Many scholars and thinkers have explored the origins of the left vs. right divide, particularly using its roots in the French Revolution, to critique conservative (or “right-wing”) ideologies for resisting progress and clinging to [[hierarchical]] or traditional structures. These critiques often focus on how [[Conservatism]] seeks to maintain existing power dynamics, often at the expense of social or technological advancements that could benefit humanity. Below are some examples of this intellectual work: Key Thinkers and Their Work 1. [[Karl Marx]] and Friedrich Engels • In works like The Communist Manifesto (1848), Marx and Engels critique conservatism as a force that resists the inevitable progress of [[History]], particularly the transition from feudalism to [[Capitalism]] and ultimately to [[Socialism]]. • For Marx, the right represents the interests of the ruling class, who resist social [[Change]] to maintain their dominance. He frames the left as the revolutionary force driving humanity toward greater equality and freedom. 2. [[Antonio Gramsci]] – [[Cultural Hegemony]] • Gramsci, an Italian Marxist thinker, argued that conservative forces maintain societal control through cultural hegemony, using institutions like religion, media, and education to resist progressive change. • He critiqued the right for obstructing human progress by perpetuating myths of tradition and inevitability, thereby stalling transformative movements. 3. Thomas Paine – The Rights of Man • Writing during the French Revolution, Paine critiqued conservatives (notably Edmund Burke) for their unwillingness to embrace democratic principles and social equality. • Paine argued that conservatism, rooted in aristocracy and tradition, was antithetical to human progress, which required challenging unjust hierarchies. 4. Erich Fromm – Escape from Freedom • Fromm explores how conservative ideologies appeal to people who fear the uncertainties of freedom and progress. • He critiques the right for offering authoritarian structures as a refuge, rather than embracing the challenges of autonomy and human development. 5. Corey Robin – The Reactionary Mind • Robin argues that conservatism is fundamentally a reactionary ideology, defined by its resistance to emancipatory movements rather than any inherent principles of its own. • He critiques the right for framing progress as dangerous or destabilising, thus impeding humanity’s ability to address systemic inequalities. 6. [[Herbert Marcuse]] – One-Dimensional Man • Marcuse critiques right-leaning forces within capitalist societies for stifling technological and social progress by perpetuating systems of domination. • He argues that the right manipulates progress (e.g., technological advancements) to reinforce control, rather than using it to liberate humanity. 7. Naomi Klein – The Shock Doctrine • While more contemporary, Klein critiques the right for using crises as opportunities to roll back progress and entrench neoliberal systems that prioritise profit over people. • She frames the right as obstructing global progress, particularly on issues like climate change and inequality, by resisting systemic reforms. Theoretical Foundations of Critique 1. Progress vs. Preservation • The French Revolution’s left-right divide is often interpreted as a conflict between progress and preservation. Scholars argue that the right’s focus on preserving tradition often blocks necessary advancements in social justice, economic equality, and ecological sustainability. 2. Dialectical Materialism • Using Marxist frameworks, theorists critique the right as defenders of the status quo, obstructing historical progress toward a classless society. • This critique sees conservatism as a force that slows or halts humanity’s development for the benefit of a privileged few. 3. Postmodern Critiques • Thinkers like [[Michel Foucault]] and Judith Butler critique right-wing ideologies for relying on rigid definitions of identity, morality, and tradition. They argue this obstructs the evolution of more fluid, inclusive societies. 4. Human Potential • Thinkers such as Bertrand Russell have argued that humanity’s potential is hindered by conservative ideologies that resist scientific, social, and philosophical advancements in favour of static traditions. Anarchist Connections These critiques often align with anarchist theories, which reject the preservation of hierarchical systems and advocate for progress through decentralised and cooperative models: • Anarchism critiques both the right and the state itself for blocking human potential by enforcing rigid structures of control. • The right’s obsession with “order” and “tradition” is viewed as incompatible with the fluid, adaptive systems anarchists envision, where human creativity and solidarity drive progress. Criticism Framed in Modern Contexts 1. Climate Change • Right-wing resistance to environmental policies, often rooted in economic conservatism or denial of science, is critiqued as obstructing global progress and endangering future generations. 2. Technological and Social Stagnation • The right’s focus on preserving existing systems often leads to resistance against policies like universal healthcare, wealth redistribution, and educational reform, all of which could improve collective well-being. 3. Cultural Conservatism • The right’s reliance on cultural and religious traditions to justify inequality is critiqued for holding back social progress, such as gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and racial justice. In summary, scholars from various traditions critique the right for resisting progress and clinging to traditions that often perpetuate inequalities. Using the left-right divide’s origins, they argue that conservatism has historically obstructed humanity’s evolution toward greater freedom and equality. Anarchist theory builds on these critiques by rejecting not just the right, but all forms of top-down control, proposing instead pluralistic, cooperative systems that transcend these binary divides. Would you like to delve deeper into any of these thinkers or ideas? Culture is like personalities for areas. Countries and continents. I guess it's good we have a combination of differing 'personalities.' It would be cool if in the future people could easily choose to move to places that fitted them better, then communities could work together better. Although I suppose currently that happens anyway. One type of group is nested in another, creating varying blends. https://www.personalitycafe.com/threads/[enneagram]-types-of-contemporary-countries.132705/ `Concepts:` [[Sociology]] `Knowledge Base:`