To be "on the right" in general is to take up the position of the Rearguard. To be "on the left" in general is to take up the position of the Vanguard. The question is then what polarity is charged -- what tensions sustain political current?

​

In the West the tensions are between the Vanguard of Liberalism (Left-Libertarians) and the Rearguard of Liberalism (Right-Authoritarians). In the East the tensions are between the Vanguard of Communism (the Party) and the Rearguard of Communism (Right-Libs).

​

This reflects different dominant meanings of “Liberty”: in China, Liberty is primarily economic -- the freedom to build or own productive capacity -- whereas in the West it is primarily expressive, centred on speech, identity, and performance rather than property relations.

 

Consequently, Western discourse concentrates on a polarity that excludes positions oriented toward property relations altogether. Libertarians and Commies therefore appear off the map -- this is the "Overton's window"-- and are rendered politically unintelligible.

​

A revolution is the change of polarity for an entire society – this is why neither the Vanguard nor the Rearguard of the current Western polity (Lib-Left / Aut-Right) is capable of founding a new polarity. This is, however, what is called for.

​

You can't really have discourse between two polarities -- it's impossible for a Tankie & a Nazi to have a "productive discourse" for the same reason it's impossible for Georgist Libertarians & Left Panarchists. 

​

It's because, within distinct polarities, the very essence of words used in discourse connote different things -- to the Tankie, "Authority" means the Will of the People, to the Nazi "Authority" means the Will of Nature.

​

To a Georgist Libertarian "Liberty" is Owning Property. To a Rad-Neolib Anarchist "Liberty" is the Absolute Abolition of Property.

​