The Left-Right False Equivalence Media Failure

not equal - photo by holeymoon

It’s lazy reporting to conclude that “both sides do it”. It’s a failure of analysis to conclude that both sides play the same games whether we are talking about left or right – Democrat or Republican – liberal or conservative. Are they really mirror images? Do both sides play the same tricks?

If we limit the scope of this discussion to the political parties and a corrupt political system then there might be at least some merit to this idea of equivalence. It is true that most politicians will say what they need to say to get elected and generally rig the system in favor of their next election with little regard to their constituents. I happen to think Republicans are more unabashed about it and quite frankly better at it, but I admit that could be bias talking.

I believe this idea of equivalence starts to break down when you apply it to liberal vs. conservative. Forget about politics, politicians and political parties and focus instead on the things people are for or against. Obviously liberals and conservatives have very different ideas about how things should work like role of government including health care, economy, etc. but it seems like the media likes to portray both sides as equal halves of a political pie. They like to talk about pandering to the base and extreme ideology left and right as if there are equal measures of it on both sides.

Where is the extreme left exerting its influence now?

You could make a case for a radical left-wing element in this country – Weather Underground – Students for a Democratic SocietyBlank Panther Party – that exerted its influence back in the 1960s and 70s but I don’t know what you can point to now. Is it a radical left-wing idea to want health care for all? Is it a radical left-wing idea to have compassion for the poor and those less fortunate and feel government can play a role? Is it a radical left-wing idea to want equal rights for every citizen and every member of the military? Give me an example of something radical from the left that has prominent influence over our political discourse in this country.

Where is the extreme right exerting its influence now?

The better question would be – where isn’t it? A constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage – Illegal immigration laws in some states that make it practically a crime to walk around without “papers” when your skin color is darker than some would like – Voter suppression laws enacted by Republican controlled states that effectively make it more difficult for minorities to vote.

These are just some of the extreme ideas on the right that have at least some mainstream traction. Most if not all of these extreme ideas are based on anecdotal evidence at best. Come up with a theory – that instantly turns to fact – of what is wrong with the country and conservatives start trying to find ways to limit the rights of people who don’t look like them or act like them. Of course that doesn’t sound very conservative to me. It sounds like big government interfering in people’s lives. I think it’s best to refer to these people and these ideas as extreme right-wing and not conservative. The country has been pushed so far to the right over the past few decades that more and more extreme right-wing ideas are being fully embraced by people who call themselves conservatives. Are they all extreme right-wing ideologues or are some in a pot a water set to a slow boil?

I’m still waiting for someone to tell me what the left-wing equivalents are to these extreme right-wing ideas. The scale started tipping to the right during the 70s and 80s and it’s now in full-tilt. It’s a complete and nonsensical overreaction to the social upheaval of the 1960s and 70s, which will need an entire article unto itself some day.

You could throw the anecdotal evidence charge back at me or to others on the left when we make claims about how a specific problem should be addressed but there is a key difference between the right and the left. Even if my evidence happens to be anecdotal on a given issue, my intention is to actually fix a problem using compassion and without discrimination. Liberal solutions to problems do not contain a side goal – or primary goal – to disparage people. The problem with the right is that many of the things they advocate turn out to disparage people based on things like race or sexual orientation.

I dare you to name something from the left that has the explicit intention of disparaging a group of people. And I’m not talking about political rhetoric aimed at one politician to another. I’m talking about real ideas and legislative goals that aim to disparage another group of people. The only thing I can come up with is a deeply religious conservative who believes it’s against his or her religion and against the word of god to accept gay people and in fact take it a step further and proclaim that gays are disparaging their faith just because they exist and want to have the same rights as everyone else. But this is only disparaging within the mind of that person. It is not as if the advocating of gay rights has the intention of disparaging some other group of people. You can’t control how people think. You can’t control if they are closed-minded about differences in fellow human beings. We should never cater to the lowest common denominator out of fear of offending what could only be described as bigoted and offensive sensibilities.

Just for once it would be nice if the media stopped worrying so much about Fox News and conservatives complaining about a liberal bias and instead focused on the facts. The truth doesn’t have a bias even if some interpret it as such.

photo by holeymoon via Flickr

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestShare on TumblrDigg thisShare on StumbleUponShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone


#conservative#Democratic#false equivalence#gay#left#left-wing#lesbian#liberal#media#Republican#right#right-wing

  • well said man

  • Trent Hellbusch

    In the second pargraph he notes that it may be his bias talking. This entire article is biased. I would live to find a site/blog that actually covers all sides of the issues without this bias from either side. I do not want any opinions from these self proclaimed journalists. Just give the information without any spin or slant. The electorate needs to be provided with the information not opinions. They are smart enough to make determinations on their own. However, it sure would be nice to find somewhere where we could get real information with out the garbage added.

  • Trent: First of all, I thank you for commenting. Second, this website is called The “Left” Call. I like to think everything I say here is backed up by facts and careful consideration even if it’s still my opinion. But make no mistake, this is a liberal commentary website. I think the unbiased perspective you seek doesn’t actually exist anymore, if it ever existed. Even professional journalists are human beings with left/right opinions on topics. The problem with the media trying to be unbiased nowadays is that on any given story/topic they will present the views of a right-leaning pundit and the views of a left-leaning pundit and that will be the end of the article or TV segment. They never actually do the hard journalism required to find out what the real facts are on any given issue which “might” lead to determining one side was correct and one side was wrong. And if they were to do this? They get charged with media bias. The problem with saying you want to read only unbiased articles is who determines it’s unbiased? You? You don’t have any biases? If you admit that you do (because all people do) then how would you judge that an article was unbiased when your opinion of that article is colored by your own bias? So, more important than believing something is biased or not is whether or it is well reasoned with references to other well reasoned thoughts. It’s hard to pull this off with every article. I’ll leave that judgement up to the readers.

  • Rad_Fox

    The biggest problem with arguing against the right wing false equivalency is the simple reality that you will have to write a thesis, perfectly refuting every single element of their stupidity in it’s entirety. This article simply acknowledges a lot of that falsehood without actually referencing why it is so, and as such the comments section is riddled with idiot’s who think that it is simply bias! Transference is a real problem in right wing arguments. So many times do they literally take what their own party “is actually doing,” and accuse the left of the exact same actions. What is most infuriating, is the fact that right wing moron’s don’t bother with fact’s whatsoever. A real false equivalency is this notion that you can argue without facts, but then demand them from your opposition on every small minute detail. That is the definition of false equivalency!

    The author wins at showing just how pathetic and self serving the right is, and there certainly is no equivalency in the difference between wanting for the few, and wanting for all! I have had too many arguments with absolute right winger’s, and the only thing I can say, is that they will ignore anything that doesn’t fit in their bubble, and no fact is without their ability to rationalize its’s falsehood! (no matter where it comes from) To quote one such fool: “Facts are subject to interpretation.” (That was a member of the Arizona Legislature saying it to high school students, after they watched in horror as the school budget was cut “again!” And the prison budget was increased by almost the same margin. “I wonder where the money for education went? No I don’t!)

    Basically talking to anybody who is hard right, is like talking to a wall. They embody the definition of ignorance in all of it’s facets, but are too indoctrinated into the bullshit to ever see that fact, or they wouldn’t be able to continue believing what they do. (it’s a perfectly constructed facade, following fear, and anger to the ends of their minds)

    1984, not referencing the book, is the year that unbiased journalism ended. The fairness doctrine was repealed by some of the worst politicians to grace the political stage. Rush Limbaugh would have never been allowed to call himself news. He would have been sued day one, and been kicked out of journalism for bias and outright lies. (to the defense of the right, it is also not illegal for a leftist journalists to lie as well, and oh boy do they!) “I’m a progressive, I make fun of both sides, because they’re both petulant children at times, and they deserve to be ridiculed for it. I’m also a hardcore Socialist, but then, most have no clue what that even means, and so we won’t go there!”

    Make no mistake, the right is far more full of themselves, and bullshit, then the left. (which is why I shit on them more! And why they are so easily called ignorant idiot’s! Ignorance is practically written in their arguments, that and the use of logic fallacy)

    BTW, being open about your bias, and being honest is a trait that “very few” journalists today embody. Most are in it for the paycheck, and could give a crap about anything but their ratings. If you watch mainstream news and you think you’re informed, you are less than so!

    We live in a “post Google” society, ad yet people in the US are as uninformed as it get’s The US ranks #2 for ignorance in the world! How in the heck do so many people not know how to use the internet to learn about factual information?

    And how in the hell is 97% of scientists calling global warming a man made problem, and 3% not any sort of equivalency? (I’ll give you a hint, it’s not even close!)