The Contradictions Between Left and Right as Underscored by Covid

Eight examples of left acting like right and right acting like left in a skewed political landscape

I would like to present the argument that the terms "left" and "right" or "left-wing" and "right-wing" have become, for the most part, obsolete. I will also suggest that these terms while used frequently are being used with many different ideas in mind and not in a coherent way in most instances. What do we mean when we say "left" and or "right"?

Without referring to any formal definitions, I would like to explain off the top of my head, what left and right meant to me as I was protesting, organizing and engaged in various actions I considered to be "left-wing" in nature and orientation. Very simply put, to me, "left" meant "The People" (capital T and capital P) or always siding with, always favoring — The People. Being a "leftist" meant being anti-war, anti-racist and anti-sexist. Of course a leftist would oppose war because if the main priority of a leftist is the well being of not just themselves but the broad masses of people, well — war is, after all, the slaughtering of people. War means murder and rape conducted in a quasi-organized manner. 

Likewise, a "leftist" would naturally oppose racism, sexism or other forms of discrimination because again, same concept — the mistreatment of people is a contradiction of the fundamental value of upholding human dignity and not just in an individual sense but in terms of every human's right to a dignified existence.

A "leftist", by my understanding, followed the edict of "an injustice to one is an injustice to all."* A leftist, by what I thought was the definition, would feel indignant about any injury inflicted upon The People. This necessarily means a sense of solidarity with the broad masses of people most of whom are poor and working class. 

Before moving on to my off the top of my head description of what I considered to be "right", I must first make the distinction between the rank and file left and what I would refer to as the "synthetic left." So, to be clear, when I say "left" in this case, I am referring to grassroots, community based activists and organizations. I am referring to "The Peoples's" movement. I am not referring to Blue-Anon. I am not referring to the warmongers Barry O'Bomber, Genocide Joe or Killary. I am referring to people who identify with the poor and the working class.  I am referring to people who are supposed to be reflexively revolted by oppression. 

"Right-wing" to me meant identifying with the power structure. It meant pro-military, pro-police, pro-corporation — pro all of these things in an unquestioning, uncritical way. 

If some terrible instance of police violence occurred on the national stage (a plethora of examples come to mind, sadly) a right winger would be inclined to justify the abusive police officer(s) egregious actions. If they simply couldn't, they would say, "oh well, police officers are under a lot of stress. These events are very rare and they get hyped up and exaggerated by the liberal media, etc."

Likewise, if the United States were to announce one of its routine acts of aggression against a sovereign nation (again so many dreadful examples from which to choose) — a right winger in my mind, would mindlessly say, "support the troops" while never considering the possibility that maybe the best thing to support them would be to not send them to remote locations to get blown to bits in a senseless conflict. I considered “right wingers” people who scoff at hippies and peaceniks and use the notion of "political realism" as a veneer to vaguely conceal their fundamentally callous attitude. 

On the "right-wing side", we have to make the same distinction we did previously with the left. When we say "right" do we mean the Republican party or do we mean "right-wing" militias conducting military drills in the backwoods of America, right now — as you read this very article? Here, because I do not and have never identified myself as a “rightist” I'm not perfectly clear as to where to draw my lines of demarcation so I will generically identify “the right” as those who consider themselves to be in opposition to “the left.”

Then there's that strange little vortex where the "far left"and "the far right" overlap.

The framework I am outlining here is based on the contemporary landscape. I will not, in this article, contrast Marx's Das Kapital with The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. I am not going to review and contrast the revolutionary histories of various nations. I will not take the time, on this occasion, to compare the historical atrocities of communism with the historical atrocities of capitalism.

Those areas of discourse can be studied and debated endlessly. Here we will scrutinize the left-wing/right-wing dialectic through the filter of Covid (The Convid Scamdemic). The following is a list of eight examples where the "left" and "right" did a veritable roll reversal (according to my previous understanding of what the two wings are supposed to represent).

The following are eight examples of the left/right switcheroo: 

1. It's the “right wing” and not the “left wing” initiating discourse about the pharmaceutical industrial complex?

It was through “left-wing” discourse that I first encountered the term, the suffix "industrial complex." First it was the military industrial complex. (This term was first used in the January 17th 1961 speech by Dwight Eisenhower where he warned the nation to "beware of the military industrial complex." Eisenhower, by no means a radical leftist, ironically introduced the term that would go on to be used most readily by leftist activists.) Then it was the prison industrial complex, and right there to complete the trifecta was — the pharmaceutical industrial complex.

Yet somehow when it was time for covid (The Convid Scamdemic) a non-critique of big-pharma became the order of the day. So-called "leftists", who wittingly or unwittingly, became the foot soldiers of the biosecurity agenda, could not bring themselves to intellectually address the fact that the public was thrust into the arms of felonious corporations who were granted total liability protection. They even went out of their way to lie and claim the corporations who were granted the EUA for Covid did not have indemnity, when they most certainly did.

2. It's the “left-wing” disregarding Nuremberg precedent and acting flippant about body sovereignty and human rights in general?

The Nuremberg code which was achieved after the Nazis were defeated specifies that human beings cannot be coerced into participating in a medical experiment. That is precisely what just happened on a global scale. It's insane that people try to argue that we, the global public, were not coerced. Telling people, The People, that if they don't do something they don't want to do they can't return to work? They can't go to a restaurant? They can't go to a music festival (which of course they are likely to be unable to afford because they're being prevented from working)? To then argue "well no one forced you to do it!" That's precisely why the word coercion exists. It's the degree just shy of outright forcing someone to do something and yes it can be done in a very aggressive manner. 

People asking that we abide by the laws and the precedents that were established in Nuremberg are "right-wing"? How do you figure? Insisting that we abide by the human rights laws that have been established and achieved is now a "right-wing" thing? Please explain. Please explain both why the “left wing” is not concerning themselves with human rights and also explain to me how the definition of "right-wing" includes this conviction. 

Imagine declaring "my body my choice" under one set of circumstances but then at a later interval supporting policies whereby people are excluded from society for declining experimental, rushed-to-market so-called vaccines using a novel platform. It's incomprehensible hypocrisy. We should update the saying, "My body my choice — except when it comes to dangerous experimental drugs."

3. It's "the right" questioning pharmacology and “the left” mocking holistic alternatives? 

A "right-winger" is supposed to believe in the solutions produced in the market place. It was hippy-dippy lefties who were into acupuncture, herbalism and all that kind of stuff. It was during covid that I discovered there actually was and is, what I have termed, a "holistic right." They are into guns and so-called conservative values but distrust factory farms, packaged foods, the pharmaceutical industrial complex and they pursue alternative health modalities. 

When it was determined early on that covid was not an automatic death sentence, far from it in fact, it should have alerted people to the idea of honoring known staples like onions, garlic, tea, citrus fruits, etc. If your immune system has a battle to fight, those things really help.

I was personally amazed at the number of people who practice martial arts, yoga and various traditional health disciplines who bought into the "vaccine is the only solution" agenda. Some people (lefties) even went well out of their way to ridicule the idea that there were any alternatives other than rushed-to-market experimental gene juice. 

4. “The left” are now champions of censorship? I thought free speech was a fundamental tenet of “the left.” 

There are two positions you can have on the subject of freedom of speech. Either you're for it or against it. If your freedom of speech concept is riddled with extensive stipulations then you don't actually believe in freedom of speech. The test for whether or not you believe in freedom of speech, is specifically that you believe it should still apply to those whose views you find abhorrent. Every tyrannical dictator in history was in favor of freedom of speech for views they agreed with. 

I thought freedom of speech, which was necessarily accompanied by an attitude of anti-censorship, was intrinsic to “the left.” I must admit, I was naive. I didn't think I would see the day where people (leftist) jettisoned free speech as a value so readily. It was truly scary to see people embrace "cancel culture", "fact checking" (by extremely partisan, bought and paid for fact checking agencies), hypervigilant labelling and flagging of content and all the rest of it, as though free speech were never even a thing.

5. When did the “right-wing” become the champions of children's rights? From Jeffrey Epstein to completely unnecessary and dangerous medical interventions into young children's bodies, “the left” pretty much treats children's rights as a joke by now.

Children were never part of the vulnerable demographic when it came to covid. There was no need at any point for an emergency medical intervention for anyone, but least of all children. How did they groom us to get to the point where we are willing to have our children experimented on and those who object to such a thing are labeled as so-called "right wing"? How asinine! Talk about the spectacular achievements of propaganda!

I know it predates covid, but it was during covid that it was really highlighted for me personally that the notion of human trafficking, in particular the trafficking of minors, was being labeled a right-wing issue. So much to the extent that to express concern for children being trafficked is actually mocked as “right wing.” How bizarre? Again, I would consider it "the left" who was concerned about all the world's children — "We are the World", etc. 

Likewise, it's so called "right-wingers" who want the Jeffrey Epstein client list brought to justice. "Left-wingers" write off what one should receive as a deeply disturbing revelation that "elites" are sexually abusing minors as though it were meaningless celebrity gossip. 

6. It's the "left-wing" shunning the vaccine injured? Those who support the vaccine injured are "right-wing"? 

The hallmark of the "left-wing" that I thought I was a part of was that we would leave no one behind. Every person was fundamentally equal. If not equal in strength, size, talent, intelligence etc. — nevertheless, equal.

If someone were injured or the victim of injustice we would immediately start organizing a fundraiser and a rally and doing everything we could do to help people who needed help that wasn't being received. The “left” that I knew sought to give a voice to the voiceless and to highlight injustices that people by and large are unaware of due to lack of media coverage and government suppression. But now, after buying into the biosecurity agenda, the dupes have taken on the incredible disposition of committing to the denial of vaccine injury. They're content to continually overuse the word rare to the extent that now "rare" has taken the lead as the most overused word in the dictionary. Since no, well very few, prominent “leftists” are speaking up on behalf of the vaccine injured it has become a "right wing" issue to concern oneself with the human beings who were injured by these injections after the biggest onslaught of pharma-prop in world history.

7. It's “right-wingers” who distrust the government? And so-called “left wingers” are shaming people for distrusting the government?

You can either understand history or you can trust the government. You can't do both. How the hell is it that "leftist" who have spent decades alerting people to the crimes committed by the government and by major corporations and often major corporations in collusion with the government (like what happened during Covid) — would then turn around and shame people for not trusting the government? How could they not realize that in doing so they were negating their entire life's work of galvanizing the public to resist unjust authority? How could they not realize they are literally ignoring every lesson of history in their claim that this was the historical instance in which we fall in line and suspend our well-earned suspicion and distrust? 

Y2K. The absurdity of the 2000 election in which the American president (son of a former president) was selected by the supreme court (because of a controversy in a state in which the brother of the "winning" candidate was the governor). 9/11 and all the incongruities and unanswered questions that remain in association with that world changing event. The subsequent "war on terror" which led to unbridled warfare in multiple countries (don't forget the false claim about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq). The 2008 economic meltdown. The water crisis in Flint Michigan. The invasion of Libya. We can cite so many examples from recent history in terms of reasons to not trust the government. How did “leftist” who used to expose government corruption come to a place of now deriding those who do so as "right-wing”?

8. Now it's the “right-wing” who are decrying “oligarchy” and critiquing the "elite"?

One of the biggest contradictions of the modern "left" is that their historical position is based on the idea that wealth has been accumulated to a perverse degree by a hyper-privileged ruling class. Yet then they'll dismiss as conspiratorial any discussion of what the wealthy power brokers of this world are actually doing. They only like to speak in platitudes and generalities. They dismiss as “conspiracy theory” any number of things that are not theoretical whatsoever. Where's the discussion among "the left" about the fact that the Covid period (The Convid Scamdemic) was the biggest wealth transfer in history?

What would be an antithetical term to trickle down economics? Vacuum up economics? Whatever the term may be, “leftist” just aided and abetted in precisely that process and did so with no qualms whatsoever.  They've been fighting tirelessly to create a redistribution of wealth and they finally succeeded in doing so! Unfortunately, the wealth was being distributed in the wrong direction — up to the plutocrats and the oligarchs and not down to the broad masses of people who so desperately need the money to pay for food, housing and medical expenses. 

It should be clear by now that monikers are less important than ever. Solutions are what is important. Let's come up with real solutions. Once our solutions have been effectively implemented, we can debate about the preferred nomenclature for describing and defining those solutions.

*“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”

— Martin Luther King Jr., Letter from the Birmingham Jail