Which is worse: right-wing collectivism or left-wing collectivism?

[Tooting Carmen]

Generally speaking, right-wing collectivism revolves mostly around race/ethnicity and nationhood, whereas left-wing collectivism revolves mostly around social class and economics. While I am sceptical of both types of collectivisms, given they encourage people to think of themselves and others as groups rather than as individuals, I'd argue that left-wing collectivism is probably the worst of the two. (And I am saying that as a social democrat who nevertheless dislikes much more 'radical' Marxist ways of thinking). After all, race/ethnicity (though not so much nationhood) is something that is immutable, tangible and objective, whereas social class is something that (at least in theory) can be easily changed. At least in reasonably open and dynamic societies, it is possible for a cleaner to one day wake up and think "OK, today I want to start training to become a university professor", whereas a Japanese person cannot wake up one day and think "OK, today I want to be Black". By contrast, the sad truth is that many old-fashioned leftists talk about social class as if it is something permanent and inescapable, when much of the time it is nothing of the sort.

[Root]

both. God gave us a brain (creativity, intellect & knowledge) to use it so don't follow any rules established by pathetic narrow-minded human beings, you're not dumber than they're.. let these people do whatever they want but don't let them impose something upon you or insert themselves into your private life

[Black Panther]

On a personal level, I fear right-wing collectivism more than left wing collectivism.

[Tooting Carmen]

On a personal level, I fear right-wing collectivism more than left wing collectivism.

The main problem with many right-wingers is that they confuse difference with hierarchy. This was taken to its most absurd and brutal extreme in Nazi Germany and to a lesser extent Apartheid-era South Africa and the Jim Crow-era Southern USA. To say that White and Black people are objectively different and can be categorised as such is one thing. To say that one group is better or worse than the other, however, is a total nonsense.

[Smeagol]

The main problem with many right-wingers is that they confuse difference with hierarchy. This was taken to its most absurd and brutal extreme in Nazi Germany and to a lesser extent Apartheid-era South Africa and the Jim Crow-era Southern USA. To say that White and Black people are objectively different and can be categorised as such is one thing. To say that one group is better or worse than the other, however, is a total nonsense.

No it isn't. It's perfectly logical and true. It actually needs to be acknowledged in a healthy society.

[Tooting Carmen]

No it isn't. It's perfectly logical and true. It actually needs to be acknowledged in a healthy society.

While there might be average levels of e.g. intelligence per ethnic group, this masks the fact that most variation occurs between individuals. You can find semi-literate cleaners who are White, Black, South Asian, East Asian or Arab and you can find well-read university professors who are White, Black, South Asian, East Asian or Arab.

[Tooting Carmen]

To put it crudely: groups are different but equal, while individuals are different and very unequal.

[Smeagol]

While there might be average levels of e.g. intelligence per ethnic group, this masks the fact that most variation occurs between individuals. You can find semi-literate cleaners who are White, Black, South Asian, East Asian or Arab and you can find well-read university professors who are White, Black, South Asian, East Asian or Arab.

No, it doesn't. The difference in intelligence between whites and negroes for example is huge and so insurmountable that all negroes in Western countries should either be sent back to Africa or be sterilized and be subject to the same kind of laws the Nazis had against the Jews that took them out of public life (without actually killing them).

[Tooting Carmen]

When it comes to countries like the USA and Brazil, the big debate is whether racial disparities in overall wealth and intelligence are to do with nature on the one hand and nurture and history on the other. Had slavery and (in the USA's case) State-imposed segregation not occurred, and instead Blacks could migrate freely to those countries just as Whites had done and could live freely and fully integrated among Whites, would the racial disparities in those countries be anything like as big as they are? Very debatable and contentious.

[Tooting Carmen]

Here are rugby players Maro Itoje and Alun Wyn Jones.


Do you consider the fact that one is Black and the other one White to be their most defining features (right wing-collectivist mentality), or the fact they both come from upper-middle class backgrounds and went to public schools (left wing-collectivist mentality)?