jcl, thanks for the wikipedia reference, I hadn't come across it before. It illustrates my point quite well, by describing the complexities that we try to cram into the words right and left.

In daily use right and left are handy words to use as slogans on a banner, ("because most people understand the concepts") but that is the limit of meaning that they can convey. If we carry them into more intelligent discussions - as I assume we are trying to have here - they simply indicate an unwillingness to think any more deeply than in morning-TV sound bites.

Pericles,

In terms of government, the left desires a vast majority of public ownership, as opposed to private ownership. Curiously, the right is not diametrically opposite to this (anarchy is), and the libertarians are also further towards zero public ownership than what is commonly referred to as the 'right'.

So, by clear definition, Castro is left wing. And, as history has shown with communist and socialist governments, these governments always head towards the cruel actions you describe to Castro.

Of course, if we just ditch labels completely, then how is discussion possible? Are we only allowed to use labels you like? Please.

If you need to understand what a particular label, just ask. Your attempt to remove these labels is just another attempt and controlling to terminology of the discussion, which is par for the course for the left. That's why they are apparently now a 'reality based community' (Alternate reality of course)...

Grey, I think it is clear that I am going to have to agree to differ with the majority here, who seem to enjoy the use of labels-as-slogans. But I have to take issue with a couple of points you make.

"Of course, if we just ditch labels completely, then how is discussion possible?"

"Of course" discussion is possible without labels. Is a tin of beans less nutritious because you have removed the label? By examining the contents you can determine whether they are edible, tasty, poisonous etc. It just takes a little more care and attention, that is all.

"Your attempt to remove these labels is just another attempt and controlling to terminology of the discussion, which is par for the course for the left."

Surely, it is the use, rather than avoidance, of labels that is the more powerful in "controlling to [sic] terminology" - as you demonstrated perfectly in the next sentence. Having introduced the term "left", you veer off into some obscure reference to reality based communities. That is a clear illustration of how the word can be pressed into service to control the argument from a position in which you feel comfortable.

Which is my point, again. "Left" and "Right" belong on placards being waved by a mob. Absolutely perfect for the purpose, but totally meaningless in any sane discussion on real issues.

Actually Grey the one’s calling for that on this site are mainly right winger not lefties. Also there is not any modern countries were a true communist government has again power. All notional Communist states in the world all totalitarian in nature not communistic . The revolution in Cuba for example may have started with socialist ideas but they have subsequently been dropped. What history has really shown us is whenever power is concentrated in a same group of people they are corrupted by it no matter what their politic. The most important act in a democracy is not gaining power but relinquishing it.

Bozzie as usual you missed my point about the net because you are unable to tell the difference between the ability to say your views as opposed to your right to say them.

Pericles
""Of course" discussion is possible without labels.Is a tin of beans less nutritious because you have removed the label? "
I'm sorry, but you have used the label of 'beans' and 'nutritious'.
Thank you for proving my point that you need to use labels to have a discussion.

"Surely, it is the use, rather than avoidance, of labels that is the more powerful in "controlling to [sic] terminology" "

As you have already shown, It is impossible to have a discussion without labels. As such, you cannot have 'avoidance of labels'. So really, it is your attempt to repress the use of labels that you do not like, that is trying to control the terminology.

"Having introduced the term "left", you veer off into some obscure reference to reality based communities."
I'm sorry if you had not heard of the reference before. I had assumed you would be a little wider read, as you portray yourself as learned and knowledgeable.

"Which is my point, again. "Left" and "Right" belong on placards being waved by a mob. Absolutely perfect for the purpose, but totally meaningless in any sane discussion on real issues."
There you go, labelling again....I guess you can't avoid it.

Pericles, Sorry mate but it IS pedantry and nitpicking. I'm talking broadly and basically in a particular context. You're talking in specific characteristics in many different contexts. I've aknowledged your two examples and yes, I still claim that most know exactly what I'm talking about.

Are you seriously suggesting that people don't? Are you saying that when people talk of left and right politics everyone stands around with a dumb look on their faces? I don't think so.

How are the terms left and right used as weapons? Do you think most people are insulted by being described as such? Once again I don't think so.

I'll say again that I agree the terms have blurred over the years. In fact the two terms have become almost exact opposites of their original positions. I agree that when speaking on some particular issues the use of the words are meaningless. That doesn't mean that they have lost all relevance, they haven't. People still identify with one or the other and it'll be a fair while before sterile argument kills the terms off.

Kenny, by ignoring other peoples views, opinions, and concerns, especially when you urge others to do the same, is tanamount to supression of free speech.