Op-ed in the Beaver on left vs rightwing @ LSE

The Left v Right delusion

We should look beyond the left-right juxtaposition and learn to appreciate the various shades of grey on campus, argues Arthur Krebbers

It’s time to stop worshipping at the high altars of “Rightism” and “Leftism”. Our union is way more complicated than this black-white paradigm would suggest.
Pigeonholing others is an innate part of human nature. We can make sense of our surroundings by clustering them under convenient headings. Even more so in politics, where one can easily get snowed under by the sheer diversity of opinion.
Still, this need not always be healthy. The continual reference towards an omnipresent ‘Right’ and ‘Left’ within the LSE student body is in fact highly corrosive. It seems to suggest that the politically active wing of the SU is near-to polarised between two camps. In doing so, it stifles actual debate about policies and candidates, and encourages the formation and fortification of insular factions.
What’s more, this sense of dualism is far removed from the more colourful reality. There are lots of shades of grey to be found amongst politically active students. In the absence of class-, ethnic or religion-based voting, people tend more and more to pick and mix their preferred policies. Even well-embedded activists who profess a particular ideology can have substantial differences of opinion with their closest comrades.
This becomes all the more clear in cases that transgress the classic left-right split. Several hacks have baptised themselves ‘Blue Green’s (Aqua, if you mix the two correctly). Here, they appear to be following Schwarzenegger’s brand of environmentally-friendly conservatism, appealing to both sides of the spectre. Within the socialist movement there is a core group of orthodox religious voters, who take a highly conservative view on such issues as gay rights and abortion. Then there’s the obvious internal battle of ideas between the social-liberals and the economic “Orange Book” liberals.
There is also the issue of personal and societal perspective. The left-right split is in essence dependent on subjective criteria; everyone will draw the line differently. There are some on campus who believe that opposing Castro’s (autocratic) regime and Hezbollah’s (theocratic) policies automatically brands you an avid right-winger. Others would boot you out of the left camp for arguing for the benefits of free markets or failing to denounce George Bush as “The World’s No 1 Terrorist”. At the opposite end, Thatcherites may accuse you of being an illiberal left winger for favouring progressive taxes or welcoming a public smoking ban.
As well as this, the historical and national roots are of utmost importance. Many radical activists in Soviet satellite states have morphed into conservative populists after the wall fell. Similarly, outspoken ‘laissez faire’ liberals such as Jeremy Bentham were highly progressive in their day and age – but would now be deemed rather reactionary.
Within student politics there is another important distinction to be made. Besides a candidate’s political preferences, his or her methodological views can be equally important. How do they hope to achieve their goals? How will they work with the school? Are they in favour of a consensual approach or a head-on clash?
Let’s not just judge people by what they say, but on how they act and whether they perform. And let’s learn to develop beyond knee-jerk labelling of student activists. Only then will we begin to appreciate the different flavours of political opinion at the LSE and step up the quality of debate.