|
Maybe black-and-white isn't exactly the right phrase for it. But isn't the primary distinction between 'left' and 'right'an economic policy? Whether to try to run the country via capitalism, or adopt more socialist elements? But now, it refers to way more things than that. Civil liberties, environmentalism, war, human rights, etc. How is it that someone's stance on an economic policy translates into opinions on all these things? Individual thought seems discouraged; the main options seem to be between two blocks of thoughts.
I wasn't alive at the time, but I can't help but think how different this is from the Johnson presidency. Progressives who wanted civil rights for all Americans gladly chose him over Goldwater, but the anti-war movement, which was progressive, vehemently opposed the violent escalation of the Vietnam war by Johnson. Maybe 'polarized' is a better term than black-and-white, but what seems strange to me is that so many Americans who believed in a more right-of-center economic policy would be lead by these beliefs to accept spying, rendition, and countless other things which seem to me should not divide left-right, but be opposed by the American concepts that are the base for both left and right.
|