cunning fergus
Well-known member
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,747
The consequences are the same.
Millions died under Stalin and Mao.
Millions died under Hitler and nationalist Japan.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Technology] Are some leftwingers unthinking automatons?
- Thread starter looney
- Start date
The consequences are the same.
Millions died under Stalin and Mao.
Millions died under Hitler and nationalist Japan.
And both types of regime almost always give the ruling elite a life of luxury. Power corrupts.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
They are just two different routes to the same destination.
Are there any RW or LW Authoritarians in Parliament at present?
sydney
tinky ****in winky
Giggs on his day was superb.
On a scale with Stalin/Hitler/Assad/Mao being a 10 out 10, I'd give a mild 1 or 2 to the premierships of Blair and Thatcher, simply through the careful management of media, parliamentary voting through their use of the whip system, bullying (Alaistair Campbell and Malcolm Tucker) and zealous non-listening paths taken.
Our 650 MP's do a good job with a stack of democratic checks and balances, in the face of internet trolls. People who "ate May", or "ate Corbyn" or "ate Cameron" with a passion, spitefully wishing them person ill, need a reality check. Kids are taught at school thesedays not to hate.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
This thread almost contains a full house of the biggest GIMPS on the forum ("closer to a full house now you've posted LOL" etc). Fair play to those trying to reason with them but it's really not worth it.
It's always worth trying to reason with people, and it's rarely if ever worth name calling.
This thread almost contains a full house of the biggest GIMPS on the forum ("closer to a full house now you've posted LOL" etc). Fair play to those trying to reason with them but it's really not worth it.
I agree with some of your politcal views and disagree with others.
But yes, I noticed that too, the full array of very right wing NSC'ers have appeared in unison.
Which is very unusual thesedays, with politics threads dominated by Corbynistas and Remainers.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
Who would you say is very right wing in this thread?
Not you. I like your reasoned views.
I'm not going to name call, but those who've had bans deserved it. Sometimes they have valid points IMO (which are seized upon by their left wing NSC adversaries), but they respond with insults.
One final thing, their "very right wing" views are fine by me. It's perfectly legal to support political views of the right for example the EDL. Those views are for debate as much as those of people demanding high taxation, open doors immigration and state ownership of a swathe of industries.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
Ok, I confess I did think you meant me (since it's been mostly just me on the that side of the discussion), glad I haven't been taken as "very" right, because I'm actually not. If anything I think I'm a "little" right, with some sympathy for the left. It's one of the reasons I wish the left would avoid the vitriol, because in many respects they may have a point which ends up being lost in an unnecessary war of insults. I'm certainly pretty liberal in a lot of respects, I'm something like a classical liberal I guess.
Like you, I have a mixture of views. I've voted for New Labour, Greens and Tory. I liked Blair, Cameron/Clegg and some policies of Thatcher. The reaction of half the populace to the huge influx of immigrants and the hate speak of Islamist fundamentalist preachers based here, is completely understandable ... even the Independent covered the latter point this week. I'd like taxation reformed to one single higher rate with no Nat Ins and a high personal tax allowance - this would end in a second all tax planning based on keeping taxable income below critical thresholds and conversely it would incentivise. I want the truly needy adequately supported by the state - those really disabled, with mental health issues, the poor elderly, poor single families, the vulnerable.
Hateful class warriors of the left and their right wing equivalents, are too blinkered to fairly think through issues and listen to others.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
I think the most important thing is that we can disagree and still be civil and have dialogue (which is actually essential) and we can disagree and still listen to (and hear) each others concerns and view points without unfairly judging each other.
I also agree about protecting the genuinely vulnerable, although with two caveats. First the vulnerable are only protected with a sensible monetary and fiscal policy, the first people to suffer a financial crisis are the poor and the vulnerable. It's all well and good to want more spending on social programs but if you run out of money then the very programs you created to help people (and that they depend on) collapse. Inflation hurts the poor, if you are on a very low income and the price of bread doubles it's going to hit you hard. If you are on a high income you might not even really notice. So a belief in careful and restrained spending is with the poor in mind, it's not borne out of selfishness or not caring, it's the exact opposite. The second caveat is that to some extent I feel that we have encouraged dependance in some people who could be independent, and there is nothing more demeaning and damaging to self esteem and confidence than finding yourself dependent. Once you are dependent it's hard to break free from.
It's not nice to watch the extreme polarization at the moment, but we have to hope that ultimately, rather than tip into the extemes of one side or the other, we will regain a sense of mutual respect and understanding. Niether side has a monopoly on compassion or wisdom.
Agree entirely with your middle section on economics. The hard left believe there’s a large cake that grows by accident, which should be cut more fairly. Within reason there’s fairness and sense there, but a vibrant economy driven by entrepreneurs taking risks determines the size of the cake.
We’re often then told about great systems such as in Sweden. With tax knowledge, I’ve looked at this closely and ALL middle and high earners pay far higher tax than us. The proposed UK idyll of taxing everyone earning over £100k or £150k very heavily would not produce the revenue to create a Swedish type welfare state. Plus at a stroke it would disincentivise those who do run businesses or have the option in their chosen profession to work overseas.
There’s a balancing act to maximise total tax take.
Last edited:
Always been the way. School teachers and uni lecturers arrogantly deeming that their left view of the world is righteous and unsubtly trying to indoctrinate their students. But because even 14 year olds in this free thinking country make up their own minds, it doesn’t go entirely to their plan. I know this through first hand knowledge of young folk currently in education.
Relax - their propaganda only works those inclined left already.
Blimey, does that mean when I was teaching creative accounting at Lehman Bros and Bear Sterns graduates in Wall Street (amongst others) I was trying to subliminally bring down capitalism?
It nearly worked though...