My letter to the NY Times re: UKIP is neither left nor right

My letter to the NY Times re: UKIP is neither left nor right
Profile photo of Patrick Barron

Re: Populist Party Gaining Muscle to Push Britain to the Right

Dear Sirs:
It is about time to end the inaccurate labeling of all political parties as either of the left or of the right.  The ultra left is always linked with Soviet communist and the ultra right is always linked to Nazi fascism.  The laymen is left to believe that there is no other paradigm for government and that most governments fall somewhere between the two extremes.  Your recent article about UKIP, the British Eurosceptic party, is a case in point.  Supposedly UKIP is a party of the right.  The error is one of trying to pound every political movement into the left/right paradigm.  The real divide is between freedom and tyranny.  Both communism and fascism are tyrannies and both are socialist.  Ludwig von Mises explained that there were two models of socialism–the Russian model, exemplified by the Soviet Union, and the German model, exemplified by Nazi Germany.  (“Nazi” itself translates as “national socialism”.)  In the book that was partly responsible for winning him the Nobel Prize in Economics, The Road to Serfdom, Friedrich Hayek said that communism and fascism were two sides of the same socialist coin.  UKIP, by contrast, is a party of freedom.  It may be conservative in the sense that it wants to conserve (and regain) ancient British liberties and, to fulfill that end, Britain needs to leave the EU.  One needs merely to follow the daily insane edicts streaming from Brussels to realize that it is not a source or protector of anyone’s liberties.

  • Frank Zeleniuk

    Politics being about power, and thus corrupt (a la Lord Acton), can never present a clear picture to the public of its intent. In a democracy the public is a factor that must be assuaged while in a socialist state the duality of intent is internalized and is a singularly more brutal struggle for power. In my view, as the State progressively grows in a democracy the obfuscation of intent grows proportionately. The extant left/right political paradigm is a big part of that obfuscation. A true political spectrum, would go from anarchy to the total State. This makes it very easy to position political ideologies and philosophies in relation to freedom and liberty of the individual versus the power of the State.
    In western democracies we see the left/right, liberal/conservative struggle for power but both would be fairly close together on an anarchic to total State spectrum.

    It is about time to "end the inaccurate labeling of all political parties either of the left or of the right."

    Thanks for illuminating that point.

Profile photo of Patrick Barron

Patrick Barron is a consultant to the banking industry. He teaches Austrian school economics at the University of Iowa and Bank Managemant Simulation for the Graduate School of Banking, University of Wisconsin. Visit his blog. Send him mail.

More in Blog


A carbon tax is bad for Alberta

Danny LeRoyApril 27, 2016

A proper rejoinder to an empty threat

Patrick BarronApril 17, 2016

An Open Letter to Sylvain Levesque of Bombardier

Danny LeRoyApril 12, 2016

Rose Wilder Lane on the debt

Danny LeRoyApril 11, 2016

German and Dutch objections to ECB QE are ignored

Patrick BarronApril 8, 2016

My letter to the Philadelphia Inquirer re: The consumer always pays

Patrick BarronMarch 29, 2016

Do what I say or I’ll shoot myself

Patrick BarronMarch 29, 2016

Part 2 of my interview re: The end of dollar hegemony

Patrick BarronMarch 26, 2016

Remember the people involved

Danny LeRoyMarch 22, 2016