Talk:Greens and Left Alliance

Italy High‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Left wing or Left wing to far-left?

While I am generally loth to put "far-" before an ideology, this party has a few characteristics that would justify such a change.

1) The Greens and Left Alliance is the farthest left party with representation in Italian politics (though the 5 Star Movement's ideology can sometimes be unclear)

2) The Greens and Left Alliance put a far-left demonstrator, affiliated with ANTIFA, on their lists for the 2024 European parliament elections, specifically so that she could avoid jail time in Hungary for attacking far-right demonstrators with parliamentary immunity.

3)Most essentially, and the crux of my argument, as a consequence of both of the aforementioned factors, many articles commenting on the party have called them "far-left," some not so reliable, such as The Hungarian Conservative, and some very much authoritative, such as Politico.

Considering that reliable sources state that the party has elements in the far-left, I argue that it is necessary to say as such, and anything short of this would be the insertion of original research on the magnitude of those who try to remove the "far-right" label from so many parties frequently described as such, to which the response is: no matter what you think is true, we must follow the reliable sources. This should also apply to the Left.

Any objections? JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also generally loth to put "far-" before a political position (not ideology!), I especially oppose the "xxxxx to xxxxx" format (e.g. "left-wing to far-left") and I would remove political positions from infoboxes altogether. For AVS, my preference is for "left-wing", but, as "far-right" is used to describe also mainstream parties like the League and Brothers of Italy, I would also accept "far-left". --Checco (talk) 16:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, I just realized I said "ideology" not "political position," though I'd say that the point stands for both. I do think there is credible backing for both left-wing and far-left, and I would not necessarily want to assert one over the other, but would say "far-left," though not in the militant extremist sense, is more accurate. But between putting "left-wing to far-left" and "far-left," which one would you say is ideal? JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 16:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Far left" because I oppose the "xxxxx to xxxxx" format, but "left-wing" is my first preference. --Checco (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I frankly do like the "xxxxx to xxxxx" format, but ok. Edits made. JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 20:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly oppose. First of all, your unironic use of "ANTIFA" should make everybody doubt your research. But I will give you reasons why it's wrong

ANTIFA does not exist. There is no organization such as the Communist Party of Germany's Antifascistische Aktione today, just various clubs with far different tendencies around them. Ilaria Salis was candidated by AVS, yes, but she is an independent (and the accusations against her have been unproven) untied to either of the parties in AVS, which are a center-left green party and a moderate left-wing democratic socialist party, both quite known for being reformist, pacifist, pro-Ukraine and pro-Israel, and very adverse to political violence and revolutionary ideals, preferring purely parliamentary and electoral politics. Neither of said parties can be lumped in with actual far-left parties with radical methods in Italy like Potere al Popolo or CARC, parties that have indeed suffered arrests, detainments and police scrutiny and such for No TAV occupations, pro-Palestine protests or previous revolutionary activities of their members, or like other parties which are full-on unapologetically Stalinist or Trotskyist like SCR, FGC, PCI, PC. AVS has often condemned the actions of all these parties, both for their positions and their occasional violence.

Politico, as a liberal source presenting itself as "mere geopolitical analysis" but quite declaredly centrist, might be authoritative of course has a bias: of course liberals, centrists by definition, are going to represent the center-left and the moderate left as "far-left". And furthermore it never provides proof on the classification of why such parties would be "far-left", neither theorical, nor empirical, not even analytical. Its interest lies not in those parties and so it will not put the effort in unless they become super-relevant, like in France.

To add a last thing: if a party is the furthest-left in a given parliament, it does not necessarely mean that it is far-left. Labour is the furthest left in Westminster; would you call that party far-left? Before Keir Starmer its policies were basically those of AVS and it stayed comfortably classified as center-left the whole time. Leegend99 (talk) 08:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) Yes, "ANTIFA" is not an organized movement, but a general term for a number of differnt clubs. Regardless, they have a strong association with the far-left, and to deny their existence world be a falsehood.

2) I also do not claim that the greens and left alliance is a violent movement, as it very clearly is not, but as is demonstrable with many parties that are called far-right, a party does not need to be violent to be radical. Meanwhile, they certainly are willing to tolerate a degree of political violence, as they had one member elected to European Parliament so that she could not be imprisoned for attacking protestors due to parliamentary immunity.

3) I must also say that Politico is a reliable source, and is qualified as such by Wikipedia consensus, though, like all sources, it is not without bias. If one were able to be more objective than Politico and able to remove this bias, though, I would say that there would be a lot more far-right labels for us to change than far-left labels. The truth is that there will be some bias in reliable sources, and we just have to live with that, however.

4) Britain is practically a two party system, while you ignore the greens who are not center-left. That is just not a comparable circumstance, anyways. JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]