The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Guardian readers et al. patently hate working class culture

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Tyrion_Lannister
Why do so many people hate The Guardian on here?! I've always liked it


I thought it was brilliant at first but after reading both sides of the debate I find the guardian just as ludicrous in many of its articles as the Telegraph and Daily Mail. It's populated by people like Owen Jones which sound good if you haven't really got a clue, I know I used to think it was brilliant. The main problem is it's too abstract and populated by know it alls who are usually wrong and distanced from the things they talk about, most of the time deliberately avoiding reporting conflicting information or interpreting it dogmatically to conform to left wing prejudices (note there are also right wing prejudices on other papers just saying).
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by KingBradly
Guardianistas and Green Party lovies feel it's their duty (as the enlightened prophets they consider themselves to be) to save the helpless working class from the oppression of the ruling elite. They are the intelligent, middle-class socialists who are the only hope for all the poor folks too simple to be able to counter the wrath of Cameron and his cronies. Or at least that's how they see it.

The reality is they hate working class culture. The Guardian has always hated the tabloids and tried to find ways of showing how they are disreputable. They hate Page 3 and seem to think that people who read the Sun are too stupid to be able to distinguish between a human being and an object.

And what is the main demographic that reads the tabloids? The working class of course.

I really cannot think of one thing which both The Guardian and the working class likes, except perhaps drugs.

Most of the things which the Guardian hates the most, are supported by the working class. The EDL is mainly made up by the working class, most people I know who want to vote UKIP are working class, the army is mostly made up of the working class, homophobia is rife among the working class, "lad culture" is definitely a mainly working class thing, most working class people I know hate Islam, and most of them think feminism is a joke.


is that a word? :wink:
Original post by Juichiro
is that a word? :wink:


100% yes it's acknowledged by guardian readers themselves as a derogatory term. If it's not already in the dictionary of slang it should be.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Stopped listening.


Maybe you would be more comfortable in an extreme-left echo chamber where everyone agrees with everything you say.

Ironically when I have made posts on the Grauniad website, I get comments like "go back to the Telegraph/Daily Heil" or "WTF has happened to the Guardian" in response. Yet applied to any other group of people the same sentiment becomes "-phobic" or "-ist" :wink:
Original post by thesabbath
Maybe you would be more comfortable in an extreme-left echo chamber where everyone agrees with everything you say.



Then why do I post on TSR?

I don't agree with the entire left either so. I got enemies everywhere :yy:

Plus I don't even think I'm extreme. I sometimes wonder whether I am conservative :s-smilie:
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 25
Original post by Tyrion_Lannister
You're not! We agree on a lot of topics :tongue:

I await the inevitable tirade of the right wing lolbertarians


Are you implying that anyone who dislikes the Guardian is right-wing or libertarian? That is a typical Guardianista attitude and it's why I dislike the paper so much.

I'm most certainly a liberal, and I dislike the Guardian for the fact it is so often illiberal.

Also it's worth noting that libertarianism isn't an inherently right-wing philosophy. It's really neither. There exists left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism. The political spectrum isn't simply left wing = socialism/communism, right wing = everything else.
Original post by Tyrion_Lannister
Why do so many people hate The Guardian on here?! I've always liked it


isn't that because the guardian is aimed at people like you? :laugh:



I don't dislike any newspaper (or I equally dislike them all) though because they're all biased. You're supposed to read everything if you want a balanced view.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Then why do I post on TSR?

I don't agree with the entire left either so. I got enemies everywhere :yy:

Plus I don't even think I'm extreme. I sometimes wonder whether I am conservative :s-smilie:


Okay, but you've now made two posts in response to my explanation of the Guardian's worldview without saying anything at all except that you snarkily disagree with my use of terminology (cultural Marxism).

However anticipating this I explained what I meant conceptually in my original post, so perhaps you could tell me where I'm going wrong?

thesabbath
cultural Marxism, which decrees that there must be "representation" of every element of "diversity" in perfect correlation with the body public else something is seriously wrong (be it racism, homophobia etc). It is not only comfortable with but frequently publishes calls to use ever more encroaching State power to force this "diversity" on every institution and organisation in existence and hound out those which don't play along.
Original post by KingBradly
Are you implying that anyone who dislikes the Guardian is right-wing or libertarian? That is a typical Guardianista attitude and it's why I dislike the paper so much.

I'm most certainly a liberal, and I dislike the Guardian for the fact it is so often illiberal.

Also it's worth noting that libertarianism isn't an inherently right-wing philosophy. It's really neither. There exists left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism. The political spectrum isn't simply left wing = socialism/communism, right wing = everything else.


libertarian socialism is so dumb just wut its abstract nonsense the reason libertarian right wing exist is to preserve the rights of industrialists, how can u have small state public ownership? once you have ownership you have power, once you have power you basically have a state.

tldr state is like energy cannot be created or destroyed just takes on different forms
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by thesabbath
Okay, but you've now made two posts in response to my explanation of the Guardian's worldview without saying anything at all except that you snarkily disagree with my use of terminology (cultural Marxism).

However anticipating this I explained what I meant conceptually in my original post, so perhaps you could tell me where I'm going wrong?


Well I don't think the Guardian has an agenda to turn culture into a monoculture if that is what you mean. I don't have anything against people from criticizing society or culture. Which is what I see it as, even if I don't agree with all of it.

Having just googled cultural Marxism I can't say I am completely opposed to it to be honest. Although I wouldn't say it exists now really, it appears to be based of normal Marxism and it's view of capitalism. Marxism has very little political influence now. CM in fact seems to incorporate the anarchist view that any hierarchy is never self justifying and should be challenged. That isn't Marxist in itself and there will always be people who think like that. The Guardian is in no way and has never been a marxist newspaper.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by KingBradly
Are you implying that anyone who dislikes the Guardian is right-wing or libertarian? That is a typical Guardianista attitude and it's why I dislike the paper so much.

I'm most certainly a liberal, and I dislike the Guardian for the fact it is so often illiberal.

Also it's worth noting that libertarianism isn't an inherently right-wing philosophy. It's really neither. There exists left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism. The political spectrum isn't simply left wing = socialism/communism, right wing = everything else.

I know that, hence why I said right wing. I consider myself a left wing libertarian using the term very loosely

No, but the majority seem to be
Nail head
Original post by KingBradly
Guardianistas and Green Party lovies feel it's their duty (as the enlightened prophets they consider themselves to be) to save the helpless working class from the oppression of the ruling elite. They are the intelligent, middle-class socialists who are the only hope for all the poor folks too simple to be able to counter the wrath of Cameron and his cronies. Or at least that's how they see it.

The reality is they hate working class culture. The Guardian has always hated the tabloids and tried to find ways of showing how they are disreputable. They hate Page 3 and seem to think that people who read the Sun are too stupid to be able to distinguish between a human being and an object.

And what is the main demographic that reads the tabloids? The working class of course.

I really cannot think of one thing which both The Guardian and the working class likes, except perhaps drugs.

Most of the things which the Guardian hates the most, are supported by the working class. The EDL is mainly made up by the working class, most people I know who want to vote UKIP are working class, the army is mostly made up of the working class, homophobia is rife among the working class, "lad culture" is definitely a mainly working class thing, most working class people I know hate Islam, and most of them think feminism is a joke.


I do hate all of those things. But I don't hate the working class people. There's a big difference between disliking a group of people's beliefs and culture and disliking the people themselves.
Reply 33
Original post by Chlorophile
I do hate all of those things. But I don't hate the working class people. There's a big difference between disliking a group of people's beliefs and culture and disliking the people themselves.


I don't think there is a big difference. Can you explain what the difference is?
Reply 34
Working class culture, or rather the cultural aspects which you seem to have cherry-picked, is just one aspect of many which we can discuss. Guardian readers are also generally opposed to wars which increase the suffering in the world and are opposed to poverty, inequality and the policies which lead to them. They're also known for standing up for oppressed people and are more likely to speak out against the suffering of other sentient beings too.

Thus, the act of liking or disliking the culture of a group is largely irrelevant to opposing the suffering inflicted upon them. The tactic of the appeal to hypocrisy - fallacious, by the way - is often employed by right-wingers, who often hold and same views and justify the cruel policies inflicted on the working class, for example. I'd rather stand up for people while disliking their culture rather than disliking their culture and rationalising their suffering. (I, personally, as someone who reads the Guardian as one of my sources of news, don't think that I particularly 'patently hate working class culture', as the original poster puts it.)


And, as someone else has pointed out, disliking a culture or belief is not at all equivalent to disliking the people. Otherwise, I'd dislike all religious people and all meat-eaters on a personal basis, which I most certainly do not. Disliking a culture is not equivalent to disregarding the interests of people within that culture: the interests of all sentient beings should be considered on an equal basis.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by KingBradly
Are you implying that anyone who dislikes the Guardian is right-wing or libertarian? That is a typical Guardianista attitude and it's why I dislike the paper so much.

I'm most certainly a liberal, and I dislike the Guardian for the fact it is so often illiberal.

Also it's worth noting that libertarianism isn't an inherently right-wing philosophy. It's really neither. There exists left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism. The political spectrum isn't simply left wing = socialism/communism, right wing = everything else.



you? A liberal? The most right wing extremist hard line authoritarian poster on here?


hahahahahahahahaahhaahahahahahahaha


hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Original post by viddy9
Working class culture, or rather the cultural aspects whicn you seem to have cherry-picked, is just one aspect of many which we can discuss. Guardian readers are also generally opposed to wars which increase the suffering in the world and are opposed to poverty, inequality and the policies which lead to them. They're also known for standing up for oppressed people and are more likely to speak out against the suffering of other sentient beings too.

Thus, the act of liking or disliking the culture of a group is largely irrelevant to opposing the suffering inflicted upon them. The tactic of the appeal to hypocrisy - fallacious, by the way - is often employed by right-wingers, who often hold and same views and justify the cruel policies inflicted on the working class, for example. I'd rather stand up for people while disliking their culture rather than disliking their culture and rationalising their suffering. (I, personally, as someone who reads the Guardian as one of my sources of news, don't think that I particularly 'patently hate working class culture', as the original poster puts it.)


the guardian stands against the liberation of Iraqis, Syrians etc but supports Hamas terrorising Israelis.

the guardian is opposed to poverty while supporting a welfare policy that makes the working class worse at the expense of the underclass (who terrorise them)

the guardian is opposed to inequality even though most of its writers are Oxbridge educated.

the guardian is hypocrisy.
Original post by KingBradly
I don't think there is a big difference. Can you explain what the difference is?


Whilst your beliefs and attitudes are important, they don't define you as a person - there's a lot more to people than that. Whilst there is a good chance that if someone fits the persona you detailed in the original post that I wouldn't like them very much, I'm not going to make a sweeping statement and say that I dislike everyone in that category. It's perfectly possible for very nice and friendly people to hold attitudes you dislike. For instance, I personally don't like any major religions and what they stand for. But I have have plenty of friends who are religious and I hold a number of very religious people in very high esteem.
Original post by Chlorophile
Whilst your beliefs and attitudes are important, they don't define you as a person - there's a lot more to people than that. Whilst there is a good chance that if someone fits the persona you detailed in the original post that I wouldn't like them very much, I'm not going to make a sweeping statement and say that I dislike everyone in that category. It's perfectly possible for very nice and friendly people to hold attitudes you dislike. For instance, I personally don't like any major religions and what they stand for. But I have have plenty of friends who are religious and I hold a number of very religious people in very high esteem.


existence preceeds essence as the French philosopher Jean Paul Sartre put it. I'd say beliefs do define someone though in the eyes of society as a whole.
Original post by DErasmus
existence preceeds essence as the French philosopher Jean Paul Sartre put it. I'd say beliefs do define someone though in the eyes of society.


You're welcome to say that. I gave a personal response that's correct for me.