Opinion: Making Sense of ‘Right-Wing’ Being Used to Describe Every Type of Oppression
It should be no surprise to anyone that the left advances it cause largely though the manipulation of words and a large dose of emotion and straw man arguments.
What struck me, however, while reading news on different evils of regimes is the wide spread in which “right wing” is used.
Going by the Merriam-Webster definition of the term, which I would argue is the most correct of every source I consulted, defining the Golden Dawn Nazi party in Greece as right-wing would be incorrect.
Merriam-Webster defines right wing as “the part of a political group that consists of people who support conservative or traditional ideas and policies”.
Nazis are fascist; fascism is a form of Dictatorship, which, by definition is neither left nor right by the terms of the political spectrum.
According to Merriam-Webster, It is “a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government”.
In light of the IRS targeting scandal, the San-Antonio city ordinance making disagreeing with homosexuality essentially illegal, the food and soda controls of New York City, the NSA spying, the overarching controls over medicine of Obamacare, ect. I would argue that the definition of Fascism is more akin to the modern American left-wing Democrat than any right-wing group.
The trick that left wing media and their ilk use is a very selective definition that one can find by consulting Wikipedia, a less-than-reputable source that relies on user consensus for information.
According to Wikipedia right wing is “…an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social hierarchy or social inequality”.
With this definition, which could very easily be renamed as “evil”, those on the left can feel they are correct by labeling every oppressive regime as ‘right-wing’ regardless of their actual position on the traditional political spectrum.
Wikipedia does, in the final sentence of their definition, make the admission that “…the term ‘right wing’ originally designated traditional conservatives and reactionaries; it has also been used to describe neo-conservatives, nationalists, racists, Christian Democrats and classical liberals”.
They admit the real definition of the term, while justifying its re-definition by consensus.
It shows not only, how the left continues to be able to use the term to define anything bad while also using it to define those on the right, it also shows one of the trademarks of the modern liberal.
They reject the reality that words and terms have true definitions and that those definitions do not require consensus to be true.
This same mindset is the one they use to justify claiming to have science on their side even when evidence is either uncertain or against them.
To a liberal, reality is consensus, and definitions and facts are never static beyond the current liberal consensus.
Andrew Montalvo is a KFYO Talkshow Producer. Let him know what you think in the comments below.