yep the left very much believe in solving problems and imaginery problems with other peoples money. That is why they are into big Government and Government funded positions. Conservatives are much more likely to use their own money in the causes they believe in. Look at how Rudd and Gillard were so free in giving away tax payer money as well as supporting all the charlotans involved in the gw scam. Gillard dumbed down the education sector by getting the public purse to pay for thousands of degrees that were never going to result in real jobs. The leftist secular ideology has failed almost every part of society.

Most, if not all of the millions of human beings who participate in the organizations listed on this site would be on the left side of the culture wars divide.
http://www.dabase.org/GCF.htm
And as such their participation is based on a justifiable moral concern for the betterment of the human situation - as much as that is possible and necessary in any given location.
The idea of a linear time line "governing" the affairs of humankind has its origins in the Christian idea of his-story.

First of all God "created" the "world" in a specific one-off act (day ONE) And "he" has a "plan" for humankind which will be "worked out" in linear his-story.
Secondly the drama of "Jesus" created an all-encompassing meaning to the presumed "plan" and significance to the mortal human drama.

His-story is thus moving in a linear direction and its ultimate significance and purpose will occur when "Jesus" reappears at some defined point in linear history to "redeem" all of humankind.

And of course the earnestness of the Christian POLITICAL project to convert all human beings to the one-true-way is supposedly given "divine warrant" by the "great commission" to convert all nations or more correctly all human beings to the one-true-way.
Of course Jesus who was never ever in sense a Christian never ever gave such a warrant/commission.

But what is the nature of the "world"? Is it a fixed very concrete thing, or is a much more fluid plastic which can be (and is) trans (trance)formed by ones presumptions about it.
http://www.adidam.org/teaching/gnosticon/spirit-of-buddhism

And what about applied right-wing politics, or the politics of "there is no other way" as stated by Margaret Thatcher.
These two references sum up their applied politics, as does the book The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein in which she describes in great detail the phenomenon described in the first reference below.
http://www.logosjournal.com/hammer_kellner
This stark image sums up the applied politics of all of the right-wing think tanks, including the IPA.
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~spanmod/mural/panel21.htm

Don is exploring many difficult ideas here, which frankly seem to be beyond many commentators. As well, some are affronted by what he writes, the Marxist Left for example, with his exploration of inevitability. I very much agree with him that " .... we have to do the best we can. But I do my part without any sense of inevitability, and with often a worrying sense that there is too little recognition of what can go wrong, .... "

i.e. nothing is inevitable, including 'progress', it's something we have to constantly work for, it won't just happen. In one of his last papers, Karl Popper (1989) wrote that all of his life he had been trying to bring together the best of both liberalism and socialism. Many times, e.g. in his critiques of historicism, he tried to point out that, if a revolution didn't either come about 'inevitably' or 'inevitably' improve people's lives, then it would be better to avoid it and improve society wherever one could, incrementally. i.e. if you don't really know what you are doing or where you are going, first and foremost do no harm. And never plan as if other people can be sacrificed for your cause.

Yes, pretty wimpy, I know, but leave the sacrifice of the masses to tyrants.

The 'Left' is a very broad church. The 'Right' is a very broad church. The 'Centre' is a very broad church. Most of us hold firm beliefs which may stretch across church boundaries, but few would agree. But I would suggest that those who believe in the inevitability of progress may be more 'trans-church' than they think.

I look forward to more articles from Don (?) :)

Joe

Armchair,

"Its not a fair go for everyone if you end up destroying everything."
I agree absolutely. However if you look at changes in the form of government, you'll find it's a lot more complicated than Plato predicted, and there's no inevitable progression.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Hasbeen,

It is indeed a good one, for it is an entirely accurate one.

I can't off hand name any political leader, left or right, who departed any office poorer than he entered it. Unfortunately the acquisition of wealth seems to be part of human nature, and people tend to feather their own nests whether they believe doing so is right or wrong. Though there are many on the right who see getting rich as inherently good, it's difficult to think of even one person on the left who even purported to have any moral basis for getting rich at others' expense. I suppose Evita might count, but that's about it.

As for global warming, it might have a lot to do with the right swallowing all the propaganda they read in the Murdoch Press (or in America's case, Fox News). In Europe (and indeed Africa, Asia and South America) the right are more willing to accept the facts.

______________________________________________________________________________________

runner,

The left make a distinction between government money and other people's money. They do of course accept that other people's money is a major source of government funding, but also accept that this is justified when government spending benefits everyone.

Hi Aidan,

The late David Lange, PM of NZ, lived in a state (housing commission) house before, during and after his time as PM. I think he died there. The current President of Uruguay is reported to live in a two-room cottage.

On the other hand, Ceausescu of Rumania built himself a two-thousand room palace. Probably from his life savings from his evening shift job. And would you suggest that current Chinese leaders are getting by just on their state salaries ? Does Mugabe live in a two-bedroom cottage ? Or are rumours of his string of palaces, around the world, nothing but lies ?

Caution: don't get between many on the Left and the chance to spend other people's money. On good causes, of course. Such self-sacrifice ! Brings a tear to the eye.

Joe

Hi Joe

Australia's Curtin-like saint of a politician, Neck Xenophon, is also known as a Man, of non-enriching, non-material, habits:

"People usually boast that their car is the latest model of a posh brand. Xenophon brags instead that his is a bomb, one of the cheapest cars on the market and almost a decade old."

He reputedly also lives in a cheap motel, when in Canberra.

A legend.

Pete