do the right wing guys think it’s like a draco malfoy thing where they’re a good guy underneath?
like when it’s like a lady and a cop and the lady seems like a normal sorta boring suburban lady
do you know what i mean. this is one of the things where if you try to ask an AI bot it yells at you
The opposite side of the political spectrum, which progressivism occupies.
Fundamentally, the belief in hierarchy. Which manifests as support of capitalism, private ownership, and traditional social values.
Opposed to progressivism which opposes unjust hierarchies, and favours egalitarianism. Which manifests in desire for more equitable distributions of wealth and power, and critiques traditional social values.
In any form of hierarchy? Would a technocracy be right wing? Or leftist states with a leadership structure? Like, any leftist state.
No not any. But conservativism is characterised by belief in inherent hierarchy. That all people are not equal. That some people are more or less worthy than others.
And note I’ve said “characterised” and “belief”. In reality ideologies are complex, and the humans and organisations implementing them are even more complex and subject to corruption. So it’s not a simplistic “presence of hierarchy == right-wing”. Some ostensibly left-wing governments fall to authoritarianism. After all politicians are vulnerable to greed and corruption. Though notably those governments begin to quickly abandon their left-wing principles as they do so. For example, the Chinese Communist Party has certainly gone all-in on capitalist ideas of private ownership of land and the means of production.
That characterisation is simply a useful lens for understanding political movements. One can easily see that when there is a push to distribute power “down” the hierarchy, people who refer to themselves as conservative will be more likely to oppose it. They oppose social safety nets that benefit those at the bottom, they oppose transgender recognition, they opposed gay marriage, they opposed ending slavery.
Depends. If you mean replacing the democratically elected government with a government of “experts” (who gets to be an expert being decided by, you guessed it! The experts)? Then yes. As that is basically just a form of aristocracy.
But if you mean democratically elected politicians relying on expert advice to make policy decisions, then no.
Depends. How is that leadership structure maintained? If those positions are elected, and the elections are fair and representative, then no. Because the power ultimately lies with the people, with one person having one vote.
But, do you have a point that you are approaching? Because at this point it seems like you are just asking endless questions. In which case I kinda agree with the other person, you’re sealioning.