There would be a revolution before 100M could die here

It would make the bread lines easier.

that's the only scenario where there is historical precedent for communists being able to reach that proportion in a country. They killed a third of the population in cambodia. So it is technically more likely.

Bread lines are a good thing - commie grandpa

proportionally speaking less people would die if the far-right took power than if the far-left took power.

I'm still not being given a good idea of what the far right specifically is, possibly because it's not a thing :^)

I guess it depends on what axis your working on. In the american sense its probably something like religious ancaps.

In the broader discussion it seems to be anything people don't like

But even working the axis where hitler is far right, the death by proportion is still less for the right.

Even Peterson essentially attributes racism to the list of right wing traits

As though socialist governments have never enacted ethnic purges

what about mugabe

What about the Holodomor, Chinese occupation of other ethnically distinct regions etc

oh i see what you were saying

Yeah

There's lots of examples

i misread what you said

S'all good I figured as much

I think in Peterson's case he's talking more about the European sense of right wing as in nationalism, and is basically saying no ethnonationalism

well he's canadian, maybe they use the european right and left instead of the american one

Would the Trotsky/Stalin divide be Left/Right then? Like this is where it breaks down

^What? Are we using the David Pakman scale now where stalin is right wing?

Trotsky/Stalin divide was Worldwide Communism vs Communism in One Nation

Which ended up being an empire mind you

But there's still a global/national divide

I'd argue both are left wing

so national communism versus global communism. That makes no sense because it leaves out a wide spectrum of other systems

Right I'm talking about this in terms of nationalism being "right wing"

I'm not convinced it is

I find issue is there is economic and cultural scale and mixing those two things makes it hard to put things on a scale

economics is easy

I don't think nationalism versus globalism can help define right or left. It dependent on what kind of nationalism and what kind of globalism. Like you could have national communism or national capitalism would you define those both as right wing? Also confusing things like religion. Are both Christians and Muslims right wing in america? What about black and white nationalists? They clearly choose different sides in the United states.

I think there's a minority/majority factor there

Do you think they classify white nationalist and black nationalist as opposite in south africa?

I think ultimately "right wing" is just "stuff X group doesn't like"

Going back to the nationalism thing: I know in hong kong right wing want more control by Beijing and left wing want more independence. In britain left wing want more control by europe and right want less.

maybe the way left wing people use it, but right wing people dont use it that way

I think right and left are specific to a country. That probably why its not that useful.

Even then. Richard Spencer is anti free markets, pro welfare state, anti conservative and "far right"

right i don't agree with that. hes really just a white SJW he believes the same except his oppression stack is inverted.

to me far right in the usa is a really religious ancap