{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "canonicalUrl": "https://www.jacky.wtf//essays/2025/left-right-genesis",
  "path": "/essays/2025/left-right-genesis",
  "publishedAt": "2025-03-04T16:30:00.000Z",
  "site": "at://did:plc:e2ctbutx6kya6si4if5ngjmm/site.standard.publication/3mniussyp2d2g",
  "tags": "essay",
  "textContent": "This entry serves as a reference whenever someone replies to me saying that\nthey're disengaged from the left and right discourse. I'm never sure how folks\ncome across those terms for themselves. But prior to my adoption, I did look\ninto the genesis of the term. This begins with the world's online encyclopedia,\nWikipedia. The terms \"left\" and \"right\" come from [the \"traditional\" model][1]\nof political identification, classification and alignment of one's party,\nstances or ideals. You'd think that this means journalists would use this\nclassification more. It's not uncommon, though, to see left-wing groups\npick up right-wing talking points and visa versa. This makes it a bit\nirrelevant to use as a label as _a whole_ unless you're willing to \"root out\nimpurities\".\n\nAs with some things dealing with the modern logos of politics, this began in\nFrance. In reflection of today to no irony, a deputy, the [Baron de\nGauville][2], explained: \"We began to recognize each other: those who were\nloyal to religion and the king took up positions to the right of the chair so\nas to avoid the shouts, oaths, and indecencies that enjoyed free rein in the\nopposing camp\". This is part of the reason in legacy media, you'll see some\nleft-wing folks call Democrats within the United States a right-centrist party:\ntheir loyalties in the corpo-party routines align with these stances. However,\nthe right-wing party double downs and embraces these stances as part of their\nidentity.\n\nAnother weakness of the institution of bipartisanship in the United States is\nthe guise of neutrality of their actions. The idea that an elephant and a\ndonkey, or more accurately, the reinforcement of Confederate ideals and the\nlayover of American nationalism infused with a perversion of what the Harriet\nTubman-inspired [Combahee Collective][3] defined as identity politics, can work\ntogether on common stances is only possible if it's in favor of aggressive\nconcessions towards conservative stances. Examples of this entail things like\n[their stances of Medicare in the past][4] and that of [Al Gore][5] in the 2000\npresidential election.\n\nWords have meaning and the corporate Internet _strongly_ wants you to divorce\nus from understanding the socio-etymology of them for the sake of squabbling\nand juicing traffic. Even on platforms that don't have direct monetization, if\nit's powered by venture capital (like BlueSky and Instagram), the point is to\nkeep people using it such that they can justify raising more (and more) money.\n\n[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum\n[2]: https://man8rove.com/en/coat-of-arms/3bz7dm6-gauville\n[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combahee_River_Collective\n[4]: https://www.cbpp.org/research/democrats-offer-significant-concessions\n[5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore",
  "title": "Left, Right and Center: A Reference"
}