frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Best Left-wing leader and right-wing leader?

Debate Information

In your opinion who do you consider to be the best left-wing leader and the best right-wing leader within your nation that you have encountered? I also encourage you that if your loyalty resides more on the left then choose one from the right and if it is with the right then choose one from the left.

In my own country of the UK, I like to think of myself as a Centrist (NOT centralist). A centrist is someone that has or at least tries to have moderate political views, although at times they may lean slightly to more one side than the other.

As such the two great leaders from both sides of the UK within the last 2 or 3 decades would have to be Tony Blair from the left and David Cameron from the right. Albeit they made mistakes no doubt they also accomplished some great things. One of the things that Tony Blair did was modernize labor and allowing people to choose private sectors of things if they wanted to; this way everyone got the best of both worlds. With David Cameron on the other hand, he enforced environmental policies. These are both examples of accepting and/or enforcing policies of opposite sides; this is a true reflection of being able to think moderately.

Out of the two of them though I'd have to choose David Cameron. The only mistakes I think David Cameron made was the referendum and the NHS cut-backs during the recession times, and his abdication of responsibility after the referendum. Pretty much everything else he did was on the ball in my opinion.

One of the other great things I think David Cameron did was to harden up the national curriculum so as to match the same educational standards as that of other EU countries. I don't know if there is any truth in this but there was a rumor that Tony Blair lowered the UK's national curriculum to make the UK look good in Europe and if this is true then it is highly unethical. This means that students would be graduating on a false sense of achievement which is absolutely disgusting in my opinion. 

Anyway, those are my views.
PlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987






Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    From a Canadian perspective, it's hard to clearly define left/right politics, historically speaking, because for a very long time we had center-left vs center-right, we used to be quite a consensual society, actively seeking it... That said, our political center is definitely to the left of the American center for example, although things have been shifting away from the center and toward the edges in the last 20 years... So keeping that in mind:

    The leader who did the most to advance a left leaning agenda, would have to be William Lyon Mackenzie King (Liberal, 1921-1930 and 1935-1948). King gained independence from the British Empire; founded the welfare state; navigated the perils of the 1939-45 war and the early Cold War... He is tied with Pierre-Elliott Trudeau, who brought the French fact to Ottawa and beyond, battled a Quebec separatist movement that seemed sure to succeed, and established a new Constitution with a revolutionary Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

    Side note: The worst would be the current one, Justin Trudeau, he's just a poster boy with the philosophical depth of a frisbee... He is the worst side of his father, amplified...

    On the right leaning side, probably John A. MacDonald, he united the country and made Canada what it is by leading the negotiations that resulted in the birth of Canada as a nation, but his treatments of native First Nations will forever tarnish his legacy though... Brian Mulroney comes a close second imo, was in office close to 10 years (1984-93), solidified commerce relations with the US, enhanced individual freedoms, and free-market ideology... 
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • WinstonCWinstonC 235 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42 I'm not a fan of any leader I've lived under here in the U.K. and I'm actually quite shocked that you like the previous two PMs. Blair led us into the Iraq war and created the surveillance state we currently live under, making him among my most hated politicians. We still have his legacy of an unstable Iraq and a lack of privacy (not to mention the Iraqi deaths, with upper estimates at over 1 million)(1).

    As for Cameron, I only rank him marginally better, due to the issues with the ATOS work capability assessments that were marking dying cancer patients as "fit for work" and his austerity measures in general. There is also the issue of his role in toppling the regime in Libya and attempting to oust Assad in Syria. Taken together with Blair's actions before him these interventions created the conditions necessary for the creation of ISIS/ISIL. We still haven't solved the problem of the instability in these areas and in fact, Libya now is plagued by armed groups and slave markets (2).

    Cameron had to offer the referendum on the EU by the way, because at the time UKIP was polling incredibly well and stripping away conservative support. It also made sense for him to step down and not to lead the country in a direction that he didn't agree with or have a vision for (Cameron is pro-remain).

    Sources:
    (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualties
    (2) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-rights/executions-torture-and-slave-markets-persist-in-libya-u-n-idUSKBN1GX1JY

  • WinstonC said:
    @ZeusAres42 I'm not a fan of any leader I've lived under here in the U.K. and I'm actually quite shocked that you like the previous two PMs. Blair led us into the Iraq war and created the surveillance state we currently live under, making him among my most hated politicians. We still have his legacy of an unstable Iraq and a lack of privacy (not to mention the Iraqi deaths, with upper estimates at over 1 million)(1).
    I didn't say I liked anyone. What I was doing in this discussion is commending the leaders on the good things they did do from my point of view, while at the same time I also acknowledged that they made mistakes. Up until the possibly grave mistakes they made that probably lead to their demise I still can see some things that they did well during their prime.
    As for Cameron, I only rank him marginally better, due to the issues with the ATOS work capability assessments that were marking dying cancer patients as "fit for work" and his austerity measures in general.
    I also said that I ranked Cameron better out of the two of them.

    It also made sense for him to step down and not to lead the country in a direction that he didn't agree with or have a vision for (Cameron is pro-remain).
    That is a good point too. However, I think he would be better at trying to solve this Brexit mess we now seem to bit compared to those in our current government.



  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5970 Pts   -  
    In my view, the "left" ideologies are toxic at their very core, so I will refrain from the judgment. As far as the right wing goes, historically it was probably Thomas Jefferson, and Ronald Reagan from the more recent history.
    Zombieguy1987
  • MayCaesar said:
    In my view, the "left" ideologies are toxic at their very core, so I will refrain from the judgment. As far as the right wing goes, historically it was probably Thomas Jefferson, and Ronald Reagan from the more recent history.
    That really is a shame you have this view. I would say that extreme leftism just like extreme right is toxic, but I don't think it is prudent to make a blanket statement reference all of the left has to have ideologies that are toxic. 

    I think I understand and sympathize with your point of view though as it is hard for many of us to find things that are good in those that we're strongly aversed to.



  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5970 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    I disagree with the entire premise of the left ideologies, and as such all of their conclusions are unfounded and dangerous in my eyes. When I disagree with something at its core, I refuse to make qualitative judgments on the details of its implementation. The Castro family may be more reasonable than, say, the North Korean Kim family, but they both are harsh authoritarians, enough that the border between them is washed out in my perception.

    Extreme right, on the other hand, in my opinion is the only way for our civilisation to move forward in the long run - but I realise that how I define "left" and "right" differs strongly from how most people on the West do it. I do not see Trump's protectionist ideas as coming from the right wing, for example, but I realise many would disagree.
    Zombieguy1987

  • I disagree with the entire premise of the left ideologies, and as such all of their conclusions are unfounded and dangerous in my eyes. When I disagree with something at its core, I refuse to make qualitative judgments on the details of its implementation. The Castro family may be more reasonable than, say, the North Korean Kim family, but they both are harsh authoritarians, enough that the border between them is washed out in my perception.

    Extreme right, on the other hand, in my opinion is the only way for our civilisation to move forward in the long run - but I realise that how I define "left" and "right" differs strongly from how most people on the West do it. I do not see Trump's protectionist ideas as coming from the right wing, for example, but I realise many would disagree.

    Don't you think that is black and white thinking though since there are lots of people in this world that share both left-wing and right-wing views?

    I am against all kinds of extremism. Hence why I also try not to hold extreme views about an opposition. I don't think politics should be about "I'm better than you" or the proverbial "My toys are bigger than yours."  Every party has advantages and disadvantages, and I think it would be more beneficial for humanity if people could learn to listen to one another and make compromises where necessary. 



  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5970 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    What can I say, I have always been against any violation of voluntarist principles, and an ideology that forgoes them in exchange for the alleged collective good is very alien to my nature. I do not think that I am better than anyone, there are just things I refuse to put up with or compromise on. If someone suggests something I deeply oppose, I refuse to consider the middle ground, as it is like looking for the middle ground between the statements "2+2=4" and "2+2=5"; I will not say, "Okay, let us agree that 2+2=4.5 and move on".
    Zombieguy1987

  • No, you mistook me. I am not advocating a look for middle ground in instances when there is only one right answer. Of course, in math, there is usually only one right answer but politics is not math.

    In politics, you have some people of either side that on the balance of probability alone will have some things that they say which are valid and other things invalid.  

    However, It is dichotomous thinking to believe that only one side is right or valid all the time just because they're the party that you generally side with. Not only that but this is also a failure to recognize that millions of people all over the world share a mixture of both left-wing and right-wing views, or to put it another way, both conservative and liberal views. This is not the same as saying two counter-arguments are the same, neither is that implied.

    Also, I think it's more sensible to make judgments based on what's being said rather than basing those judgments on whose actually saying it. 

    Moreover, my stance is not an appeal to moderation, but rather an invitation to try and think critically and objectively about validity and qualities in a leader or party that you don't usually side with.

    In fact, at the beginning of this discussion, I actually said: "I also encourage you that if your loyalty resides more on the left then choose one from the right and if it is with the right then choose one from the left."

    Understanbly though I can see why this might be a problem with some people and in some countries where political polarization is a prevalent issue.



  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5970 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    I by no means imply that one side is always right and another side is always wrong. What I am saying, however, is that the basis behind the left ideologies is deeply wrong, in my opinion, while the basis behind the right ideologies is not: I view collectivist ideas as evil, and while there can be different individualist ideas, some evil and some good, fundamentally individualism is neutral.

    A person who bases all of their views, or some of their views, on an evil premise can still have a lot of good ideas, and a person who bases all of their views, or some of their views, on a good premise can be mistaken about a lot of things. It is never as simple as "person X is 100% right" and "person Y is 100% wrong". But the basis behind the person X's reasoning can be wrong, even if some of the conclusions are not.

    I refuse to seek compromise with those who support collectivist ideas on the matters in which their ideas manifest. Someone who generally supports collectivist ideas, but is very moderate on them and can mix them up with individualist ideas in order to reach compromise - now that is someone I can collaborate with.

    I won't collaborate with someone who believes that healthcare should be nationalised, but I can work with someone who believes that healthcare should be fully privatised, but some minor regulations should still be installed. As long as it is an upgrade over the status quo, I can get behind the proposal. I am not an "all-or-nothing" guy, but I am pretty strict on my desire for the society to move in the right direction, and I will not condone even minor steps in the wrong direction.
    Zombieguy1987
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch