-3

As it is right now, as I am aware (which may be lacking), most of the right wing in most of the West is dismissive of environmental preservation and protection and social services, such as single payer healthcare and other safety nets while they are focused on protecting the cultural and demographic profile of their society, to put it that way, through restrictive immigration and other such policies. They are also often inclined towards theocracy, to varying degrees.

On the other side of the conventional spectrum we have the left wing, which often advocates environmentalism and social services but are dismissive of vetting immigration and are open to changing core cultural values according to the trend of the moment. For the most part.

I am just curious whether, either in the U.S. or in Europe, there are movements or political parties that combine environmental protection, secularism and social protection associated with the traditional left with public security and tight immigration of the right?

12
  • 1
    Your generalizations are way overly broad to the point where they are a detriment to your question. All the details you mention vary broadly region to region, and some of them are flat out silly. IE I can't think of any major conservative group that wants a theocracy. Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 19:12
  • 2
    literally none of the right wing wants a theocracy. Religious freedom =/= theocracy. The fact that you say "most" doesnt mean you can get away with whatever generalization you want. Also if you think your first two paragraphs aren't helping you (I would agree) you should take it out. Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 19:19
  • 2
    Do you understand what a theocracy is? Ted Cruz is not asking for a religious head to be the head of the United States. Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 19:23
  • 2
    "not having legal abortion is effectively theocracy" Thank you for making my day. I think its clear that we are miles apart on this issue and there is no way to bridge it in these comments. All I can say before these comments get purged is I suggest you read the definition of a theocracy. Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 19:30
  • 2
    If it makes you feel better, I think there are many problems with your post - the theocracy was just the most glaring one. Other problems include while they are focused on protecting the cultural and demographic profile of their society - so are liberals and everyone, dismissive of environmental preservation and protection - in the US almost all R senators believe in global warming. They may want to kill the EPA, but they still believe in preservation, just not via government mandate. dismissive of vetting immigration - not really, they still want security, just not Trump's EO. Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 19:32

2 Answers 2

4

In the United States, Steven Hayward has advocated for a conservative approach to environmentalism. In the linked YouTube video below a small group called BreakThrough, an across the political spectrum of folks that is described as

Sociologist Daniel Bell once characterized himself as "a socialist in economics, a liberal in politics, and a conservative in culture." It was in part because of his heterodox approach to life that Bell asked original questions and contributed original insights.

Breakthrough Journal exists to modernize political thought for the 21st century.

Founded shortly after the death of heterodox sociologist Daniel Bell, Breakthrough Journal embraces Bell's view that "A new public philosophy will have to be created in order that something we recognize as a liberal society may survive."

You can also check out their mission and how they define ecomodernism here.

See the above link mostly for credentials; here and Can Conservatives be Environmentalists for more general policy prescriptions from Hayward.

I don't think anyone on the right in the US debates seriously against a either having a welfare state, but to perchance its size, or having a secular, pluralistic society, but rather to freedom of religion. The rest of your tenets hold true too.

-2

Switzerland, at least the majority of its voters.

I'll take it as obvious assumption (e.g. won't bother proving it) that Swiss are generally more secular, social-safety-net, and environmentally-concerned, than average (definitely more so than average right wing in USA).

Yet,

9 February 2014, the federal popular initiative "against mass immigration" was accepted by 50.3% of voters. The referendum aims to reduce immigration through quotas and limits the freedom of movement between Switzerland and the European Union.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .