Letter: The words at the crossroad of politics, economics

I respect the work of Miami Herald columnist Andres Oppenheimer. I look forward to reading his thought-provoking and informative articles. However, when I read the headline on his April 16 opinion, “Leftist dictatorships aren’t alone in attacking free press. Brazil, El Salvador do the same”, I became confused.

Oppenheimer would understand there are right and left terms for political positions and economic positions. For example, if you called a socialist or a communist or Adam Smith a leftist, I would understand. If you called a rightist a supporter of mercantilism or unregulated markets, I would agree.

During the economic crisis of 2008, a leftist president used a rightist economic idea — supply-side economics — to get our economic ship righted. During World War II, our economy became a leftist command economy that produced the materials of war that led to victory.

Point being, political terms are confused with economic ones, as the April 16 headline seems to suggest. Politics involves how we make economic decisions. If a decision is made by one person, say a king, monarch, emperor or dictator, history has labeled those as rightist. If you support decision-making where the people are involved, then you are on the left.

Allowing women to vote, for example, is being inclusive and leftist; denying minorities the vote would be exclusive, so a rightist strategy. The idea of a free press is a leftist idea because it provides the oversight helping all to understand how and why decisions were made.

Jonathon Swift, Irish author and satirist, wrote in 1710, “Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it...”

Oppenheimer’s half truth, I am sure, was unintentional. As a journalist who supports a free press, he would welcome the censure of one small oversight.

Philip Beasley,

Plantation