I was thinking about the origins of left and right wings...

I was thinking about the origins of left and right wings, and reading about Greek phalanxes and the positioning of men within them I came to the conclusion that the terminology originates from the Greek phalanx.

With the way Greek shields were designed everyone, at least those in the front, had to rely on the shield of the man to the right in order to get "full" coverage. This led to a general tendency of the phalanx to drift to the right. In order to prevent battle plans from getting ruined you had to get people on the right WING of the phalanx who were brave enough not to push to their right and strong enough to hold back the men to their left. So they stacked the strongest/most prestigious people on the right wing and those who were weakest/least willing to stay the course on the left wing. Of course the king would generally be placed on the right wing.

This I think encompasses everything about the right/left dichotomy. The right serves the interests of those who have prestige/authority/trust, and the left serves the interests of people who don't. It also makes the left look really bad.

It also clarifies why both right and left might be said to serve the same master, as both right and left wings hold the phalanx to be supreme. Both the left and right wing would be falangists regardless of which group they serve, both hold the collective to be the central metaphor.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Autism

Boy you're in the wrong neighborhood.

I'm pretty sure it originated due to the seating arrangement in one of the French parliments.

Logically your theory is 9/10 though, and I will definitely repeat it to normies to make the left look like the Soyboy cowards they are.

The term left and right wing comes from Revolutionary French parliament. The monarchists sat in the right wing of the parliament and the faggots sat in the left. They sat in the same places every day for years and people just referred to the directions that bitching would emanate from. That doesn’t make your metaphor completely invalid, but that’s not where the terms come from.

this
pretty.much accepted jacobinist vs can't remember, left and right

It originally came from the French Revolution: traditional folks on the right side of the people's parliament, the revolutionaries on the left side. Before this, both sides we're mixed; seated by... whatever reason.

>proud of being the first to die for the warjew
Okay, cuck.

I just feel like this is a more general principle than "for the king vs against." I also think that politics makes more sense when you think in terms of stakeholders rather than in terms of abstract doctrines and "dialectics."

Don't forget 99% of normies wouldn't even know how to refute this - and if you claim that the French Parliment "drew on this Greek tradition to arrange their seating," that claim is impossible to refute (have to prove a negative).

In other words, we should definitely repeat this to normies.

Comes from France stupid fuck

Knowing that the "right wing" exists to serve the prestigious/powerful means that one needs more than ever to examine the motives and purposes of the prestigious and powerful.

It is based on the parlimant however its ancient western custom the person on the right of anything is the favored/superior one. Right hand of the king, right hand of the table, right flank of the army, right hand man etc

>Jew
>Ancient Greece

Maybe it all comes from the phalanx, which is naturally derived from people being right handed.

grown ups are talking, bitch

I suppose this is where the term "right-hand man" comes from?

>Politics should focus on stakeholders

This 110%. Look at the Katrina looting. It is patently insane to give a vote to people with no stake in the state's preservation.

Ancient Rome for consular elections allowed top 5% 40 votes, 4 votes for the proletariat (no property or savings), and 40 votes for everyone else.

You can argue with the proportion, but the poor benefit by leeching/destroying the state.

Universal suffrage was a mistake.

It was based on the seating arrangement of the French Parliment, OP. Pleb-reps on the left, clergy and nobles on the right.

Yes
See

no, it come from the french revolution of 1789.

historically illiterate grown ups I guess

Regarding the French Revolution meme I think the Wikipedia page references one book, and that book I think references itself. I checked a while back and there was no reliable record of this outside of this book which was obviously designed to glorify the overthrow of the French monarchy.

I mean the 'right-wing' during the revolution were constitutional monarchists.

no it comes from the roman forum

Checked.

Could very well be. "Accepted Historical fact" is often built on shoddy evidence, but becomes accepted through repetition.

You have accomplished nothing by posting this. I want to see your face when you realize you have posted the dumbest explanation of political alignment. Look it up you low life. You're on drugs or just delusional about a lot of thing in your life.

Just as Nazis have been described as far-right on the political spectrum, despite the fact that they were self described socialists, which is on the left of the political spectrum.

>a lot of thing

Fireborn is awesome and lok as if real life movie.

LEFT IS WEAKER THAN THE RIGHT IN A PHALANX! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Left is weaker than right in real life, eeeeerr

They called themselves Socialist Revolutionaries,
Hitler said he would bring about a New World Order
starts @ 13:00
youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho

In a way they were national leftists, they were concerned with the German poor/proletariat and the German poor alone.

Actually the political Conservatives never served in the Phalanx.
They were all at home with bone spurs.

In a way internationalism is designed to destroy the left, as internationalism will as a general rule increase political and labor burdens on the system, a system that at least for the first few years would be ill-equipped to take on new burdens. Kind of like how during Occupy Wall Street cops would take homeless people and drop them off at Zucotti park or how the US government promotes feminism to weaken all political opposition.

it's preserve vs change

in the usa, the government was founded on liberal ideas. so the right - conservatives - want to preserve liberal ideas.

the left - "change" - want to transform the USA.

in france it was monarchy vs liberalism. in the usa it's more classical liberalism vs french-style liberalism á marxism.

it gets gray, but in general, everyone in the usa is a liberal. it's a liberal country. so you can't demand change to the very foundation of the nation, tearing down statues, what have you, while calling yourself a liberal.

they're socialists in the us. the left, change, is socialists, the right, conservatives, are liberal.

The left wants to end history. They want their change to be the last one.

You're retarded. The left/right terminology comes from seating in the French Assembly

Do you not wish to engage your enemies in glorious melee combat? Are you a fucking Tau hippy?

That's why they promote discussions that go nowhere and are designed to go nowhere.

That's why they want everyone to be poor.

That's why they hate free speech.

It's because they want to create a new feudal monarchy, with themselves as high priest and king.

And of course by "left" we mean "the Jews."

We don't mean the jews.

Most leftists are white.

Know your enemy.

CNN and the media is pandering to these people. They didn't create them. I used to be one. The Young Turks is not a Jewish organization.

These people look to Europe for answers, whereas in reality it should be the other way around. So they are importing European ideas and in that regard also Europe's problems.

Look at the seed, not at the flower.

The seed is imported from Europe, I'm telling you. Aren't you old enough to remember how America was just 12 years ago?

And if it's from Europe, where is THAT center? The EU parliament? The Tavistock Institute?

The Unified Grand Lodge of England? The Grand Orient in Paris? The Frankfurt School? Or all of the above?

The defeated people descendant from WW2 victims.

French. British. Germans. Swedes.

Our societies have been dead for decades. You don't know. And when you import our defeatist ideas, you get liberalism.

It's not a "Jewish" construct. You have to know your enemy so you can defeat it. Israel is busy fighting for its survival. The last thing they'd want is destroy the nations they supposedly have controlled for 300 years.

I’ll see you in class tomorrow, OP. Ready to turn in that paper?

Would the EU parliament be the epicenter of such thinking?

It's nothing to do with that but nice thinking user

Holy shit I hate Americans so much.

Why is it whenever there's a thread with some outlandish, child-mind-constructed crackpot theory (Making up origins of phrases and institutions, claiming retarded conspiracy theories as facts, making up genetic and anthropologic "facts" as you go along) it's ALWAYS an American that makes it?

Can they not just look up the answer to these fucking questions on Google?

It comes from the arrangement of the French parliament. This is a WELL DOCUMENTED HISTORICAL FACT and a simple google search would've save you the time it took to write this trite up as well as the embarrassment of letting it be seen by the public eye.

see

The source (not sources) is weak.

No. They are a product. It's the people. The culture. Just like the culture over there has certain values, like second amendment and free speech. Our culture here is incredibly nihilistic, and weak, and afraid of conflict, and no convictions, and so on.

It's no institution pumping it out. It's our culture.

It's traced back to WW1 where Europe suffered a pyrrhic victory, and ever since our societies grew weak and decadent.

To expand, since WW1 we haven't "achieved" anything. WW2 was a catastrophe. And we've always lost, ever since.

Britain has been apologizing for "imperialism" since the 60s. And they lost all their colonies.

Germany lost everything it had.

USSR influenced us with left wing propaganda, so America was forced to combat that, and only broke through in the 80s.

The people though, us, we've been weak and decadent and indifferent ever since. We've only had losses, and here we are, we aren't sure about anything.

So when Bush was failing in the USA, it gave Europe the moral high ground, and young people in the USA started look to Europe for answers, and imported our defeatist ideas over there.

It's nothing orchestrated. It's an effect. You can argue Bush's miserable administration caused the decline of American culture. He discredited conservatism hard and made the people look to fucking Europe for answers.