Labels for different groups on the Left

[eclecticmisc]

Finding labels for different groups on the left has come up in the town halls and now on two straight Bonus Episodes.

Here’s my try at finding terms I think are respectful but hopefully clear, followed by an example of an issue that shows what I think they have in common and what distinguishes them from each other.

GROUPS ON THE LEFT
1] Leftists
2] Progressive left
3] Populist left
4] Liberals

IMO, I think Jill Stein would be a leftist, Jordan & John would be progressive left, Cenk & Ana would be populist left, and Kamala Harris would be a liberal.

Let’s consider trans rights as an example. Supporting the trans community unites all of us on the left as a fundamental principle. We all agree on this. But there are different positions on some specific issues, like trans women playing in women’s pro sports.

Using these terms, I would say:

1] A leftist strongly supports including trans women in pro sports. They’d say we need to actively fight for this since it is a fundamental right. It doesn’t matter whether or not it’s a popular position. If a candidate doesn’t support it, it’s a deal-breaker.

2] Someone on the progressive left agrees with including trans women in pro sports. They think this should eventually happen, possibly encourage the Democratic Party to adopt it. But it wouldn’t be a deal-breaker if a politician didn’t support it as long as they support trans rights more broadly.

3] Someone on the populist left may or not personally support trans women in women’s pro sports. What matters is we should not fight for it now because it’s not a popular position, isn’t a fundamental right, and it doesn’t affect many people. They support the trans community, but since this specific issue hurts the left politically, they oppose running on it electorally.

4] A liberal may or not have an opinion on trans women in women’s sports. They’ll support what the Democratic Party decides is best because like most things, the GOP is much worse overall on trans issues than any Democrat would be. We should support the Democratic candidate and defend or at least not oppose their position on this issue.

I think it’s important to remember there can be good- and bad-faith actors for any of these. All progressives aren’t good, all of them aren’t bad. There are good-faith leftists and bad-faith leftists, the same goes for liberals, etc. We should be united against bad faith actors who only want to fight, misrepresent, or insult the other side, but welcoming and open to anyone who’s willing to have an honest discussion.

Hope this helps advance the discussion (or at least doesn’t make things worse!). Whether or not you agree with these terms, we have much more in common with others on the left than we do with the right. As we do the important work of reaching out more to the right to find our common ground, it’s also important not to forget the shared values that unite us — or at least should unite us — on the left.

[Galphar]

OK that is good for that 1 issue of Trans in Sports. Now what about for say someone wanting to be called a woman and not a birthing person or for supporting Israel militarily? And don’t forget that someone could be Populist Left on say Trans in Sports but Progressive Left on Israel so what would they be?

I don’t mean to nitpick here but this is a complicated thing trying to divide out all the 100’s of different “classifications” on a political spectrum. I live in Kentucky and for some issues I am staunch LEFT but there are some that I am actually on the Right. Now does that make me a Right Winger cause I have a few Right wing ideologies or am I a Leftie because I have more Left philosophies than Right?

[amyns]

I do not think the trans issue is a good example to make so many different nuances. . There is just not enough info and understanding yet how that works with sports and the whole point of title Ix.

I am curious how you would divide up these groups re the attack ad on Harris for supporting public spending of an elective trans surgery for someone in prison??? Do you think all people think this is too far? According to your categories and Harris being a more traditional liberal you might assume she would be least likely to support this and yet she did?!?!?!

I am shocked by these divisions and deal breakers. I sort thought I was a lefty and/or progressive and/ or populist but as far as I am concerned re any trans issues… is that they should be included as a protected class for employment/housing discrimination laws and hate crimes etc but i am not sure how to deal with sports and federal funding. Some girls have fought to play in boys football etc but do we re think Title Ix all together or do we create certain team sports as coed so it doesn’t matter??? Do hormone levels or ages play a part in the laws. So many questions!

War is complicated. I support the US helping Ukraine defend itself but I do not support Netanyahu’s war crimes.

I think you create a party and a platform and have it mean something. Right now being a Dem means nothing.

[mggbwmn8]

I’m a very visual person and I’ve been thinking about this since yesterday. Here’s what I’ve drafted so far:

Amazingly Simple Graphic Design Software – Canva

Axes:

1. X-Axis: Left to Right

• Far Left (Socialist, Communist) → Center Left (Progressive, Social Democrat) → Center (Moderates) → Center Right (Traditional Conservative) → Far Right (Nationalist, Authoritarian)

2. Y-Axis: The Establishment (Corporatist Oligarchy) to The People (Populace)

• Bottom: Establishment-Aligned (supports or operates within elite power structures, e.g. Corporatist Oligarchy).

Top: Populace-Aligned (challenges or rejects elite power structures, e.g. Grassroots Movements).

The Quadrants

Bottom Left: Establishment-Aligned Left

• Description: Advocates for centralized state control to achieve redistribution and equality.
• Example Groups: State-controlled socialism, authoritarian leftist regimes.
• Example Figures: Historical examples like the USSR.

Top Left: Populace-Aligned Left

• Description: Decentralized, grassroots-driven movements emphasizing social justice and equity.
• Example Groups: Labor unions, climate justice movements.
• Example Figures: Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Bottom Right: Establishment-Aligned Right

• Description: Pro-business, pro-elite policies that favor deregulation and wealth concentration.
• Example Groups: Corporate conservatives, authoritarian right.
• Example Figures: Koch brothers, corporatist Republicans.

Top Right: Populace-Aligned Right

• Description: Combines nationalist identity and cultural conservatism with anti-elite rhetoric.
• Example Groups: Right-wing populists, libertarian movements.
• Example Figures: Donald Trump, MAGA.

[drea_m_r_76]

I am really impressed and appreciate all of these ideas! I’m wondering if we really need to create more labels. Maybe it’s better to say Left (or Progressive or Populist) as an umbrella term and then just leave labels out of specifics to not create further, and I would posit unnecessary, division. For example, if some people on the Left don’t believe the US should be involved in the Ukraine and Russia war, they are just called people on the Left who don’t believe the US should be involved in the Ukraine and Russia war. On the other hand, if some people on the Left believe the US should be involved in the Ukraine and Russia war, they are just called people on the Left who believe the US should be involved in the Ukraine and Russia war. It is also important to not use verbiage or tones that insult or demonize opinions. I’m sick of hearing crazy, stupid, etc., used when referencing people’s opinions and views, regardless of what those opinions are. This is neither helpful nor is it appropriate. Personally, I don’t care if someone (including hosts and contributors) is or is leaning toward the Right, what bothers me is the insulting tone and verbiage, leaving viewpoints and opinions unchecked with data and facts, and being overtly coddling to some while being overtly harsh to others. In my opinion, it is best to leave labels and playground tactics aside and treat each issue and person as what they are, individually unique. One other thing I’ve been thinking about is that we should maybe not use Trans issues as every example for the fact that not only is it (understandably) highly triggering, but it is also an issue that many people in our community have to deal with every single day who might not appreciate having it constantly brought up so divisively.

[Galphar]

I agree here. All that will happen by creating these different categories for “leftist” is a further dividing of us and result in the MAGAts gaining even more power. When somebody asks me what my race is I do not say German-American or even American with German-European ancestry. I say Human. To me it is better to encapsulate as many as possible under a wide umbrella than to divide ourselves up into little groups. I mean there is nothing wrong with being a Trans Leftist or a Black Leftist or a White Leftist or a Sky-Blue/Pink with Purple Polka-Dots Leftist. The main thing in all of those is LEFTIST

[eclecticmisc]

I agree that it’s very complicated and that no one is going to nearly fit into one label all the time. That has always been an issue with labels going back centuries.

But imo, a lot of the fighting is attacks or bad feelings about labels & political identities. If we recognize we’re not homogenous, that might end some of it while being respectful (which is not happening currently).

You can’t be a true progressive if you think this or that, you’re MAGA! Or, you’re radical!

Neither of those is true on any of the issues being discussed. I picked trans women in pro sports as an example since it’s something that has very clear distinctions that has been discussed at length (ad nauseam).

Wouldn’t it make things a lot more civil and productive if we didn’t label each other inaccurate extremes?

Another example. Cenk opposes prison reform as unrealistic & unpopular. He’s on the left, he doesn’t oppose prisoner rights (which is absurd) and isn’t against eventually reforming things. He just doesn’t agree with the progressive left, which thinks we need prison reform now but is negotiable on what that might look like, or leftists who think we should be fighting to adopt abolish prisons and replace it with a Nordic model right now.

None of these positions are on the right, which thinks the current system is either completely fine or thinks prisoners have it too easy.

So a leftist might say, well of course Cenk doesn’t approve of prison reform, he’s not a leftist. He’s a populist. We’re both on the left, we’re just not allies on this issue.

But there are issues that unify the left. Family leave. Everyone on the left agrees with some sort of family leave. The nitty gritty or timeline might differ. But on this issue we are allies.

[This also happens to be an issue we can get some on the right to agree with — which I would call the populist right (I took out the part where I gave labels for the right because it was getting long and complicated, but I’ll reply to Maggie’s excellent work asap)]

So imo

1. The hosts attacking TYT are bad-faith actors. It’s no use engaging in dialogue with them
2. Some of their audience & other leftists are good-faith actors who are allies on some issues. They shouldn’t be lumped in with the bad-faith actors
3. Some of TYT’s audience are liberals. They don’t like disagreements with the Dem. establishment but are allies on many issues.
4. Some of TYT’s audience is on the right, generally the populist right agreeing on popular issues like family leave, no more funding for foreign wars, etc.

The distinctions aren’t neat and will depend on the issue. But recognizing the differences while under a general umbrella of “the left” could be helpful. This recognizes some of the left does have some policy issues in common. If they agree with the right on some issues, it doesn’t mean they’re sellouts or grifters—they’re populists. I may not agree with them, but they’re good-faith actors who are fellow travelers on other issues.

[mggbwmn8]

Labels can help clarify where we stand, but they also risk creating divisions when what unites us—justice, equity, and progress—matters more. We need to see the Left as a spectrum of shared values, highlighting alignment while making room for different approaches.

Take trans rights. We all want to uplift the community, but strategies on topics like sports might vary. Framing these as tactical debates rather than ideological divides shifts the focus from ‘who’s right’ to ‘what works,’ allowing for disagreement without weakening collective efforts.

Ultimately, we’re stronger when we focus on building together, embracing diverse tactics and voices. That’s how real change happens.

That said, I really like visuals. Here’s the evolution of my graphic:

[jackc380]

eclecticmisc , thank you for spelling this out. This is the first response that helps me . I think there is much more here to unite the Left and possibly some on the right . It’s unfortunate terminology is used to divide rather than pull together. Jack

[jackc380]

Wow , this is phenomenal ! I’m sorry to say my brain struggles with this but probably for the majority of people this works . Thank you and great effort Jack

[jackc380]

Great points, Andrea

[vener]

That’s actually a pretty good layout. You are not the first to do this. Basically, bottom is Authoritarian and top is “some-word-that-is-opposite Authoritarian” so Democrarian maybe? Often “Libertarian” is put there, but I disagree with that.

One thing I would disagree with is where you put Bernie and AOC. They are both Centrists. Let’s use me for an example. I am very much anti-authoritarian. I am a modern Marxist in the same vein as Prof. Richard Wolff. Which is to say that I believe in 1 person, 1 share, 1 vote. In government as well as in enterprise. I do not believe that government ownership is the collective. I believe that decisions should come not from the few who control but from the majority who are involved in whatever process is under consideration. I believe I would be placed i the Upper Left Corner. Bernie would be in the Upper Left Quadrant but near the center. I don’t know where AOC would be given that she betrayed the people. Where do we put people who let themselves get caught up in the “game” of politics?

I should probably think about this more, but I’ve had a long day.

[mggbwmn8]

Yeah, I don’t like where I put Trump either.

[Galphar]

This is how some saw things in 2018. IF you are going to do a chart/diagram for this then it should be like this and show the MANY overlaps that there are in the Left.

[eclecticmisc]

I really like your diagram, Maggie. Thank you for sharing this. I agree with a lot of what’s on there. I think for in-depth analysis for people like us who are deeply interested in politics, that kind of visual could be useful. If Cenk, Michael Shure, or another political analyst saw this, I wonder what their take on it would be.

I think some people want a “quick and dirty” word or two to sum up where they and other people stand, so I don’t know if they would be willing to find themselves on When Cenk asks Hasan or Jordan what label they want him to use, I believe that’s what he’s thinking of. But with the complexity (or chaos) of the current political landscape, it may not be possible to do. “Populist right” could be something people would identify with imo; I’m not as sure about “state-controlled left” for example even though it’s an accurate and clear description.

The problem with my terms and descriptions is that it’s not really a definition, I just give a couple examples of what they may or may not believe. So maybe some combination of our approaches could be helpful?

[eclecticmisc]

This is an interesting graphic. It’s definitely specific to the politicians that are named on it, so it might be hard to generalize it. IMO something like this could be helpful in moving us towards a system of identifying or labeling different groups, but might be too complicated (but see my critique of my own approach too in my reply to Maggie). I think it’s good we’re exchanging ideas.

[vener]

I appreciate Bernie Sanders a lot, and while he does champion left side principles, he is not as far from the center as you’ve placed him. Same for Warren. Especially Warren who supports Capitalism. Bernie is more of a Scandinavian type Socialist, I think. I also would not put State Intervention on the Left, but rather at the bottom as state intervention is an act of authoritarianism.

[Galphar]

That is a chart that I found from 2018. I only posted it as an example of the type of chart I think we should use for this. One that will show the overlaps that people have in their stances on issues. It would be able to show something like: I think that we should cut all Military funding(Offensive & Defensive both) for Ukraine AND Israel. Now you may agree with me on defunding Israel’s offense but think we should continue to fund their defense and fully fund Ukraine. Another member may think that we should fully fund Israel but pull all of Ukraine’s funding and another pull all of Israel’s funding and only fund Ukraine’s defense. The chart would show how these stance’s overlap in some areas.

[mggbwmn8]

I really want to create an interactive chart that shows the spectrum on a sphere but my skills are limited in that regard.

Anyone know how to or where I could be a free tutorial?

[eclecticmisc]

That would be awesome if someone knows how to do this. I know a few 2D tools but nothing that would be 3D.