Aegiscalibur
Add Witty Title Here
Yes, but I also think it's a reasonable thing to say for the reasons I mentioned.first of all, seeing someone (or even a group of someones) use an argument does not grant said argument legitimacy.
LGBT issues and abortion aren't about the economy though. They are socially liberal, not economically left-wing. Gun policy doesn't fit here either. "Right wing" is too vague if people are talking about both social, economic and other issues. If we can bring in any area of policy, I could focus on foreign policy and have a field day here.second of all, calling her right-wing even in an international context fundamentally misrepresents what constitutes the "right wing", because it almost always fixates on ignoring the fact that our social services being less robust right now is not exactly germane to what each party's end goals are
on immigration? the Dems are arguably further left than any major party in the EU. only Germany even comes close to our Overton window, and that's arguably because a grand coalition is currently in government.
on infrastructure and general spending? consistent with most center-left parties, with the caveat that many in the EU are constitutionally constrained by Union-wide treaties
on LGBT issues? far and away to the left of practically every country in Europe, with the sole exception of marriage equality
on environmental policy? consistent with most center-left parties, with the caveat that the center-right parties aren't as terminally insane on this front
on health care policy? consistent with most center-left parties as far as end goals, we're just not physically there yet
on banking policy? on gun policy? on family-related policies, from abortion to family leave? the Dems are there, broadly, with the EU's center-left. like, i've served as an assistant to left-wing officeholders in multiple countries at this point, and with regards to their respective domestic policies, we're not particularly far off from any of them anymore. might've been 20 years ago, but that was another age.
third of all, about half of the US's politicians are right-wing. this does not automatically confer right-wing status upon the other half, it just means we're polarized as hell.
Environmental and immigration policy are a bit closer to economics. US refugee policy isn't more liberal though. They have small figures and intense background checks. The Dems are more willing than the GOP for sure, but further left than Germany, really?
Banking is poorly regulated in much of Europe as well, and Obama's government did more stimulus. Those parts are right.
Healthcare as an end goal? The Dems' stance on healthcare is "preserving the Affordable Care Act for generations to come." That isn't single-payer.
And family leave? Federal law doesn't mandate paid leave. The US is dead last in this. The Dems had control of Congress for a while, so they could have passed it. They could have also passed stronger labor rights in general. How about passing a stronger, more unified welfare system instead of scattered programs?
Then there are areas like intellectual property protection and, even better, investor protection. The US wants to allow private companies to sue countries in courts run by the corporate lobby if said countries try to protect workers, customers or the environment. Thanks to Nafta, Canada has been sued many times, and now the Obama administration wants to do the same with Europe.
Last edited: