Deep down, are we all Conservatives at heart?
Scroll to see replies
Is the conclusion we are supposed to reach after reading your OP, that we should all be voting conservative? The main issue being that the conservatives you describe in the OP are nothing like the conservative party we have in the UK.
e.g. It's the babysitting the citizen party that wants to filter and monitor everything to "protect the children". They certainly have no intention of decreasing the scope of the government (other than selling off public assets for less than they are worth to rich people).
e.g. It's the babysitting the citizen party that wants to filter and monitor everything to "protect the children". They certainly have no intention of decreasing the scope of the government (other than selling off public assets for less than they are worth to rich people).
Original post by snowman77
If you think about the Conservatives and what they truly stand for, you will see that we're all Conservatives at heart, even if we don't want to admit it.
- Conservatives believe government should have limited control and individuals should be given more power over their own lives and the decisions they take.
Great! We're all like that. We don't want someone telling us what to do, we don't want someone else to be in control of our own lives. People want the freedom to do what they want, as long as it doesn't harm others.
While we don't want the government controlling us I struggle to agree the conservatives stand for this. If you look at recent policy choices...the "snoopers charter" for one example. Even the porn restrictions Cameron placed is control over the populace.
- Conservatives believe people should pay less tax and retain as much of what they earn as possible.
Well who doesn't want to pay less tax? Everyone hates tax. You're essentially working for a certain amount of money, only to have a portion of that stolen from you. No one wants that. We all want as much money as possible.
This really depends on what you look for in your life. Less taxes are a good thing if taxes didn't really benefit you in any way. On an individual level we want more of our own income. However, the lower the taxes the less things become state funded so we would have worse schools, worse health care. I thing taxes need to be used in a much better way. For example, Cameron wants to remove government maintenance grants but wants to raise MPs salerys...I do not want my taxes to be funding MPs but I do want them to be helping students go to university.
- Conservatives believe the state should be reduced.
No one wants to fund the lifestyles of people on benefits. No one wants to pay for the idiot who died from lung cancer because he smoked 20 cigarettes a day, or the idiot who got liver cancer from his alcohol addiction, or the slut who got herself pregnant from unprotected sex and now wants an abortion. No one wants to pay for all this crap.
Equally think about when you have a natural illness which you couldn't stop yourself from getting and you don't have the money to pay for it and the state has been reduced so no free health care...well you're not screwed. Some people need benefits and some people smoked years ago when it was seen as good and even healthy and find it very hard to give up, for example.
- Conservatives believe in lower levels of immigration
The mass immigration that has occurred over the last 20 years or so was never asked for. The average person in Britain never wanted it. Allowing masses of immigrants to come over from former Communist countries of Eastern Europe just doesn't work. Our cultures are so vastly different. Native British people don't integrate with them. People naturally stick to those they have the most in common with. Why do you see all the international students at universities hanging in their own groups all the time? Why do you see groups of only Asians or only blacks sitting together without a single white person? Precisely. People obviously don't wish any harm on people from different backgrounds or cultures, but attempting to get different cultures to integrate successfully just doesn't work. Humans gravitate to the familiar. They always have done and always will do.
I personally do not mind at all about immigration. Why does "former communist countries" have anything to do with it? Should we not allow German here as they are from a former Nazi country? If we all made a bigger effort to integrate it works. Go to a university, you see people of all races, cultures, faiths, sexualities...all living and working together happily.
- Conservatives are naturally greedy and self-interested.
So is everyone in this world. We all look out for ourselves first. We all try and better our own lives, even if it's at the expense of someone else. Humans are naturally greedy, especially young people.
Not everyone does. A lot of people are selfless. A lot of people put family first, rather than themselves. Altruism does exist in human society and while it is natural to have a selfish behaviour the majority of people wont exhibit it under extreme conditions.
- Conservatives believe government should have limited control and individuals should be given more power over their own lives and the decisions they take.
Great! We're all like that. We don't want someone telling us what to do, we don't want someone else to be in control of our own lives. People want the freedom to do what they want, as long as it doesn't harm others.
While we don't want the government controlling us I struggle to agree the conservatives stand for this. If you look at recent policy choices...the "snoopers charter" for one example. Even the porn restrictions Cameron placed is control over the populace.
- Conservatives believe people should pay less tax and retain as much of what they earn as possible.
Well who doesn't want to pay less tax? Everyone hates tax. You're essentially working for a certain amount of money, only to have a portion of that stolen from you. No one wants that. We all want as much money as possible.
This really depends on what you look for in your life. Less taxes are a good thing if taxes didn't really benefit you in any way. On an individual level we want more of our own income. However, the lower the taxes the less things become state funded so we would have worse schools, worse health care. I thing taxes need to be used in a much better way. For example, Cameron wants to remove government maintenance grants but wants to raise MPs salerys...I do not want my taxes to be funding MPs but I do want them to be helping students go to university.
- Conservatives believe the state should be reduced.
No one wants to fund the lifestyles of people on benefits. No one wants to pay for the idiot who died from lung cancer because he smoked 20 cigarettes a day, or the idiot who got liver cancer from his alcohol addiction, or the slut who got herself pregnant from unprotected sex and now wants an abortion. No one wants to pay for all this crap.
Equally think about when you have a natural illness which you couldn't stop yourself from getting and you don't have the money to pay for it and the state has been reduced so no free health care...well you're not screwed. Some people need benefits and some people smoked years ago when it was seen as good and even healthy and find it very hard to give up, for example.
- Conservatives believe in lower levels of immigration
The mass immigration that has occurred over the last 20 years or so was never asked for. The average person in Britain never wanted it. Allowing masses of immigrants to come over from former Communist countries of Eastern Europe just doesn't work. Our cultures are so vastly different. Native British people don't integrate with them. People naturally stick to those they have the most in common with. Why do you see all the international students at universities hanging in their own groups all the time? Why do you see groups of only Asians or only blacks sitting together without a single white person? Precisely. People obviously don't wish any harm on people from different backgrounds or cultures, but attempting to get different cultures to integrate successfully just doesn't work. Humans gravitate to the familiar. They always have done and always will do.
I personally do not mind at all about immigration. Why does "former communist countries" have anything to do with it? Should we not allow German here as they are from a former Nazi country? If we all made a bigger effort to integrate it works. Go to a university, you see people of all races, cultures, faiths, sexualities...all living and working together happily.
- Conservatives are naturally greedy and self-interested.
So is everyone in this world. We all look out for ourselves first. We all try and better our own lives, even if it's at the expense of someone else. Humans are naturally greedy, especially young people.
Not everyone does. A lot of people are selfless. A lot of people put family first, rather than themselves. Altruism does exist in human society and while it is natural to have a selfish behaviour the majority of people wont exhibit it under extreme conditions.
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: Read replies.
Original post by snowman77
- Conservatives are naturally greedy and self-interested.
So is everyone in this world. We all look out for ourselves first. We all try and better our own lives, even if it's at the expense of someone else. Humans are naturally greedy, especially young people.
- Conservatives are naturally greedy and self-interested.
So is everyone in this world. We all look out for ourselves first. We all try and better our own lives, even if it's at the expense of someone else. Humans are naturally greedy, especially young people.
While I won't argue for a minute that humans don't have selfish tendencies, I don't see why this should be blindly accepted because it is natural.
Manners aren't natural, looking after those most vulnerable isn't a natural thing is most animal populations. Regardless, unnatural things can greatly benefit society regardless of how, deep down, people might want to be rude or ignorant of the problems of others.
A thing I find really annoying with Conservatives who encounter anyone even slightly left of them is that they assume we are all trying to make a perfect, classless society. I just think that if we can make things fairer, we should. Even if we're still greedy pigs deep down.
Original post by snowman77
- Conservatives believe the state should be reduced.
No one wants to fund the lifestyles of people on benefits. No one wants to pay for the idiot who died from lung cancer because he smoked 20 cigarettes a day, or the idiot who got liver cancer from his alcohol addiction, or the slut who got herself pregnant from unprotected sex and now wants an abortion. No one wants to pay for all this crap.
No one wants to fund the lifestyles of people on benefits. No one wants to pay for the idiot who died from lung cancer because he smoked 20 cigarettes a day, or the idiot who got liver cancer from his alcohol addiction, or the slut who got herself pregnant from unprotected sex and now wants an abortion. No one wants to pay for all this crap.
What about the genuinely disabled guy?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by A level sufferer
This is stupid, Conservatism advocates total free market capitalism i.e no nhs, i.e no welfare state, no progressive tax system that redistributes income. Its just every man for themselves and if you're one of the unlucky ones then youre ****ed basically so no, not everyone has a bit of conservatism in them.
This is laughable - what you've described is the British Tea Party. Do you think they'd have cut the NHS in the way they did (very little) if they didn't want the NHS? Tories do want a welfare state - it is an accepted part of liberal democracies, and modern Conservativism advocates a social safety net. And the Tories do want a progressive tax system (like pretty much every other country in the world) - Thatcher's toying with a flat income tax was opposed by almost every member of her cabinet, and even her poll tax was what arguably created her downfall. So no, Conservatives don't advocate total free market capitalism; otherwise they would want more immigration, which they don't.
So, ummm, wrong on all counts. Nice one!
Original post by snowman77
If you think about the Conservatives and what they truly stand for, you will see that we're all Conservatives at heart, even if we don't want to admit it.
Given that they truly stand for increasing the wealth of the top 1% and promoting an economically illiterate austerity plan, I'm afraid I'm not a Conservative.high
I believe that government should exist to regulate the market, because free-markets fail, as decades of research in behavioural economics by the Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and others has shown.
Social democracies such as those in Scandinavia have high rates of public spending, high taxes, high numbers of public sector workers and free education and healthcare. They're also the happiest societies in the world.
I support higher taxes on everyone, including myself. I quite like tax, because it funds public services such as the NHS, schools and libraries. It's good that we have these things, because they put people over profits.
I'm perfectly happy to fund people on benefits, the vast majority of whom require them because of exploitation through the wage labour system, something which is inherent to capitalism.
I'm fine with paying to save people's lives, and how dare you suggest otherwise.
I like immigration and, ironically, the Conservatives have utterly failed to meet their pledge to control immigration anyway. What an inept political party!
I'm somewhat greedy and self-interested, as is everyone. But, there's something called morality, which most of us are capable of understanding. Humans aren't purely self-interested, and nor are they angels. I suggest you read Steven Pinker's book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, for more on this.
As reasonable beings, we can take the perspective of other people and other sentient beings - this is known as cognitive empathy.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, want to deny the existence of morlaity, which is, unfortunately, not particularly palatable to me.
I support policies which promote the greatest good for the great number, in which the individual is not put above the collective.
Original post by illegaltobepoor
Conservatives have abandoned traditional Conservatism. They have all embraced Far-Right American Libertarianism. They are all shouting Reganism at the moment. Look what good that did to the US under George Bush.
Yes George bush who significantly increased the size and cost of the federal government was a far right libertarian...
No we aren't all Conservatives at heart because some people are all too happy living off other people's money and start throwing a tantrum when someone challenges them to make a living for themselves.
Original post by snowman77
The mass immigration that has occurred over the last 20 years or so was never asked for. The average person in Britain never wanted it. Allowing masses of immigrants to come over from former Communist countries of Eastern Europe just doesn't work. Our cultures are so vastly different. Native British people don't integrate with them. People naturally stick to those they have the most in common with. Why do you see all the international students at universities hanging in their own groups all the time? Why do you see groups of only Asians or only blacks sitting together without a single white person? Precisely. People obviously don't wish any harm on people from different backgrounds or cultures, but attempting to get different cultures to integrate successfully just doesn't work. Humans gravitate to the familiar. They always have done and always will do.
The mass immigration that has occurred over the last 20 years or so was never asked for. The average person in Britain never wanted it. Allowing masses of immigrants to come over from former Communist countries of Eastern Europe just doesn't work. Our cultures are so vastly different. Native British people don't integrate with them. People naturally stick to those they have the most in common with. Why do you see all the international students at universities hanging in their own groups all the time? Why do you see groups of only Asians or only blacks sitting together without a single white person? Precisely. People obviously don't wish any harm on people from different backgrounds or cultures, but attempting to get different cultures to integrate successfully just doesn't work. Humans gravitate to the familiar. They always have done and always will do.
I'm sorry but this is simply not true. Eastern European culture is really not that different from British culture, Those are countries with a Christian history just like the UK, they also watch the same films and TV shows and listen to the same music as you, shop at the same supermarkets as you, go to the pub on Saturday and watch football just like you, dress the same as you and look the same as you. You will find that no matter where you go in the Western world, whether that's anywhere in Europe or Canada or the US or Argentina etc, people will be very much cut from the same cloth with minor differences. You will not go around like 'OMFG people are so different here' no matter where you go in the EU. Clearly you don't actually have a lot of experience with foreigners. And whether you have a lot in common with someone has nothing to do with whether they are from the UK or Austria or whatever.
The reason Eastern Europeans don't integrate well with British people in the UK is that most of them who come here to work do so because the economy is **** in their countries so they are forced to come and work here even though they don't speak English at all or if they do, it is very limited so they obviously stick with their own. It is a language thing, not a cultural thing. I could understand if you were complaining about, say, Muslims from the Middle East immigrating here and trying to impose Sharia Law or something, but Eastern Europeans? No.
Original post by snowman77
Why do you see all the international students at universities hanging in their own groups all the time? Why do you see groups of only Asians or only blacks sitting together without a single white person? Precisely.
Why do you see all the international students at universities hanging in their own groups all the time? Why do you see groups of only Asians or only blacks sitting together without a single white person? Precisely.
The Chinese do tend to stick with other Chinese students but again, most of the Chinese students I know don't speak English fluently enough to integrate into life in the UK, plus their culture is very different from ours and they don't even attempt to integrate because they will go back to China when they get their degree anyways, so yeah they don't integrate well but they aren't interested in emigrating here!
As for black people, well, this is simply not true... I'm white and I sit with black people all the time and so do all my other white friends. This is the UK in 2015, not Texas in 1897.lol
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by viddy9
Given that they truly stand for increasing the wealth of the top 1% and promoting an economically illiterate austerity plan, I'm afraid I'm not a Conservative.high
I believe that government should exist to regulate the market, because free-markets fail, as decades of research in behavioural economics by the Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and others has shown.
Social democracies such as those in Scandinavia have high rates of public spending, high taxes, high numbers of public sector workers and free education and healthcare. They're also the happiest societies in the world.
I support higher taxes on everyone, including myself. I quite like tax, because it funds public services such as the NHS, schools and libraries. It's good that we have these things, because they put people over profits.
I'm perfectly happy to fund people on benefits, the vast majority of whom require them because of exploitation through the wage labour system, something which is inherent to capitalism.
I'm fine with paying to save people's lives, and how dare you suggest otherwise.
I like immigration and, ironically, the Conservatives have utterly failed to meet their pledge to control immigration anyway. What an inept political party!
I'm somewhat greedy and self-interested, as is everyone. But, there's something called morality, which most of us are capable of understanding. Humans aren't purely self-interested, and nor are they angels. I suggest you read Steven Pinker's book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, for more on this.
As reasonable beings, we can take the perspective of other people and other sentient beings - this is known as cognitive empathy.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, want to deny the existence of morlaity, which is, unfortunately, not particularly palatable to me.
I support policies which promote the greatest good for the great number, in which the individual is not put above the collective.
I believe that government should exist to regulate the market, because free-markets fail, as decades of research in behavioural economics by the Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and others has shown.
Social democracies such as those in Scandinavia have high rates of public spending, high taxes, high numbers of public sector workers and free education and healthcare. They're also the happiest societies in the world.
I support higher taxes on everyone, including myself. I quite like tax, because it funds public services such as the NHS, schools and libraries. It's good that we have these things, because they put people over profits.
I'm perfectly happy to fund people on benefits, the vast majority of whom require them because of exploitation through the wage labour system, something which is inherent to capitalism.
I'm fine with paying to save people's lives, and how dare you suggest otherwise.
I like immigration and, ironically, the Conservatives have utterly failed to meet their pledge to control immigration anyway. What an inept political party!
I'm somewhat greedy and self-interested, as is everyone. But, there's something called morality, which most of us are capable of understanding. Humans aren't purely self-interested, and nor are they angels. I suggest you read Steven Pinker's book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, for more on this.
As reasonable beings, we can take the perspective of other people and other sentient beings - this is known as cognitive empathy.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, want to deny the existence of morlaity, which is, unfortunately, not particularly palatable to me.
I support policies which promote the greatest good for the great number, in which the individual is not put above the collective.
Are you my twin or soul mate or something
Oh jeez, I am most definitely not a tory. Although some of the points are agreeable a lot of the actual policies of the conservatives are either damaging to a group in our society or just pointless. It's well and good cutting benefits until you find yourself losing your job and not being able to support yourself/potential extra family members and at risk of losing your home.
And it's well and good saying cutting taxes for most but at heart, Conservatives love to support the richest 1%
And it's well and good saying cutting taxes for most but at heart, Conservatives love to support the richest 1%
Hopefully this is a comprehensive response to many of the posters here.
This shows that you have absolutely no understanding of Conservatism what so ever. The notion that Conservatism is totally free market capitalist is absurd. We can argue about what free market capitalism actually is, as I suspect you are wrong on this also.
The Conservative Party, during most of the 20th Century, fully accepted the socialist arrangements for the economy and welfare state. That tolerated the exceptionally high levels of taxation, and refused to reverse much of what Labour did during their periods in Government.
Conservatism pre-Thatcher is actually quite hard to define in ideological terms. Historically, Conservatism was always non-ideological beyond wanting to preserve the status quo. It was highly pragmatic and would abandon its previous positions at great hast if necessary.
The Conservative Party had a legendary will to govern, which made it incredibly ruthless in terms of its pragmatism. It would almost gleefully change leaders and change political positions when the time called for it.
We should be clear that in the respect of traditional Conservatism, Thatcher is NO Conservative. Most of the Party today, who identify with the Thatcherite wing, are not Conservatives in the traditional sense. They are right-wing classic liberals.
Even under this Government, the welfare state still exists and so too does the NHS. Indeed, the NHS in England (for which the Tories have control) has seen its spending increase, while the NHS in Wales (For which Labour has control) has seen real cuts in its budget. Clearly the notion that the Tories oppose the NHS is folly.
The removal of the Human Rights Act would not occur in isolation. As I am sure you well know, the Conservative Party's concerns with the HRA is NOT with the articles of rights contained within but are inherently procedural. How these rights play out in courts and, more importantly, which courts are superior.
Other people believe that people who make poor decisions don't make poor decisions on purpose, and that the state is a vehicle for improving the quality of life of society in general - not for empowering self-interest and unnecessary conflict.
The notion that the state can improve life for the majority of society is an interesting concept and one that I would worry about. It assumes great powers for the state to intervene in the lives of the people. Preferably, the role of the state would be to create the environment in which ordinary people could pursue their own lives free of further intervention.
For worrying examples of state intervention 'to improve the quality of people's lives' one must merely gander at the Scottish National Party's plans for state guardians:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/23/scottish-children-government-appointed-guardians
This is a highly worrying development and the potential for highly authoritarian decisions are obvious. The huge centralisation of powers from local authorities to Holyrood is also cause for concern.
Other people believe the state is an arbitrary means of segregation, and that everyone in the world is a human with an equal right to safety and quality of life.
Quite, but if you removed state boundaries, you would obliterate a country in a matter of years. The notion that one can preserve a welfare state without the state is absurd. The notion that one can preserve a welfare state with no restrictions on those who can claim from it, equally so.
Self-interest at the expense of others is an unenlightened philosophy that unnecessarily pits people against each other, costing the whole of society the benefits of collaboration and unity.
I agree and totally reject the notion that Conservatives are any more greedy or self serving than anyone else.
This is the single stupidest thing I have seen today and does not deserve response.
The British Conservative Party, ideologically, is far far closer to the Democrats than the Republicans.
This is one view of it:
http://www.thewire.com/politics/2013/08/how-conservative-would-uk-conservatives-be-us/67930/
In fact, British Conservatives can be far more progressive than US Democrats:
http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/02/british-conservatives-vs-american-conservatives/190298/
On what basis have you concluded that austerity is 'economically illiterate'? Just as economists oppose austerity, there are economists who support it. Just as Nobel prize winning economists oppose austerity, there are Nobel prize winning economists who support it.
We should be clear that every prediction made by Keynesian economists and the Labour Party about the state of the economy under the Tories so-called austerity plans have been proven wrong. The UK is among the fastest growing countries in the developed world, we have record levels of employment, very low levels of unemployment, the cost of living crisis did not materialise, we have non-existent inflation...
We can disagree about the particulars, but in general, the economic policy pursued by this Government cannot be deemed illiterate.
I believe that government should exist to regulate the market, because free-markets fail, as decades of research in behavioural economics by the Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and others has shown.
This single paragraph proves you know nothing about free markets. Free markets do not advocate nor encourage 'no regulation'. Indeed, Adam Smith argued quite strongly that the financial sector in any polity should be hugely regulated. Smith, for instance, argued that high risk, high interest loans (subprime) should be banned outright.
Before you criticise free markets, please learn what they are. You clearly do not know.
Social democracies such as those in Scandinavia have high rates of public spending, high taxes, high numbers of public sector workers and free education and healthcare. They're also the happiest societies in the world.
They also have HUGE private sector involvement in the provision of Government services (Sweden) and are hugely sceptical and restrictive towards immigration (Denmark). The Nordic countries are not homogeneous, there are many differences between them. On schools, for instance, Finland operates total comprehensive education, while Sweden has a myriad of different schools, some private, some state. Sweden also operates 'free schools' (the Tories borrowed the idea from Sweden) and has 'school vouchers' to give parents free choice as to where they take their children.
These countries are very different.
I support higher taxes on everyone, including myself. I quite like tax, because it funds public services such as the NHS, schools and libraries. It's good that we have these things, because they put people over profits.
But shouldn't we be emulating the Nordic nations? That means allowing huge private sector involvement in government. Or would you oppose that? I suspect you merely cherry pick what parts you like and do not like based on your ideology...
I'm perfectly happy to fund people on benefits, the vast majority of whom require them because of exploitation through the wage labour system, something which is inherent to capitalism.
Also nonsense. This is yet more proof that you do not understand free market capitalism. There is plenty of evidence for the concept of a living wage in the writings of Adam Smith. Indeed, he believed that the free market would give greater strength to workers and artisans, and would result in them having higher wages.
I like immigration and, ironically, the Conservatives have utterly failed to meet their pledge to control immigration anyway. What an inept political party!
I am not sure if you are trying to make political points or genuinely do not understand what you are talking about. The only way for the Conservatives to meet their pledge on immigration would be to break the law. Not wanting to break the law does not make one inept.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, want to deny the existence of morlaity, which is, unfortunately, not particularly palatable to me.
I genuinely love the idea that of all people, Conservatives are the ones that apparently want to deny morality... the people that tend towards traditional morality... are denying morality. That is just brilliant.
I support policies which promote the greatest good for the great number, in which the individual is not put above the collective.
So you are also opposed to the movement in the 1960s? Interesting.
Exactly. This is why they increased - and are still increasing - the tax allowance that the wealthiest 1% don't benefit from (You start losing your tax allowance once you earn over £100,000. By £121,200 you will have no tax allowance.)
Original post by A level sufferer
This is stupid, Conservatism advocates total free market capitalism i.e no nhs, i.e no welfare state, no progressive tax system that redistributes income. Its just every man for themselves and if you're one of the unlucky ones then youre ****ed basically so no, not everyone has a bit of conservatism in them.
This shows that you have absolutely no understanding of Conservatism what so ever. The notion that Conservatism is totally free market capitalist is absurd. We can argue about what free market capitalism actually is, as I suspect you are wrong on this also.
The Conservative Party, during most of the 20th Century, fully accepted the socialist arrangements for the economy and welfare state. That tolerated the exceptionally high levels of taxation, and refused to reverse much of what Labour did during their periods in Government.
Conservatism pre-Thatcher is actually quite hard to define in ideological terms. Historically, Conservatism was always non-ideological beyond wanting to preserve the status quo. It was highly pragmatic and would abandon its previous positions at great hast if necessary.
The Conservative Party had a legendary will to govern, which made it incredibly ruthless in terms of its pragmatism. It would almost gleefully change leaders and change political positions when the time called for it.
We should be clear that in the respect of traditional Conservatism, Thatcher is NO Conservative. Most of the Party today, who identify with the Thatcherite wing, are not Conservatives in the traditional sense. They are right-wing classic liberals.
Even under this Government, the welfare state still exists and so too does the NHS. Indeed, the NHS in England (for which the Tories have control) has seen its spending increase, while the NHS in Wales (For which Labour has control) has seen real cuts in its budget. Clearly the notion that the Tories oppose the NHS is folly.
Original post by miser
Yet the Conservative government is always trying to increase control and give individuals less power, for example by removing the Human Rights Act, blocking websites and forcing the vulnerable into poverty (introducing barriers of entry into the labour market).
The removal of the Human Rights Act would not occur in isolation. As I am sure you well know, the Conservative Party's concerns with the HRA is NOT with the articles of rights contained within but are inherently procedural. How these rights play out in courts and, more importantly, which courts are superior.
Other people believe that people who make poor decisions don't make poor decisions on purpose, and that the state is a vehicle for improving the quality of life of society in general - not for empowering self-interest and unnecessary conflict.
The notion that the state can improve life for the majority of society is an interesting concept and one that I would worry about. It assumes great powers for the state to intervene in the lives of the people. Preferably, the role of the state would be to create the environment in which ordinary people could pursue their own lives free of further intervention.
For worrying examples of state intervention 'to improve the quality of people's lives' one must merely gander at the Scottish National Party's plans for state guardians:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/23/scottish-children-government-appointed-guardians
This is a highly worrying development and the potential for highly authoritarian decisions are obvious. The huge centralisation of powers from local authorities to Holyrood is also cause for concern.
Other people believe the state is an arbitrary means of segregation, and that everyone in the world is a human with an equal right to safety and quality of life.
Quite, but if you removed state boundaries, you would obliterate a country in a matter of years. The notion that one can preserve a welfare state without the state is absurd. The notion that one can preserve a welfare state with no restrictions on those who can claim from it, equally so.
Self-interest at the expense of others is an unenlightened philosophy that unnecessarily pits people against each other, costing the whole of society the benefits of collaboration and unity.
I agree and totally reject the notion that Conservatives are any more greedy or self serving than anyone else.
Original post by illegaltobepoor
Conservatives have abandoned traditional Conservatism. They have all embraced Far-Right American Libertarianism. They are all shouting Reganism at the moment. Look what good that did to the US under George Bush.
This is the single stupidest thing I have seen today and does not deserve response.
The British Conservative Party, ideologically, is far far closer to the Democrats than the Republicans.
This is one view of it:
http://www.thewire.com/politics/2013/08/how-conservative-would-uk-conservatives-be-us/67930/
In fact, British Conservatives can be far more progressive than US Democrats:
http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/02/british-conservatives-vs-american-conservatives/190298/
Original post by viddy9
Given that they truly stand for increasing the wealth of the top 1% and promoting an economically illiterate austerity plan, I'm afraid I'm not a Conservative.high
On what basis have you concluded that austerity is 'economically illiterate'? Just as economists oppose austerity, there are economists who support it. Just as Nobel prize winning economists oppose austerity, there are Nobel prize winning economists who support it.
We should be clear that every prediction made by Keynesian economists and the Labour Party about the state of the economy under the Tories so-called austerity plans have been proven wrong. The UK is among the fastest growing countries in the developed world, we have record levels of employment, very low levels of unemployment, the cost of living crisis did not materialise, we have non-existent inflation...
We can disagree about the particulars, but in general, the economic policy pursued by this Government cannot be deemed illiterate.
I believe that government should exist to regulate the market, because free-markets fail, as decades of research in behavioural economics by the Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and others has shown.
This single paragraph proves you know nothing about free markets. Free markets do not advocate nor encourage 'no regulation'. Indeed, Adam Smith argued quite strongly that the financial sector in any polity should be hugely regulated. Smith, for instance, argued that high risk, high interest loans (subprime) should be banned outright.
Before you criticise free markets, please learn what they are. You clearly do not know.
Social democracies such as those in Scandinavia have high rates of public spending, high taxes, high numbers of public sector workers and free education and healthcare. They're also the happiest societies in the world.
They also have HUGE private sector involvement in the provision of Government services (Sweden) and are hugely sceptical and restrictive towards immigration (Denmark). The Nordic countries are not homogeneous, there are many differences between them. On schools, for instance, Finland operates total comprehensive education, while Sweden has a myriad of different schools, some private, some state. Sweden also operates 'free schools' (the Tories borrowed the idea from Sweden) and has 'school vouchers' to give parents free choice as to where they take their children.
These countries are very different.
I support higher taxes on everyone, including myself. I quite like tax, because it funds public services such as the NHS, schools and libraries. It's good that we have these things, because they put people over profits.
But shouldn't we be emulating the Nordic nations? That means allowing huge private sector involvement in government. Or would you oppose that? I suspect you merely cherry pick what parts you like and do not like based on your ideology...
I'm perfectly happy to fund people on benefits, the vast majority of whom require them because of exploitation through the wage labour system, something which is inherent to capitalism.
Also nonsense. This is yet more proof that you do not understand free market capitalism. There is plenty of evidence for the concept of a living wage in the writings of Adam Smith. Indeed, he believed that the free market would give greater strength to workers and artisans, and would result in them having higher wages.
I like immigration and, ironically, the Conservatives have utterly failed to meet their pledge to control immigration anyway. What an inept political party!
I am not sure if you are trying to make political points or genuinely do not understand what you are talking about. The only way for the Conservatives to meet their pledge on immigration would be to break the law. Not wanting to break the law does not make one inept.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, want to deny the existence of morlaity, which is, unfortunately, not particularly palatable to me.
I genuinely love the idea that of all people, Conservatives are the ones that apparently want to deny morality... the people that tend towards traditional morality... are denying morality. That is just brilliant.
I support policies which promote the greatest good for the great number, in which the individual is not put above the collective.
So you are also opposed to the movement in the 1960s? Interesting.
Original post by Megst
, Conservatives love to support the richest 1%
Exactly. This is why they increased - and are still increasing - the tax allowance that the wealthiest 1% don't benefit from (You start losing your tax allowance once you earn over £100,000. By £121,200 you will have no tax allowance.)
Original post by snowman77
Allowing masses of immigrants to come over from former Communist countries of Eastern Europe just doesn't work. Our cultures are so vastly different.
No they aren't.
Original post by driftawaay
this is an internet forum for students.
firstly it's on the internet. it's going to naturally be left-wing.
secondly it's for students. it's going to be even more left-wing.
thirdly this is tsr. there is an anti-right purge on this site. there is no will to reveal yourself.
Original post by SotonianOne
this is an internet forum for students.
firstly it's on the internet. it's going to naturally be left-wing.
secondly it's for students. it's going to be even more left-wing.
thirdly this is tsr. there is an anti-right purge on this site. there is no will to reveal yourself.
firstly it's on the internet. it's going to naturally be left-wing.
secondly it's for students. it's going to be even more left-wing.
thirdly this is tsr. there is an anti-right purge on this site. there is no will to reveal yourself.
Anonymous voting is not 'revealing' yourself, so the weaklings can vote xo
Original post by driftawaay
Anonymous voting is not 'revealing' yourself, so the weaklings can vote xo
because all the right-wing members are leaving due to the purge?
you have to be deluded if you think that TSR's voting polls on political parties/ideologies are anywhere near reality, and an election is a far better sample than an internet poll on a student site
TSR is the only place where the Green Party would win a majority.
erm no. I would never vote the conservatives
Original post by SotonianOne
because all the right-wing members are leaving due to the purge?
Good, I'm not going to miss them.
Original post by SotonianOne
you have to be deluded if you think that TSR's voting polls on political parties/ideologies are anywhere near reality
you have to be deluded if you think that TSR's voting polls on political parties/ideologies are anywhere near reality
IDK what you're on about, I didn't mention anything about it being representative of the whole of society. Are you just arguing with yourself, or... ?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Differing Political Opinions with family.
- A level revision songs
- How do I tell my parents I broke up with my gf?
- I feel tied to my girlfriend.
- Physics or Computer science?
- How to get over heartbreak
- Myself
- 2023 National poetry day
- Limerence
- exam stress
- Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The Guardian
- engaged to my friends girlfriend, am I the *******?
- Trying to choose a uni
- Is there a reason why the government has failed to control its borders?
- what is the purpose of mose convos you have in a day?
- What does his behaviour mean?
- Fear I have been fumbled yet again- does he like me?
- Zoology or Ecology - Help!!!
- Ask a Student: All about Biological Sciences
- Have the Tories stopped being Conservative?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 18 hours ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 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 2 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 2 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 18 hours ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 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 2 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 2 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?
