eh... The Right has, in the past, presented a facade of being willing to engage in discussion - and maybe it was true to some degree, once, but even that's broken down over the last decade-or-so. "Engaging in discussion" and "seeking to find the truth" doesn't get you the MAGA movement, or "Stop the Steal"/Jan 6, or the Banghazi hearings, or Birtherism, or Pizzagate, or any number of other nutty positions.
Rewinding the clock a bit, "engaging in discussion" and "seeking to find the truth" doesn't land you on the Right's position and rhetoric with regards to climate change, the Keystone XL pipeline, or most other environmental actions. Nor does it land you on their shallow approach towards taxes and spending, or the hand-wringing over the "gay agenda" and trans kids playing high school sports.
I am not sure about most of these issues you mention as I am not from the US. The US has its own unique way of doing politics. It seems to me some of the issues like Birtherism and Pizzagate are about misinformation which again is common not just in politics but in society in general such as in mainstream media including social media.
As far as I understand and perhaps as a good example of the different ideological thinking behind the Right and Left is the trans issue. Each side has a fundementally different belief. The Right believe in the age old truths of male and female whereas the Left take a more progressive belief that its a spectrum. So as a result the Right as standing up for this truth or objective reality and therefore will be against schools implementing trans and gender ideology.
There's a reason that highly educated technocrats (i.e. the folks who favor engaging in discussion and truth-seeking) tend to be center-left: because on the current American political spectrum, that's where most of the solution-based approaches wind up sitting.
It depends on what the solutions are I would think. Perhaps the version of "solution-based approaches" is itself motivated by ideology. Afterall we all want solutions to problems. BUt generally politics is designed to twart solutions where each side will disagree about how to resolve an issue due to political beliefs. Much of the so called solutions are not solutations at all.
The Left is hardly blameless, but let's not pretend that the Right doesn't engage in these tactics as well. After all, "shutting down opposing views" was the basis for Desantis' actions against Disney. "Shutting down opposing views" was why Texas A&M rescinded its offer to Kathleen McElroy; why Liz Cheney was ostracized from her party; why Mike Pence is being cast aside from the party; why religious folks like Russel Moore, Beth Moore and others are being written off as "woke" for daring to stand up against abuse.
Yes it seems the Right sometimes engage in the same tactics perhaps justified sometimes. But I agree politics has decended into games. But what I am talking about is more fundemental. The Left basically support socialism and there are many Marxist underpinnings to their ideas like anti capitalism and more government control on all sorts of issues like family, marriage which are really private matters of freedom.
At the extreme end this ideology evolves into communism and we have seen glimpses of this in nations like Canada. It seems many nations are going this way even embracing China as a good political example of how the West can solve its economic problems. Certainly we are seeing our rights eroded in recent years and it seems most of these nations have Leftist governments.
No, the authoritarian wing of the Right has long engaged in "cancel culture." That's not even a matter of debate.
Once again you must be talking about the US. Sure there are sections of politics that are more extreme but I was speacking generally. The fact is in recent years cancel culture, PC and Woke ideology has increased under Leftist governments. Canada is an example as already mentioned. But to a lessor degree its happened in all Western nations.
There's a time and a place for everything. But just as the Left may be guilty of over-applying that filter, the Right is also guilty of being overly resistant to it and over-applying their preferred individualism filters - an approach that has its own set of failings. IMO, it's not a coincidence that the failings of the Right's approach tend to favor those who already have power and wealth.
I agree to a point as I don't like having any power have too much control. But it seems the Left have over compensated and distorted what was actually happening. I am not sure the complaints claimed by some about the evils of capitalism and tradition are as bad as they make out.
Yes there were issues that needed to be addressed like rising poor class and increasing corporate power. But to say that Western nations were evil capitalists and colonizers is an over reaction. That over reaction was engineered by ideologues post 60's revolutions and now has entered mainstream society resulting in culture wars which are dividing society.
It should also be Christian ideology to support victims against oppressors.
Yes of course but you have to first identify whether there is a victim and oppressor in the first place and not just assume that every difference is the result of a victim/oppressor situation. The ideologues on the Left take the view that all difference is the result of victim/oppressor relationships which is not the case.
We have to remember that I think both sides believe in supporting victims or the needy and disadvanatged. Its just that each side sees who are the victims/needy and how we can help them differently.
What leftist policies support anti-traditional western ideas of democracy and governance? At least in the US, it's overwhelmingly the Left who've been trying to make voting more open and accessible while it's predominantly the Right who've been trying to restrict access and gerrymander themselves into secure majorities.
Once again I am not familiar with US political system. But I did hear something about an increase in postal voting which may contribute to voter fraud. I think both sides will try to get an advantage and engage in unfair tactics. Thats the nature of politics which may make a case that the political system is in need of reforming.
To be clear - I don't think either side is innocent, nor do I think this is solely a product of each side's morals. There are obvious electoral incentives for both the Left and the Right to be acting the way they do. But while the Left isn't above engaging in its own shenanigans, it's been clear that, at least for the last 15 years or so, it's been primarily the Right who've been eager to abandon any previously-stated values regarding civic participation and democracy. The Left has advocacy groups lobbying for expanded voting access for a number of groups regardless of political affiliation, whereas I can't recall seeing anything like that on Right for some time.
I think generally democracy has eroded and maybe thats a result of the natural evolution of how society has grown. But more generally like I said earlier I think socialism has grown and maybe thats a reaction against the negative aspects of capitalism gone too far. But it seems socialist governments are more likely to wind back freedoms because thats the nature of the philosophy.
Not that I don't think there are some good aspect of socialism. But I think as a political ideology it fails as well and we are seeing that is nations like Canada.
