According to this Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leuctra), in the Spartan phalanx, the most experienced and politically powerful soldiers were on the right flank, while the weakest, least regarded soldiers were on the left. This was to keep the phalanx from drifting to the right, since the soldiers were naturally quite desperate to get behind the shield of their neighbor to the right and only the strongest and most experienced soldiers could be trusted to halt this movement.
This, I think, more closely corresponds to the general philosophical inclinations of the "right" and the "left" than the generally accepted origin story from the French Revolution, in which the people who sat to the right of the King were for the monarchy and the people who sat to the left were against it. Being for or against monarchy is something that's really specific to Europe, while the dichotomy between the strong and the weak is almost ubiquitous. And the left wing generally isn't for "equality," not really. If it was for equality, it would try to create a regression towards the mean. This is in marked contrast with the general tendency of leftists to pick out oppressed groups, like minorities or the homeless.
The terms "left" and "right" appeared during the French Revolution of 1789 when members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the president's right and supporters of the revolution to his left. One deputy, the Baron de Gauville explained, "We began to recognize each other: those who were loyal to religion and the king took up positions to the right of the chair so as to avoid the shouts, oaths, and indecencies that enjoyed free rein in the opposing camp." However the Right opposed the seating arrangement because they believed that deputies should support private or general interests but should not form factions or political parties. The contemporary press occasionally used the terms "left" and "right" to refer to the opposing sides.
This also from wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics
I know about that origin story. It's just that the Sparta phalanx is a much richer metaphor for the political "divide," and it's a much earlier source for it.
Quote from: zarus tathra on March 24, 2014, 01:02:57 AM
I know about that origin story. It's just that the Sparta phalanx is a much richer metaphor for the political "divide," and it's a much earlier source for it.
But one with no actual connection to the terms' political usage
Really? So right-wingers don't emphasize machismo and tradition and the "need" for hierarchy just like the people on the Spartan right flank? You think that left-wingers don't cynically use the scattered and disenfranchised to fill the ranks of their political parties?
I don't particularly cares abiyt the pretty and stfuff, what maters is wher the tern mcame from. If it came form France, it came from France. Doesn't
matter if noti as good of storyi.
I'm saying that you've offered no evidence that your story has any significance in the etymology of left and right as political terms. I could say that in India you always wipe you ass with your left hand just like the political left find itself cleaning up shit and that people masturbate with their right hands just like the political right politicizes sexual morals. I could reverse engineer any number of just so stories about how the terms came about. That would not, however, magically make any of those stories the actual origin of left and right as political terms.
Ahh, the good old "We're the 'daddy' party and will protect you from the boogie man" argument from the right except it's all bullshit and the boogie man is make believe. :blahblah:
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on March 24, 2014, 02:30:16 AM
the boogie man is make believe. :blahblah:
Whew, that is a load off my mind. I'll sleep sound tonight.
Quote from: Poison Tree on March 24, 2014, 02:45:08 AM
Whew, that is a load off my mind. I'll sleep sound tonight.
Happy to be of assistance.
"left" and "right" don't even make sense except in ridiculous systems like the US where you only have 2 parties to vote for and they're both shit. There are no fixed definitions for these things and I always get confused because in europe a lot of it is reversed anyway.
And centre parties are conveniently ignored :)
Quote from: Poison Tree on March 24, 2014, 02:11:04 AM
I'm saying that you've offered no evidence that your story has any significance in the etymology of left and right as political terms. I could say that in India you always wipe you ass with your left hand just like the political left find itself cleaning up shit and that people masturbate with their right hands just like the political right politicizes sexual morals. I could reverse engineer any number of just so stories about how the terms came about. That would not, however, magically make any of those stories the actual origin of left and right as political terms.
I don't think anybody REALLY knows where the terminology comes from. The source from Wikipedia that says it came from France is like the only one that says so, and it's in a fairly obscure book on the French Revolution that doesn't have enough buyers to have used copies on the market. I'm not going to buy the book just to judge the paper, but mind you it's just one paper in a book that's obviously designed to glorify the Revolution.
The point is is that the use of left and right wings to designate social rank in the Spartan phalanx is much older than the National Assembly.
Quote from: Jason78 on March 24, 2014, 06:06:17 AM
And centre parties are conveniently ignored :)
Centre parties want everyone to gravitate towards the mean, or what their propaganda says is the mean. That's actually what fascism's about.
Or it could be that the thought of a "body of Macedonian warriors" gets you all steamy inside. :biggrin:
Quote from: zarus tathra on March 24, 2014, 10:51:19 AM
Centre parties want everyone to gravitate towards the mean, or what their propaganda says is the mean. That's actually what fascism's about.
Wait.... What?
Left wing parties focus on the interests of the poor and the disenfranchised, who in developed countries are a minority and therefore not the "norm". They're certainly more numerous than the rich, but they're usually no where near the mean or the median. This makes the left undemocratic in all but the poorest states.
Right wing parties focus on the politically powerful, like the monarchs in medieval Europe. These parties are by their nature undemocratic, but not necessarily unpopular
Quote from: stromboli on March 24, 2014, 12:10:58 PM
Or it could be that the thought of a "body of Macedonian warriors" gets you all steamy inside. :biggrin:
Hahahaha. But eww
Quote from: Jason78 on March 24, 2014, 12:44:58 PM
Wait.... What?
Left wing parties (pretend to) care about the poor, right wing parties (pretend to) care about the rich, while center parties try to represent the middle classes, or the "mean." Fascism was all about representing what was "normal." This is also the general tendency of democracy, to obsess over what is "normal."