Left–Right Politics

7/21/2019 LeftRight Politics

1/6

Leftright politics

The leftright political spectrumis a system of classi-fying political positions, ideologies andparties. Left-wing politicsandright-wing politicsare often presentedas opposed, although a particular individual or group maytake a left-wing stance on one matter and a right-wingstance on another. In France, where the terms originated,the Lefthas been called the party of movement andthe Rightthe party of order.[1][2][3][4] The intermediatestance is called centrism and a person with such a positionis amoderate.

There is general agreement that the Left includes:anarchists, anti-capitalists, anti-imperialists, autonomists,communists, democratic-socialists, feminists, greens,left-libertarians, progressives, secularists, socialists,social-democratsandsocial-liberals.[5][6][7]

There is also general consensus that the Right in-cludes: capitalists, conservatives, fascists, monarchists,nationalists,neoconservatives,neoliberals,reactionaries,right-libertarians, social-authoritarians, theocrats andtraditionalists.[8]

1 History of the terms

The terms left and right appeared during theFrenchRevolutionof 1789 when members of theNational As-semblydivided into supporters of the king to the pres-idents right and supporters of the revolution to his left.One deputy, the Baron de Gauville explained, We beganto recognize each other: those who were loyal to religionand the king took up positions to the right of the chair soas to avoid the shouts, oaths, and indecencies that enjoyedfree rein in the opposing camp. However the Right op-

posed the seating arrangement because they believed thatdeputies should support private or general interests butshould not form factions or political parties. The contem-porary press occasionally used the terms left and rightto refer to the opposing sides.[9]

When the National Assembly was replaced in 1791 bya Legislative Assemblycomprising entirely new mem-bers, the divisions continued. Innovators sat on the left,moderates gathered in the centre, while the consci-entious defenders of the constitution found themselvessitting on the right, where the defenders of theAncienRgimehad previously gathered. When the succeeding

National Conventionmet in 1792, the seating arrange-ment continued, but following the coup d'tat of 2 June1793, and the arrest of theGirondins, the right side of

the assembly was deserted, and any remaining memberswho had sat there moved to the centre. However follow-ing theThermidorian Reactionof 1794 the members ofthe far left were excluded and the method of seating wasabolished. The new constitution included rules for the as-sembly that would break up the party groups.[10]

However following theRestorationin 18141815 politi-cal clubs were again formed. The majorityultraroyalistschose to sit on the right. The constitutionals sat in thecentre while independents sat on the left. The terms ex-

treme rightand extreme left, as well as centre-rightandcentre-left, came to be used to describe the nuances ofideology of different sections of the assembly.[11]

The terms left and right were not used to refer to po-litical ideology but only to seating in the legislature. After1848, the main opposing camps were the "democratic so-cialists" and the reactionaries who used red and whiteflags to identify their party affiliation.[12]

With theestablishment of theThird Republic in 1871, theterms were adopted by political parties: the RepublicanLeft, the Centre Right, and the Centre Left (1871) and

the Extreme Left (1876) and Radical Left (1881). Be-ginning in the early twentieth century the terms left andright came to be associated with specific political ideolo-gies and were used to describe citizens political beliefs,gradually replacing the terms reds and the reaction orrepublicans and conservatives. By 1914 the left halfof the legislature was composed of Unified Socialists, Re-publican Socialists and Socialist Radicals, while the par-ties that were called left now sat on the right side.[13]

There was asymmetryin the use of the terms left and rightby the opposing sides. The right mostly denied that theleftright spectrum was meaningful because they saw itas artificial and damaging to unity. The left, however,seeking to change society, promoted the distinction. AsAlainobserved in 1931, When people ask me if the di-vision between parties of the right and parties of the left,men of the right and men of the left, still makes sense, thefirst thing that comes to mind is that the person asking thequestion is certainly not a man of the left[14]

In British politics the terms 'right' and 'left' came intocommon use for the first time in the late 1930s in debatesover theSpanish Civil War.[15]

The Scottish sociologistRobert M. MacIvernoted inTheWeb of Government(1947):

The right is always the party sector asso-ciated with the interests of the upper or dom-

1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._MacIverhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Civil_Warhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89mile_Chartierhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Third_Republichttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mountain_(1849)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mountain_(1849)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-royalisthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourbon_Restorationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermidorian_Reactionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girondinshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Conventionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_R%C3%A9gimehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_R%C3%A9gimehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislative_Assembly_(France)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Assembly_(French_Revolution)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Assembly_(French_Revolution)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolutionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolutionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_conservatismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-libertarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionaryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_politicshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-imperialismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-capitalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_partyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideologyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum


2/6

2 3 USAGE IN WESTERN EUROPE

inant classes, the left the sector expressive ofthe lower economic or social classes, and thecentre that of the middle classes. Historicallythis criterion seems acceptable. The conser-vative right has defended entrenched prerog-atives, privileges and powers; the left has at-

tacked them. The right has been more favor-able to the aristocratic position, to the hierar-chy of birth or of wealth; the left has foughtfor the equalization of advantage or of oppor-tunity, for the claims of the less advantaged.Defenseand attack have met, under democraticconditions, not in the name of class but in thename of principle; but the opposing principleshave broadly corresponded to the interests ofthe different classes.[16]

2 Political parties in the politicalspectrum

Seating in the 2009 European Parliament

European United LeftNordic Green Left(35)

Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats(184)

European GreensEuropean Free Alliance(55)

Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe(84)

European Peoples Party(265)European Conservatives and Reformists(54)

Europe of Freedom and Democracy(32)

Non-Inscrits(27)

Political scientists have observed that the ideologies ofpolitical parties can be mapped along a single leftrightaxis.[17] Klaus von Beymecategorized European partiesinto nine families, which described most parties. Hewas able to arrange seven of them from left to right:communist,socialist,green,liberal,christian democratic,conservativeand right-wing extremist. The position ofagrarian and regional/ethnic parties varied.[18] A study

conducted in the late 1980s on two bases, positions onownership of the means of production and positions onsocial issues, confirmed this arrangement.[19]

There has been a tendency for party ideologies to persist,and values and views that were present at a partys found-ing have survived. However they have also adapted forpragmatic reasons, making them appear more similar.[20]

LipsetandRokkanobserved that modern party systemsare the product of social conflicts played out in the last

few centuries.[21] They said that lines of cleavage had be-come 'frozen'.[22]

The first modern political parties were liberals, organizedby the middle class in the 19th century to protect themagainst the aristocracy. They were major political par-ties in that century but declined in the twentieth centuryas first the working class came to support socialist par-ties and economic and social change eroded their middleclass base.[23] Conservative parties arose in opposition toliberals in order to defend aristocratic privilege. But inorder to attract voters they became less doctrinaire thanliberals. However they were unsuccessful in most coun-

tries and generally have only been able to achieve powerthrough cooperation with other parties.[24]

Socialist parties were organized in order to achieve po-litical rights for workers and were originally allied withliberals. However they broke with the liberals when theysought worker control of the means of production.[25]

Christian democratic parties were organized by Catholicswho saw liberalism as a threat to traditional values. Al-though established in the19th century, they becamea ma-jor political force following the Second World War.[26]

Communist parties emerged following a division withinsocialism first on support of the First World War and then

support of the Bolshevik Revolution.[27]

Right-wing extremist parties are harder to define, otherthan being more right-wing than other parties, but in-cludefascistsand some extreme conservative and nation-alist parties.[28]

Green parties were the most recent of the major partygroups to develop. They have rejected socialism and theyare very liberal on social issues.[29]

These categories can be applied to many parties outsideEurope.[30] Ware(1996) asserted that in the United Statesboth major parties were liberal, even though there are

leftright policy differences between them.[31]

3 Usage in Western Europe

In the 2001 bookThe government and politics of France,Knapp and Wright say that the main factor dividing theleft and right wings in Western Europe is class. The Leftseekssocial justicethroughredistributive social and eco-nomic policies, while the Right defends private propertyand capitalism. The nature of the conflict depends on ex-isting social and political cleavages and on the level of

economic development.[32] Left-wing values include thebelief in the power of human reason to achieve progressfor the benefit of the human race, secularism, sovereignty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistribution_of_wealthhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistribution_of_wealthhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justicehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stein_Rokkanhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Martin_Lipsethttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_righthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_democratichttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_politicshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialisthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communisthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_von_Beymehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Inscritshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe_of_Freedom_and_Democracyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Conservatives_and_Reformistshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_People%2527s_Partyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_of_Liberals_and_Democrats_for_Europehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Greens%E2%80%93European_Free_Alliancehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Alliance_of_Socialists_and_Democratshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_United_Left%E2%80%93Nordic_Green_Left


3/6

3

exercised through the legislature, social justice, and mis-trust of strong personal political leadership. To the Right,this is regularly seen as anti-clericalism, unrealistic so-cial reform, doctrinaire socialism and class hatred. TheRight are skeptical about the capacity for radical reformsto achieve human well-being while maintaining work-

place competition. They believe in the established churchboth in itself and as an instrument of social cohesion,and believe in the need for strong political leadershipto minimize social and political divisions. To the Left,this is seen as a selfish and reactionary opposition tosocial justice, a wish to impose doctrinaire religion onthe population, and a tendency to authoritarianism andrepression.[33][34]

The differences between left and right have altered overtime. The initial cleavage at the time of the French Revo-lution was between supporters ofabsolute monarchy(theRight) and those who wished to limit the kings author-

ity (the Left). During the 19th century the cleavage wasbetween monarchists and republicans. Following the es-tablishment of the Third Republic in 1871, the cleavagewas between supporters of a strong executive on the Rightand supporters of the primacy of the legislature on theLeft.[35]

4 Economic consequences of left

right politics

According toPolitical Parties and Macroeconomic Policy,Highly aggregated data on unemployment and inflationoutcome in relation to the political orientation of govern-ments in 12 West European and North American nationsare analyzed revealing a lowunemployment-high inflationconfiguration in nations governed by the Left and a highunemployment-low inflation pattern in political systemsdominated by center and rightist parties.[36]

5 Contemporary usage in the

United States

The termsleft-wingandright-wingare widely used in theUnited States but, as on the global level, there is no firmconsensus about their meaning. The only aspect that isgenerally agreed upon is that they are the defining op-posites of the United Statespolitical spectrum. Leftandrightin the U.S. are generally associated withliberalandconservative respectively, although the meanings of thetwo sets of terms do not entirely coincide. Dependingon the political affiliation of the individual using them,these terms can be spoken with varying implications. A2005 poll of 2,209 American adults showed that respon-

dents generally viewed the paired concepts liberals andleft-wingers and conservatives and right-wingers as pos-sessing, respectively, generally similar political beliefs,

but also showed that around ten percent fewer respon-dents understood the termsleftandrightthan understoodthe terms liberaland conservative.[37]

The contemporaryLeft in the United Statesis usuallyunderstood as a category that, in addition to more rad-

icalsocialistsandanarchists, includesNew Deal social-liberals (in contrast to traditions ofsocial democracymore common to Western Europe), Rawlsian liberals,andcivil libertarians, who are often identified with theDemocratic Party. In general, the termleft-wingis un-derstood to imply a commitment toegalitarianism, sup-port for social policies that favor theworking class, andmulticulturalism. The contemporary center-left usuallydefines itself as promoting government regulation of busi-ness, commerce and industry; protection of fundamentalrights such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion;and government intervention on behalf of racial, ethnic,and sexualminoritiesand the working class.[38]

The contemporary Right in the United States is usuallyunderstood as a category includingsocial conservatives,Christian conservativesand free marketliberals, and isgenerally identified with theRepublican Party. In gen-eral, right-wing implies a commitment toconservativeChristian values, support for a free-market system, andtraditional family values. The contemporary Right usu-ally defines itself as promotingderegulationof banking,commerce, and industry.[39]

Whether something is considered to be Left or Right de-pends on ones point of view. According to liberal com-mentatorDavid Sirota, writing inSalon.com, On eco-nomic issues, we are often told that right is center, centeris left, and left is fringe.[40]

6 Relevance of the terms today

Main article:Political spectrum

Some political scientists have suggested that the classifi-cations of left and right are no longer meaningful in

the modern complex world. Although these terms con-tinue to be used, they advocate a more complex spectrumthat attempts to combine political, economic and socialdimensions.[41]

However, a survey conducted between 1983 and 1994 byBob Altemeyerof Canadian legislative caucuses showedan 82% correlation between party affiliation and score ona scale forright-wing authoritarianismwhen comparingright-wing and social democratic caucuses. There was awide gap between the scores of the two groups, whichwas filled by liberal caucuses. His survey of Americanlegislative caucuses showed scores by American Repub-

licans and Democrats were similar to the Canadian Rightand liberals, with a 44% correlation between party affili-tation and score.[42]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_authoritarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Altemeyerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrumhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salon.comhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sirotahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deregulationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Righthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservatismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoritieshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_classhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rawlshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_American_liberalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_American_liberalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Lefthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism_in_the_United_Stateshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_American_liberalismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrumhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_monarchyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-clericalism


4/6

4 8 NOTES

Norberto Bobbio saw the polarization of the ItalianChamber of Deputies in the 1990s as evidence that thelinear left/right axis remained valid. He thought that theargument that the spectrum had disappeared occurredwhen either the Left or Right were weak. The domi-nant side would claim that its ideology was the only possi-

ble one, while the weaker side would minimize its differ-ences. He saw the Left and Right not in absolute terms,but as relative concepts that would vary over time. Thekey distinction was one of equality. The Right was com-mitted to inequality while the further left one went themore committed to equality one was. In his view, theleft/right axis could be applied to any time period.[43]

The political philosopherCharles Blattberghas proposedresponse to conflictas the basis of a reinterpreted politicalspectrum. According to Blattberg, those who would re-spond to conflict with conversation should be consideredas on the left, with negotiation as in the centre, and with

force as on the right. See his essay Political Philosophiesand Political Ideologies.[44]

LibertarianwriterDavid Boazargued that termsleftandrightare used to spin a particular point of view ratherthan as simple descriptors, with those on the left typ-ically emphasizing their support for working people andaccusing the right of supporting the interests of the upperclass, and those on the right usually emphasizing theirsupport for individualism and accusing the Left of sup-portingcollectivism. Boaz asserts that arguments aboutthe way the words should be used often displaces argu-ments about policy by raising emotional prejudice against

a preconceived notion of what the terms mean.[45]

7 See also

Sinistrisme

Nolan chart

8 Notes

[1] Knapp & Wright, p. 10[2] Adam Garfinkle, Telltale Hearts: The Origins and Im-

pact of the Vietnam Antiwar Movement(1997). PalgraveMacmillan: p. 303.

[3] "Left (adjective)" and "Left (noun)" (2011), Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

[4] Roger Broad,Labours European Dilemmas: From Bevinto Blair(2001). Palgrave Macmillan: p. xxvi.

[5] JoAnne C. Reuss, American Folk Music and Left-WingPolitics, The Scarecrow Press, 2000,ISBN 978-0-8108-3684-6

[6] Van Gosse, The Movements of the New Left, 1950 1975: A Brief History with Documents, Palgrave Macmil-lan, 2005,ISBN 978-1-4039-6804-3

[7] Brooks, Frank H. (1994). The Individualist Anarchists:An Anthology of Liberty (18811908). Transaction Pub-lishers. p. xi. Usually considered to be an extreme left-wing ideology, anarchism has always included a signifi-cant strain of radical individualism...

[8] The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia, Columbia Univer-sity Press,ISBN 0-231-05678-8"Fascism, philosophy ofgovernment that glorifies nationalism at the expense ofthe individual. ... The term was first used by the partystarted by MUSSOLINI, ... and has also been appliedto other right-wing movements such as NATIONAL SO-CIALISM, in Germany, and the FRANCO regime, inSpain.

[9] Gauchet, p. 242-245

[10] Gauchet, p. 245-247

[11] Gauchet, p. 247-249

[12] Gauchet, p. 253

[13] Gauchet, p. 255-259

[14] Gauchet, p. 266

[15] Charles Loch Mowat, Britain Between the Wars: 19181940(1955) p 577

[16] Lipset, p. 222

[17] Ware, pp. 1820

[18] Ware, p. 22

[19] Ware, pp. 2729

[20] Ware, p. 47

[21] Ware, p. 186

[22] Ware, p. 202

[23] Ware, p. 29-31

[24] Ware, pp. 3133

[25] Ware, pp. 3335

[26] Ware, p. 36-37

[27] Ware, p. 34

[28] Ware, pp. 4142

[29] Ware, p. 43

[30] Ware, pp. 4447

[31] Ware, p. 60

[32] Knapp & Wright, p. 7

[33] Knapp & Wright, p. 9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0231056788https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9781403968043https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780810836846https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780810836846http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/left?show=1&t=1325146819http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lefthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_charthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinistrismehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Boazhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Blattberghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norberto_Bobbio


5/6

5

[34] Anthony Giddens, Beyond Left and Right, the Future ofRadical Politics, In many continental European countries,for example, 'conservatism' suggests the political influ-ence of Catholicism. p. 22. American conservatism,in some of its major forms at least, has almost from itsbeginnings been aggressively procapitalist in ways that its

European counterparts have not. p. 23. "(However) thebasic delemmas now faced by conservative and socialistthought are everywhere similar. p. 23. Conservatism, itis often said, opposes rationalism. p. 24., Stanford Uni-versity Press, 1994,ISBN 978-0-8047-2451-7.

[35] Knapp & Wright, pp. 25

[36] Douglas A. Hibbs, Jr., Political Parties and Macroeco-nomic Policy, The American Political Science Review,Vol. 71 No. 4, Dec 1977, p. 1467

[37] Right Wing, Left Wing, Chicken Wing | MediaCulture |AlterNet

[38] Michael Kazin, American Dreamers: How the LeftChanged a Nation, Knopf, 2011, ISBN 978-0-307-26628-6

[39] Every facet of daily life, from what cars we drive to whatfood we eat is subject to governments regulatory reach.The costs are inevitably borne by consumers in the formof higher prices, restricted product choices and limitedfreedom. Policymakers should scrutinize new and exist-ing rules to ensure that each is necessary and to minimizecosts.http://www.heritage.org/issues/regulation

[40] http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5420/right_is_not_center_but_2010_resembles_1984/

[41] Ruypers, p. 56

[42] The authoritarian specter, Bob Altemeyer (1996),pp.(258298)

[43] Left and right: the significance of a political distinction(1996) Norberto Bobbio, Allan Cameron, pp. vi xiv

[44] http://ssrn.com/abstract=1755117

[45] David Boaz,The Politics of Freedom: Taking on The Left,the Right, and Threats to our Liberties, Cato Institute,2008,ISBN 978-1-933995-14-4

9 References

Gauchet, Marcel. Right and Left. In Pierre Nora,Lawrence D. Kritzman (Eds.), Realms of memory:conflicts and divisions. New York: Columbia Uni-versity Press, 1997ISBN 0-231-10634-3

Lipset, Seymour Martin. Political man: the socialbases of politics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday,1960.ISBN 0-8018-2522-9

Knapp, Andrew. Wright, Vincent. The governmentand politics of France. New York: Routledge, 2001ISBN 0-415-21526-9

Ruypers, John. Canadian and world politics.Canada: Emond Montgomery Publications Limited,2005.ISBN 1-55239-097-7

Ware, Alan.Political Parties and Party Systems. Ox-ford: Oxford University Press, 1996. ISBN 0-19-

878076-1

10 External links

Political Philosophies and Political Ideologies(PDF); by Charles Blattberg, originally publishedin Public Affairs Quarterly 15, No. 3 (July 2001)193217.

leftright, an onlinetool attempting to illustrate leftright political bias in American media through side-by-side web site searches
http://www.left-right.us/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDFhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1755117https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0198780761https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0198780761https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/1552390977https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0415215269https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0801825229https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0231106343https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9781933995144http://ssrn.com/abstract=1755117http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5420/right_is_not_center_but_2010_resembles_1984/http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5420/right_is_not_center_but_2010_resembles_1984/http://www.heritage.org/issues/regulationhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780307266286https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780307266286http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21354/http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21354/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/9780804724517


6/6

6 11 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

11 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

11.1 Text

Leftright politicsSource:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right%20politics?oldid=647515870 Contributors: AxelBoldt,The Anome, Mark, Ed Poor, Fubar Obfusco, Edward, Michael Hardy, Sam Francis, Ixfd64, Julesd, Sir Paul, Vzbs34, Nikai, John K,Wooster, Maximus Rex, Buridan, Topbanana, Johnleemk, Drernie, David.Monniaux, Catskul, Wtanaka, Fredrik, Jmabel, Fifelfoo, ZimZa-laBim, Siennalizard, Sam Spade, Hadal, TPK, Superm401, Nikodemos, Halda, TDC, Dissident, WHEELER, Richardchilton, Joe Sewell,DO'Neil, Bgoldenberg, Cowpoke, Erhudy, Formeruser-81, Cberlet, RL, Sam Hocevar, Petrosevdokas, Juan Ponderas, Rich Farmbrough,Paitum, David Schaich, Dbachmann, Kaisershatner, El C, Jonathan Drain, Kghose, Tachitsuteto, La goutte de pluie, Thedarkestclear,BillyTFried, Neonumbers, Robin Johnson, AzaToth, Lectonar, SamUK, TomH, Mysdaao, RJII, Hnoble32, Bastin, Woohookitty, Tiger-Shark, Blackcats, Zzyzx11, Karbinski, Jimgawn, Electionworld, Tim!, Quiddity, InFairness, Pearlg, Bubba73, Rune.welsh, RexNL, TeaD-rinker, BMF81, The Rambling Man, YurikBot, Stan2525, RussBot, Nobs01, DanMS, Rick Norwood, Grafen, Introgressive, Ruzmanci,Tony1, Tomisti, User27091, C mon, Sardanaphalus, Intangible, SmackBot, F, Triggtay, Incnis Mrsi, Lawrencekhoo, Jrockley, GreggW,Francisco Valverde, Squiddy, The Invisible Hand, Full Shunyata, Jprg1966, Raymond arritt, Fuzzform, AKMask, Emurphy42, RussellM-cKenzie, OhadAston, ConMan, William Quill, Agrofelipe, Nakon, Kukini, Emmisa, Will Beback, Byelf2007, The Ungovernable Force,Blattbec, BrownHairedGirl, Imran7, Ronald11, UberCryxic, Tazmaniacs, JoshuaZ, Macomrade, HardyMachia, Ckatz, JHunterJ, Beet-stra, Funnybunny, Liberty4u, Gandalf1491, Dan Gluck, WGee, Joseph Solis in Australia, Walton One, Gopchristian, RekishiEJ, Octane,Buckyboy314, Jvol, Just a member, Bobfrombrockley, Vision Thing, Neelix, Slazenger, Cydebot, Hotsphink, MC10, Gogo Dodo, Spylab,DumbBOT, NorthernThunder, Ebyabe, Justice III, Maziotis, Rougher07, Bot-maru, N5iln, Stannered, Luna Santin, Lordmetroid, J'onnJ'onzz, Bencherlite, Jay942942, VoABot II, Dekimasu, Whiskey Rebellion, Jvhertum, JLMadrigal, Greenwoodtree, Pax:Vobiscum, An-thony.Adams.1, Axlq, Anaxial, R'n'B, Locopolitico, PStrait, Mdwall, Snow Shoes, ChrisfromHouston, Maurice Carbonaro, Pajfarmor,

Laurusnobilis, Novis-M, Madhava 1947, RVJ, Organ123, Poulton, RiseAgainst01, Brando130, Katydidit, Gunnar Guvararson, Thrill-spillchill, Provis2, Sturunner, Man The Wise, WikiReaderer, Schoop, Wiendietry, Yilloslime, PDFbot, Wmcg, Billinghurst, TimShee-han, Dianeinct, -ross616-, Falconclaw5000, Phenry99, Portalian, AS, King of Corsairs, Nopm, 621PWC, Bge20, The Four Deuces,Sean.hoyland, Dabomb87, Elassint, ClueBot, QueenofBattle, EPs, TheOldJacobite, Auntof6, Woodman246, Knowz, Aprock, Indopug,DumZiBoT, PseudoOne, Ariconte, UNSC Trooper, Freestyle-69, Addbot, Gul e, Tomvasseur, Geo 259, Lightbot, ,Teles, Yobot, Apollonius 1236, TaBOT-zerem, AnomieBOT, Decora, Sfaefaol, Piano non troppo, Valois bourbon, Kingpin13, Phyrros, Ci-tation bot, LilHelpa, Mathonius, Davidplexco, Joxemai, Armadillo35, iedas, FrescoBot, Tangent747, Adam9389, Maxgorcowski, MoussuMiroul, Histoboy95, FormerIP, Foobarnix, Tim1357, Androby, Zhongguoguoge, Quark937, Imcraigs, Thestraycat57, Callanecc, ZhBot,A p3rson, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, Regancy42, Joraejean, Ghostofnemo, Immunize, Michael Eriksson, Nuujinn, ScottyBerg, Case765, LiveTrue, Tommy2010, K6ka, Bryonmorrigan, , Rcsprinter123, Larryus, Sven Manguard, Cgalle5, Rogerpenguin, ClueBotNG, LittleJerry, Slimey01, Dialecticon, North Atlanticist Usonian, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Rijinatwiki, TheAwesomeWrath, Us-afmp1995, Broadside Perceptor, Karandip.bains, Acadmica Orientlis, ZappaOMati, Davidlwinkler, Spirit of Eagle, Paul Varkey, YiFei-Bot, User55551, DigitalBluster, Xylocode, Gouncbeatduke, Smm53, Absolute98, FrogJustice and Anonymous: 382

11.2 Images

File:2009_European_Parliament_Composition.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/2009_European_Parliament_Composition.svgLicense:CC BY-SA 3.0Contributors:Own workOriginal artist:Ssolbergj

11.3 Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_3//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ssolbergjhttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/2009_European_Parliament_Composition.svghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/2009_European_Parliament_Composition.svghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%25E2%2580%2593right%2520politics?oldid=647515870