Defining the right from the left

Dim Post offers this stereotype, where the left wing position is moral, the right wing, economic:

Maybe I’m being wildly optimistic here, but it could be pretty smart for Shearer to go back to the very principles of left-wing political philosophy, and simply make the argument that we’re a society of people with obligations towards each other – in contrast to the right-wing view-point in which we are a competitive market-place with no responsibility to each other outside of inter-party transactions.

It's a false dicotomy, offering a largely moral position directly against an economic stance. It's also what is often described as "framing the argument".

DimPost basically offers a moral justification, but fails to mention that the left wing solution for "a society of people with obligations for each other" is greater government control. The economic argument of left versus right is moreso the spectrum of State supremacy versus a free market place. In any event, the moral argument is somewhat different and varied. Bottom line - social welfare and caring about others is not the exclusive domain of left wing statists.

It's not unusual, in this war of ideas, that people and organisations will frame arguments in such ways. I welcome debate on issues of morality. The purpose of this post is merely to point out we all need to constantly critique what we are reading. Debate is needed, but don't necessarily buy into the first argument you read, and be aware that framing of the argument creeps into most debates.

Here's an interesting blog post I came across that is slightly related:

Logicology: Graduate Studies in Media Bias

And I think the conclusions offered in the above post come to the heart of the real essence of the debate. My next post will answer this to some degree, by going back to the year AD313. What you think about all this, I leave for you, but at least think on it!