Are people who complain about champagne socialists stupid?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Astronomical
Where would you expect evidence to shown up? Do you honestly think people would tick the yes box in a 'do you avoid tax?' survey? Be realistic.
So you have no evidence whatsoever for the proposition? Then how can you claim it in the first place?
Original post by yo radical one
40k they can complain, if you have a good PhD to work for 40k per year is vocational. I took liberties with the definition of socialism, truth is few people are full blown socialists, even if they identify as left wing.
I've seen the payscales at my university, the maximum most lecturers can earn is 57k. They can then earn more by moving into more senior positions, but there are not many of these management positions (head of department, pro-dean etc). And even they wouldn't be earning 6 figures.
Original post by yo radical one
40k they can complain, if you have a good PhD to work for 40k per year is vocational. I took liberties with the definition of socialism, truth is few people are full blown socialists, even if they identify as left wing.
Most of us left-wingers are social democrats, which I think is what most people are these days generally (support universal healthcare and education, a progressive tax system, a mixed economy marrying reasonable regulation with free enterprise, etc).
What irks me are the radicals on both sides. The radical left-wingers, but also the free-market radicals who want to level everything we've built, and turn us over to dog eats dog. And they seem to relish confrontation, with trade unions, with "elitist" academics, with anyone who is identified as being insufficiently supportive of the right-wing agenda. It strikes me that they enjoy it a bit too much.
Original post by young_guns
So you have no evidence whatsoever for the proposition? Then how can you claim it in the first place?
I derived the statement from the axiom of wealth protection, which states: wealthy people generally don't like having money taken off them by the govt.
In all seriousness though, it would be very naive of you to think that it isn't the case. If you knew lots of wealthy families then you'd know that money comes before political affiliations.
Original post by young_guns
As the title says. Does it take a particular kind of stupidity to whine about "champagne socialism" (i.e. the idea that if you have money, it is only morally legitimate to favour policies and parties who appeal to your self-interest)
I meet a lot of middle class people who call themselves left wing and liberal. They appear to care for the less fortunate with their charitable activities and put on a noble front. They drive these so called PC and equality policies.
However, I start to question when I see them laughing at chavs, laughing at daily mail readers and calling people new money. For that, I cannot stand champagne socialists, I consider a lot of them to be self glorifying narcissists. I prefer a right winged person who is true to his/her own selfish ways.
Original post by Astronomical
I derived the statement from the axiom of wealth protection, which states: wealthy people generally don't like having money taken off them by the govt.
You said lots of wealthy lefties avoid tax. So are you saying more lefties avoid tax than other political persuasions?
Either way, you have no evidence for your proposition. It's just puerile speculation.
In all seriousness though, it would be very naive of you to think that it isn't the case. If you knew lots of wealthy families then you'd know that money comes before political affiliations.
I come from a well-off family. Tbh I don't think you have a clue what people with money do.
It's not so much the hypocrisy as the arrogance which is breathtaking.
I mean, who told the Millibands, or Balls, or Harman (the niece of an Earl), or Blair, or the Honourable Tristram Hunt that they were fit to lead the poor, downtrodden workers? They mostly went to private schools and then Oxford before jumping straight into politics without ever going near a real job. Now none of those things are sins in themselves, but it's quite clear they regard themselves as some sort of patrician class who deserve to rule. The Millibands at least were clearly groomed to lead the socialist cause from a young age.
You don't have to go to the top to see this trend. All Champagne-socialists, despite most never venturing near a council estate or a white van (thank you Ms Thornberry), believe themselves to be 'one of the people'. They tell working-class people that they are one of them, that they have their best interests at heart, that understand their needs and desires. It's all *******s of course, and when their beliefs cease to actually chime with those of their constituents, as they so often do on immigration or gay-marriage or smoking or whatever else, they console themselves with the knowledge that they know what those poor people need far better than they do themselves. Nanny knows best.
And this of course is why UKIP and the Greens are stealing Labour votes, because the metropolitan elite is deeply out of touch.
I mean, who told the Millibands, or Balls, or Harman (the niece of an Earl), or Blair, or the Honourable Tristram Hunt that they were fit to lead the poor, downtrodden workers? They mostly went to private schools and then Oxford before jumping straight into politics without ever going near a real job. Now none of those things are sins in themselves, but it's quite clear they regard themselves as some sort of patrician class who deserve to rule. The Millibands at least were clearly groomed to lead the socialist cause from a young age.
You don't have to go to the top to see this trend. All Champagne-socialists, despite most never venturing near a council estate or a white van (thank you Ms Thornberry), believe themselves to be 'one of the people'. They tell working-class people that they are one of them, that they have their best interests at heart, that understand their needs and desires. It's all *******s of course, and when their beliefs cease to actually chime with those of their constituents, as they so often do on immigration or gay-marriage or smoking or whatever else, they console themselves with the knowledge that they know what those poor people need far better than they do themselves. Nanny knows best.
And this of course is why UKIP and the Greens are stealing Labour votes, because the metropolitan elite is deeply out of touch.
Original post by Fruli
However, I start to question when I see them laughing at chavs, laughing at daily mail readers and calling people new money. For that, I cannot stand champagne socialists, I consider a lot of them to be self glorifying narcissists. I prefer a right winged person who is true to his/her own selfish ways.
However, I start to question when I see them laughing at chavs, laughing at daily mail readers and calling people new money. For that, I cannot stand champagne socialists, I consider a lot of them to be self glorifying narcissists. I prefer a right winged person who is true to his/her own selfish ways.
I can see how laughing at chavs and scoffing at the nouveaux riches could be obnoxious... I don't really see how it's selfish though?
Original post by young_guns
You said lots of wealthy lefties avoid tax. So are you saying more lefties avoid tax than other political persuasions?
Either way, you have no evidence for your proposition. It's just puerile speculation.
I come from a well-off family. Tbh I don't think you have a clue what people with money do.
Either way, you have no evidence for your proposition. It's just puerile speculation.
I come from a well-off family. Tbh I don't think you have a clue what people with money do.
I said no such thing. Wealthy people from all over the political spectrum avoid tax, it's just more hypocritical when they happen to support the left for obvious reasons.
I'm not going to get into an argument about whose family is wealthier but once again your assumption is incorrect. I'm not talking about your average well-to-do families – they don't stand to gain enough from tax avoidance to make it worthwhile.
Original post by Rinsed
It's not so much the hypocrisy as the arrogance which is breathtaking.
I mean, who told the Millibands, or Balls, or Harman (the niece of an Earl), or Blair, or the Honourable Tristram Hunt that they were fit to lead the poor, downtrodden workers?
I mean, who told the Millibands, or Balls, or Harman (the niece of an Earl), or Blair, or the Honourable Tristram Hunt that they were fit to lead the poor, downtrodden workers?
So you're saying that only poor people can have left-wing politics? What a puerile position.
By the way, Miliband went to a state school. Harman had a substantial career in the law and civil liberties organisations prior to politics. Blair was a barrister, and Tristram Hunt was an academic before going into politics.
Now none of those things are sins in themselves, but it's quite clear they regard themselves as some sort of patrician class who deserve to rule.
I think you're confusing what you fantasise about and imagine is the case, and what is actually the case. If you can show me a single statement where these people say they have a right to rule?
It's all *******s of course, and when their beliefs cease to actually chime with those of their constituents, as they so often do on immigration or gay-marriage or smoking or whatever else, they console themselves with the knowledge that they know what those poor people need far better than they do themselves. Nanny knows best.
Ah yes, the right-wing delusion that you really know and identify with the working-class because you oppose gay marriage and are socially conservative. That must be why you're so popular up north
And this of course is why UKIP and the Greens are stealing Labour votes, because the metropolitan elite is deeply out of touch.
As soon as someone starts whining about the "metropolitan elite", it reliably indicates they are utterly clueless.
Original post by Astronomical
I said no such thing. Wealthy people from all over the political spectrum avoid tax, it's just more hypocritical when they happen to support the left for obvious reasons.
You haven't even been able to establish in the first instance that "lots" of well off lefties avoid tax.
I'm not going to get into an argument about whose family is wealthier but once again your assumption is incorrect.
What, you mean between you and me? It's possible your family is better off than mine. I seriously doubt it, but I don't deny the possibility.
I'm not talking about your average well-to-do families – they don't stand to gain enough from tax avoidance to make it worthwhile.
Right. We're talking about people who have a net worth of around 8 figures and up. Upper-middle class people.
Original post by young_guns
You haven't even been able to establish in the first instance that "lots" of well off lefties avoid tax.
What, you mean between you and me? It's possible your family is better off than mine. I seriously doubt it, but I don't deny the possibility.
Right. We're talking about people who have a net worth of around 8 figures and up. Upper-middle class people.
What, you mean between you and me? It's possible your family is better off than mine. I seriously doubt it, but I don't deny the possibility.
Right. We're talking about people who have a net worth of around 8 figures and up. Upper-middle class people.
I can see that, until a study is released documenting the number of left-wingers who have partaken in tax avoidance is released, any further discussion with your good self on this matter is fairly pointless. If you wish to stop being naive then feel free to quote me again.
Original post by young_guns
I can see how laughing at chavs and scoffing at the nouveaux riches could be obnoxious... I don't really see how it's selfish though?
I didn't say those obnoxious acts are selfish. Go back and read what I said. I said I much prefer right winged people, despite their selfish views.
The reason I consider champagne socialists to be self glorifying narcissists is because they think they are holier than thou and like to give themselves a pat on the back for supposedly being kind to the less fortunate. In one vain they are doing something positive for the world to see and yet at the same time having demeaning views 'the less enlightened'.
It's the same as the paradox of the liberals. On one hand they are about liberalism, freedom of speech and what not, then on the other hand they stifle freedoms through political correctness.
Original post by young_guns
I'm sorry but that's just crap. It is perfectly legitimate to believe that education spending should be much higher, but that in the meantime while you're fighting for that system, you won't sacrifice your child's education.
Also, the House of Lords has nothing to do with the class system these days. It's simply an Upper House where membership is for life. And it's perfectly legitimate as someone with social democratic views to say that you would like to make a contribution in the upper house and it shouldn't just be right-wingers who are allowed to do so.
The accusation of champagne socialism is worse than whataboutery (though it is that too); it's an attempt to restrict the terms of public debate, to say what is politically correct given your background or family circumstances. And it's a sure sign that when someone starts to do that, they've given up trying to argue based on policy
Also, the House of Lords has nothing to do with the class system these days. It's simply an Upper House where membership is for life. And it's perfectly legitimate as someone with social democratic views to say that you would like to make a contribution in the upper house and it shouldn't just be right-wingers who are allowed to do so.
The accusation of champagne socialism is worse than whataboutery (though it is that too); it's an attempt to restrict the terms of public debate, to say what is politically correct given your background or family circumstances. And it's a sure sign that when someone starts to do that, they've given up trying to argue based on policy
sort of like when left-wingers call someone a "bigot" just because they don't hold the same views?
Original post by young_guns
So you're saying that only poor people can have left-wing politics? What a puerile position.
By the way, Miliband went to a state school. Harman had a substantial career in the law and civil liberties organisations prior to politics. Blair was a barrister, and Tristram Hunt was an academic before going into politics.
By the way, Miliband went to a state school. Harman had a substantial career in the law and civil liberties organisations prior to politics. Blair was a barrister, and Tristram Hunt was an academic before going into politics.
The Millibands went to state school in the same way Cameron's kids do. He still had a pretty privileged upbringing, and I'm not sure working in law or academia is really an example of how the Labour front bench is down with the proletariat.
And I'm not saying that rich people can't be left wing. You only have to look at Tony Benn to see someone with cast iron (if slightly nutty) socialist principles, but I'm not the current bunch can be seen in the same light. All I'm saying is there's not many Roy Hattersley figures there any more, and not everyone likes how the party has been overtaken by the middle-classes. They are career politicians who are there for their own ends and there is definitely a high amount of arrogance in how they approach their electorate. Remember Duffy the bigot? Or again the white van debacle?
I think you're confusing what you fantasise about and imagine is the case, and what is actually the case. If you can show me a single statement where these people say they have a right to rule?
Yes, because politicians are famously open and honest about their intentions.
For the record I think the top of the Conservative party, especially the Buller wing, have similarly arrogant opinions of themselves. But at least there you sort of expect it.
Ah yes, the right-wing delusion that you really know and identify with the working-class because you oppose gay marriage and are socially conservative. That must be why you're so popular up north
Have you ever actually spoken to working-class Labour voters? Some very commonly-held opinions would make you deeply uncomfortable, especially in the north. You are far more likely to encounter racism and homophobia in a white council estate than you are in a Daily Mail reading suburb, but these things are not incompatible with socialist beliefs.
The Tory party is unpopular in the industrial north because of the mines, Thatcher, the fact they don't really like free-market capitalism and because it's just what their tribe does. That doesn't mean the average factory worker doesn't have wildly divergent views from Messrs Milliband, Balls and Blair.
All of which is why UKIP could take as many seats from Labour as the Tories.
As soon as someone starts whining about the "metropolitan elite", it reliably indicates they are utterly clueless.
That's very convenient for you. I have noticed a trend for lefties to denigrate anyone who disagrees with them as ipso facto an idiot who's not worth debating with. It's a nice way to make sure your comfortable little views are never challenged, don't you think?
Are you arguing that middle-class, southern, university-educated, city-dwelling liberals tend to have the same beliefs as working-class, rural northerners? And which group is it that runs the Labour party?
Original post by Bornblue
If you'd have bothered to read one more sentence you would have seenb where. Idiot.
The NHS has done more to raise living standards than anything else.
The NHS has done more to raise living standards than anything else.
Hmmm. In what sense exactly?
Cancer survival rates maybe?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/laura-donnelly/10495852/Cancer-in-britain-lags-far-behind-European-average.html
How about standards of basic care?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/06/mid-staffs-hospital-scandal-guide
Yeah you are right, patients dying of thirst in NHS hospitals are a real advertisement for the raised living standards of socialism...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2403501/Thousands-dying-thirst-NHS-Watchdog-forced-issue-guidelines-giving-patients-water.html
If you actually thought about the issue, (or maybe looked into the records of the healthcare systems of comparable nations?) you might realise that the NHS is a national disgrace.
Original post by tengentoppa
Champagne socialists do exist. They are the ones who claim they hate the class system and then accept peerages. They are the ones who claim to champion equality of opportunity and then send their kids to private schools. They are the ones who call for higher public spending but have offshore accounts. They are the ones who claim to be in touch with the working-class but do all they can to avoid contact with the proles. These hypocrites are worthy of contempt. But being rich does not necessarily mean you have to be right-wing. Tony Benn, left-wing and rich though he was, is respected in general by those on the right.
Original post by young_guns
You don't have to wait. If I have boys, I'll send them to public schools. How is this incompatible with my fabian socialist beliefs?
I'm sorry, but are you slow? Point out precisely why fabian socialism requires me to give away my money?
My fabian socialism requires me to fight for my beliefs, to advocate my politics, to try to see legislation enacted. What you're proposing is just because you're green with envy
I'm sorry, but are you slow? Point out precisely why fabian socialism requires me to give away my money?
My fabian socialism requires me to fight for my beliefs, to advocate my politics, to try to see legislation enacted. What you're proposing is just because you're green with envy
Yes I am slow, good point well made!
You seem to be very impressed with Fabian Socialism, which, if you don't mind me saying, I find rather quaint. But we'll pass on that.
What is your view, then, on what the Fabians said about the Soviet Union?
'Champagne socialist' is generally used as a hyperbolic term, so people will disagree on exactly what it is supposed to encompass.
If you just mean wealthy people arguing that the system is broken, criticising those people is stupid. We need people like that.
If you mean wealthy people who criticise the sorry state of the public purse while shovelling cash into offshore accounts, they're a perfectly legitimate target of criticism (nay abuse).
If you just mean wealthy people arguing that the system is broken, criticising those people is stupid. We need people like that.
If you mean wealthy people who criticise the sorry state of the public purse while shovelling cash into offshore accounts, they're a perfectly legitimate target of criticism (nay abuse).
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by chocolate hottie
Hmmm. In what sense exactly?
Cancer survival rates maybe?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/laura-donnelly/10495852/Cancer-in-britain-lags-far-behind-European-average.html
How about standards of basic care?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/06/mid-staffs-hospital-scandal-guide
Yeah you are right, patients dying of thirst in NHS hospitals are a real advertisement for the raised living standards of socialism...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2403501/Thousands-dying-thirst-NHS-Watchdog-forced-issue-guidelines-giving-patients-water.html
If you actually thought about the issue, (or maybe looked into the records of the healthcare systems of comparable nations?) you might realise that the NHS is a national disgrace.
Cancer survival rates maybe?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/laura-donnelly/10495852/Cancer-in-britain-lags-far-behind-European-average.html
How about standards of basic care?
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/06/mid-staffs-hospital-scandal-guide
Yeah you are right, patients dying of thirst in NHS hospitals are a real advertisement for the raised living standards of socialism...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2403501/Thousands-dying-thirst-NHS-Watchdog-forced-issue-guidelines-giving-patients-water.html
If you actually thought about the issue, (or maybe looked into the records of the healthcare systems of comparable nations?) you might realise that the NHS is a national disgrace.
Yeah life was so much better when millions couldn't afford healthcare. Clown. No one can actually be this stupid.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- I need help on my inspector calls essay
- Why is it that I complain about stuff when I do a lot of work?
- PLEASE HELP❗️❗️What would this GCSE AQA inspector calls answer get out of 30?
- How the radical left turned America's cities into slums.
- Why am I so ugly?
- Are communists stupid?
- Does anyone else find Paloma Faith incredibly annoying?
- no one ever looks at me
- Working Class / Left wing football clubs?
- GCSE English Literature - An inspector Calls.
- Unfair exam
- Please can someone mark my essay about Sheila in Inspector Calls:)
- GCSE English Literature - An inspector Calls.
- theory test advice
- Political Quiz: Are you a fascist?
- AQA A-Level Politics Paper 3 - 7152/3 16 June 2023 [Exam chat]
- is she attention seeking or just stupid
- Disturbance in halls after a girl snitched
- Complaint at uni after embarrassing drunk moment
- Part time jobs
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
