Left and right

The economic right sees the individual's right as a supreme value and does not want the nation to interfere in their lives except where it is essential. But when it is essential, the public can intervene. Furthermore, the right-wing argument is that the invisible hand will also bring the public situation to an optimum. Therefore, you are right that there is tension but no contradiction. Note that the value of equality that underlies the socio-economic left also sees the individual at the center and the public as its servant, who is supposed to care about the situation of each individual. From this perspective, you can perhaps understand the right-wing position that the public does not serve the individuals, but rather they serve it. In any case, there is no reason for it to intervene between individuals for their own benefit, but only for its own benefit. In short, the right is against public intervention in the life of individual A for the benefit of individual B, not because the individual is more important than the public, but because the public's job is not to worry about details. The right does support intervention in the life of the individual for the benefit of the public and the public character. Incidentally, this is the focal point of my two columns on Feiglin.