Left or right? How about up and down?

I just wanted to highlight this wonderful article from Arianna Huffington (by way of Lynne Kiesling over at Knowledge Problem). That it comes from the co-founder of the Huffington post, I think, makes it that much a stronger point. The old left-right paradigm is just that: old. Ancient, even. The French National Assembly from which it was derived contained political ideologies which simply don't exist in the mainstream anymore (such as absolutist monarchism); it's about as irrelevant to modern politics as Watt's steam engine is to mechanical engineering today. While the National Assembly (as well as other contemporary representative bodies) certainly had a huge influence on modern democratic politics, that influence has been joined by two centuries of experience with representative republics. Perhaps even in its own day it was just a convenient short-hand, rather than serious political analysis.

Regardless, the age argument is only one small part of the main point: The left-right paradigm doesn't tell you much about modern American politics. Arianna does a wonderful job demonstrating this in a few short sentences:

I won't try to one-up her here.

But probably the most important part of that article is the tone. Ms. Huffington is extending the sort of courtesy that is very rare in political journalism today. While at least a bit of it is no doubt professional in nature, I also trust that Arianna actually cares enough to want to be affable and polite. This is the sort of spirit our country needs more: a spirit that acknowledges the basic humanity of the opposition. One that is willing to engage in constructive debate instead of destructive mud-slinging and fact-spinning. I'll admit to not reading that much of the Huffington Post, but perhaps I've been too influenced by those who do, coming up with the thought that it was another political rag with little to offer by division and choir preaching.

So, I'll end with an ode to man whose rhetoric put us all into a pleasant sleep filled with candy dreams of capitalism and free markets: Ronald Reagan. Never liked most of his politics, but man could he speak.

"You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order -- or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, 'The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.'

We libertarians, liberals, and (certain sorts of) conservatives may think progressives are those who would spread bounties and benefits at the expense of liberty, but that isn't the reality. That's more of the tribal nonsense that leads to simplified models like the left-right political scale. After all, isn't the main difference between social liberals (and their allies, the social democrats -- in America both falling under the 'progressive' heading) and classical liberals (and their libertarian and conservative allies) a disagreement over the meaning of liberty? There's a good discussion there! Perhaps we should be having it instead of pretending our opposites are totalitarians in disguise, who obviously lack our love of freedom.

Forget left and right; remember, our differences are ideological, not linear. Embrace the freedom we all love so much. And maybe embrace each other a bit more, too. Metaphorically speaking, of course.