the left in contrast would seek collective control over the individual. What has happened in practice is that individuals on the right seek to impose their world view on others where on the left collective strength allows individuals to express themselves.

Left and right is sometimes characterised as a battle between inequality and equality, but I just don’t see it in this way. Certainly on the right I see a greater pessimism about what is achievable but I don’t believe those on the centre right are really looking to deliberately create misery so the rich can prosper.  Although there are some on the right that believe that inequality is natural and right, and some on the left believe that equality is a goal in itself.

So I find myself on the left because I have a bias toward collective, state intervention when I can’t see clear evidence of the best way forward. In the words of Liz Kendall “what matters is what works”. On social issues I am definitely a Libertarian, believing what people do is there own business as far as it has no direct impact on others. On equality and distribution of wealth I seek to maximise our collective potential, and to prevent the powerful from inhibiting the weak.

On the issue of conservative versus radical I certainly lean toward the radical. I view conservatives as against the natural order, which is change. The danger of radicalism is to lose what matters before we realise its importance. Inevitably a steady mix of forward movement followed by static reflection and course correction is the best way forward, but I don’t see that as essentially left wing.