Why are right wingers suddenly pretending they care about the disadvantaged?
The amount of people I've seen on social media and on here saying things like "we should be looking after our own first" or "these homes could be given to the poor homeless people" in regards to the Syrian refugee situation.
It's just funny how it's the people who are voting for the conservatives, the people who've never donated or thought about the poor, who avoid beggars like the plague who are preaching this. Do they not see how stupidly ironic they're being?
And of course a popular retort by such individual these days is; "Are you personally willing to take refugees into your home?".
Therefore allow me to answer that question with another. Are YOU personally willing to help the homeless and take them into your home now?
It's just funny how it's the people who are voting for the conservatives, the people who've never donated or thought about the poor, who avoid beggars like the plague who are preaching this. Do they not see how stupidly ironic they're being?
And of course a popular retort by such individual these days is; "Are you personally willing to take refugees into your home?".
Therefore allow me to answer that question with another. Are YOU personally willing to help the homeless and take them into your home now?
Scroll to see replies
The right wing care about the poor as much as the left wing do they simply have different methods for bringing what they see as positive change.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by paul514
The right wing care about the poor as much as the left wing do they simply have different methods for bringing what they see as positive change.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
By making them poorer.
Original post by Maker
By making them poorer.
By changing economic models, values and being able to pay for the poor.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by IamJacksContempt
...
i guess for similar reasons that Left Wingers suddenly discover their deep care about national security...
Original post by the bear
i guess for similar reasons that Left Wingers suddenly discover their deep care about national security...
Name me one example of a refugee committing a terror attack.
I haven't seen many people suddenly changing their minds over welcoming refugees after the Paris attacks.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by the bear
i guess for similar reasons that Left Wingers suddenly discover their deep care about national security...
Original post by paul514
The right wing care about the poor as much as the left wing do they simply have different methods for bringing what they see as positive change.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
I guess it has something to do with where state funding is concerned generally, right wingers write the cheques and left wingers cash them.
Original post by paul514
Yes helping the poor through positive changes like tax credit cuts, bedroom tax etc etc. No, you're totally right, they do care about the poor just as much as they care about themselves!
It's quite funny looking at the way you've fallen into a trap and indeed a narrative that because people are right wing, they are cruel, insensitive, heartless people who don't like the poor and have no interest in them any other time.
I'm left wing but I completely disagree. I know most people, from all sides, care about the poor, there are just differing views on how best to help them and what role they play in society. Be careful not to fall into such a basic narrative because it sullies any good argument you may make and makes it hard to take it seriously. What is ironic, is you insulting others based off of this and calling it ironic, yet having such a huge oversight.
As far as I'm aware on the question you asked, right wing groups, parties and people have always asked those questions, but naturally at times like these, it gets greater prominence because usually it is seen as stagnation and inaction on helping our own homeless people, but at times like these it causes even greater fury because rather than be stagnant on what to do about them, we are actively allocating homes, resources and much more to others. Whilst I don't agree with the rhetoric, I certainly understand where they're coming from.
Again I would say, particularly as a left winger, please drop the attitude that because you believe in centre left (I'm presuming from your post) policies, that you are a bastion of morality and anybody to the right of centre is some evil, poor hating executive who hates immigrants. This really isn't the case and is part of what switches so many people off to the left, because it is full of high horse riding people who see it as a black and white case of being good and bad.
I'm left wing but I completely disagree. I know most people, from all sides, care about the poor, there are just differing views on how best to help them and what role they play in society. Be careful not to fall into such a basic narrative because it sullies any good argument you may make and makes it hard to take it seriously. What is ironic, is you insulting others based off of this and calling it ironic, yet having such a huge oversight.
As far as I'm aware on the question you asked, right wing groups, parties and people have always asked those questions, but naturally at times like these, it gets greater prominence because usually it is seen as stagnation and inaction on helping our own homeless people, but at times like these it causes even greater fury because rather than be stagnant on what to do about them, we are actively allocating homes, resources and much more to others. Whilst I don't agree with the rhetoric, I certainly understand where they're coming from.
Again I would say, particularly as a left winger, please drop the attitude that because you believe in centre left (I'm presuming from your post) policies, that you are a bastion of morality and anybody to the right of centre is some evil, poor hating executive who hates immigrants. This really isn't the case and is part of what switches so many people off to the left, because it is full of high horse riding people who see it as a black and white case of being good and bad.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Historicity
It's quite funny looking at the way you've fallen into a trap and indeed a narrative that because people are right wing, they are cruel, insensitive, heartless people who don't like the poor and have no interest in them any other time.
I'm left wing but I completely disagree. I know most people, from all sides, care about the poor, there are just differing views on how best to help them and what role they play in society. Be careful not to fall into such a basic narrative because it sullies any good argument you may make and makes it hard to take it seriously. What is ironic, is you insulting others based off of this and calling them moronic, yet having such a huge oversight.
As far as I'm aware on the question you asked, right wing groups, parties and people have always asked those questions, but naturally at times like these, it gets greater prominence because usually it is seen as stagnation and inaction on helping our own homeless people, but at times like these it causes even greater fury because rather than be stagnant on what to do about them, we are actively allocating homes, resources and much more to others. Whilst I don't agree with the rhetoric, I certainly understand where they're coming from.
Again I would say, particularly as a left winger, please drop the attitude that because you believe in centre left (I'm presuming from your post) policies, that you are a bastion of morality and anybody to the right of centre is some evil, poor hating executive who hates immigrants. This really isn't the case and is part of what switches so many people off to the left, because it is full of high horse riding people who see it as a black and white case of being good and bad.
I'm left wing but I completely disagree. I know most people, from all sides, care about the poor, there are just differing views on how best to help them and what role they play in society. Be careful not to fall into such a basic narrative because it sullies any good argument you may make and makes it hard to take it seriously. What is ironic, is you insulting others based off of this and calling them moronic, yet having such a huge oversight.
As far as I'm aware on the question you asked, right wing groups, parties and people have always asked those questions, but naturally at times like these, it gets greater prominence because usually it is seen as stagnation and inaction on helping our own homeless people, but at times like these it causes even greater fury because rather than be stagnant on what to do about them, we are actively allocating homes, resources and much more to others. Whilst I don't agree with the rhetoric, I certainly understand where they're coming from.
Again I would say, particularly as a left winger, please drop the attitude that because you believe in centre left (I'm presuming from your post) policies, that you are a bastion of morality and anybody to the right of centre is some evil, poor hating executive who hates immigrants. This really isn't the case and is part of what switches so many people off to the left, because it is full of high horse riding people who see it as a black and white case of being good and bad.
"Narrative", god I hate that word.
I think if anyone has fallen into a trap it is you. You haven't actually explained how right wing individuals care for the poor? Do they donate? Perhaps. Do they volunteer or assist in helping homeless or disadvantaged people? Doubt it. Do they vote for policies which assist those who need it most? Certainly not. Therefore rather than simply spouting anecdotal evidence, can you provide something of substance to back up your claims?
Now for the purpose of this thread, of course I am generalising in order to make a point. Of course not everyone who is right wing is some self-serving, evil sociopath. However, this idea that they've always cared for the homeless or disabled, despite voting for a party and for policies which directly inhibit them is laughable. More often than not, the simple explanation is most likely the accurate one. They are using the recent events as an opportunity to reinforce their pre-existing views. For example, see the arguments for "national security" as a way of undermining the cause of assisting refugees.
Original post by IamJacksContempt
"Narrative", god I hate that word.
I think if anyone has fallen into a trap it is you. You haven't actually explained how right wing individuals care for the poor? Do they donate? Perhaps. Do they volunteer or assist in helping homeless or disadvantaged people? Doubt it. Do they vote for policies which assist those who need it most? Certainly not. Therefore rather than simply spouting anecdotal evidence, can you provide something of substance to back up your claims?
Now for the purpose of this thread, of course I am generalising in order to make a point. Of course not everyone who is right wing is some self-serving, evil sociopath. However, this idea that they've always cared for the homeless or disabled, despite voting for a party and for policies which directly inhibit them is laughable. More often than not, the simple explanation is most likely the accurate one. They are using the recent events as an opportunity to reinforce their pre-existing views. For example, see the arguments for "national security" as a way of undermining the cause of assisting refugees.
I think if anyone has fallen into a trap it is you. You haven't actually explained how right wing individuals care for the poor? Do they donate? Perhaps. Do they volunteer or assist in helping homeless or disadvantaged people? Doubt it. Do they vote for policies which assist those who need it most? Certainly not. Therefore rather than simply spouting anecdotal evidence, can you provide something of substance to back up your claims?
Now for the purpose of this thread, of course I am generalising in order to make a point. Of course not everyone who is right wing is some self-serving, evil sociopath. However, this idea that they've always cared for the homeless or disabled, despite voting for a party and for policies which directly inhibit them is laughable. More often than not, the simple explanation is most likely the accurate one. They are using the recent events as an opportunity to reinforce their pre-existing views. For example, see the arguments for "national security" as a way of undermining the cause of assisting refugees.
There's a further great irony of you telling me I'm being anecdotal and then asking me if any right leaning individuals ever help the poor or donate to charity. I'm honestly not sure how somebody can be so oblivious.
When you grasp reasoned debate and move beyond hating certain words and hugely incorrect stereotypes I'll grace you with a proper response. Until then, your faux outrage and your moral high horse probably aren't worthy of a detailed post because you'll only dismiss it to further sling your own mud and feel sanctimonious about it.
PS. You're also using these events to further your own views.
Original post by Historicity
There's a further great irony of you telling me I'm being anecdotal and then asking me if any right leaning individuals ever help the poor or donate to charity. I'm honestly not sure how somebody can be so oblivious.
When you grasp reasoned debate and move beyond hating certain words and hugely incorrect stereotypes I'll grace you with a proper response. Until then, your faux outrage and your moral high horse probably aren't worthy of a detailed post because you'll only dismiss it to further sling your own mud and feel sanctimonious about it.
PS. You're also using these events to further your own views.
When you grasp reasoned debate and move beyond hating certain words and hugely incorrect stereotypes I'll grace you with a proper response. Until then, your faux outrage and your moral high horse probably aren't worthy of a detailed post because you'll only dismiss it to further sling your own mud and feel sanctimonious about it.
PS. You're also using these events to further your own views.
Well seeing as you're only capable of being anecdotal, what else could I have asked of you? Like I said, they vote for policies which directly harm the people you're saying they care about. So I'm waiting for you to educate me on how they are concerned for the majority rather than for themselves?
Next time, please prepare an actual argument rather than "I don't like what you're saying, you're wrong".
Original post by IamJacksContempt
Well seeing as you're only capable of being anecdotal, what else could I have asked of you? Like I said, they vote for policies which directly harm the people you're saying they care about. So I'm waiting for you to educate me on how they are concerned for the majority rather than for themselves?
Next time, please prepare an actual argument rather than "I don't like what you're saying, you're wrong".
Next time, please prepare an actual argument rather than "I don't like what you're saying, you're wrong".
No, I'm not, but if you put forward an argument, don't expect people to criticise you for not backing it up reasonably. When people call you out on this, don't then try and switch it to them.
Shockingly, the right isn't a unified cohort and they do disagree on the specifics. Whilst IDS is as deplorable as he is, I think for most, even on the right, he's a bit too much.
With that in mind, because you asked so nicely have a look at this report on charitable giving in the UK last year : https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default-source/about-us-publications/caf-ukgiving2014
Go to page 8 specifically, you'll find that young people are least likely to be involved in charitable giving at all, the same age group that traditionally votes left. If you look just below that, you'll find those in the highest socio-economic have participated the most in charitable giving, across all forms of it, by about 33%. The same group that overwhelmingly votes right.
That took me all of one google search to discredit the line of argument you're making, I just presumed it was so obvious that you wouldn't actually think you were 100% correct. I won't respond again, but feel free to continue the narrative that completely isolates those on the fence from the left who completely deplore the self-appointed moral warrior status.
Edit : OP has gone on to claim that 'people who have less money donate less', but the research doesn't show this, it only shows that richer people are involved in more charitable activity, regardless of how much is given. This includes volunteering and buying charity products.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by IamJacksContempt
The amount of people I've seen on social media and on here saying things like "we should be looking after our own first" or "these homes could be given to the poor homeless people" in regards to the Syrian refugee situation.
It's just funny how it's the people who are voting for the conservatives, the people who've never donated or thought about the poor, who avoid beggars like the plague who are preaching this. Do they not see how stupidly ironic they're being?
It's just funny how it's the people who are voting for the conservatives, the people who've never donated or thought about the poor, who avoid beggars like the plague who are preaching this. Do they not see how stupidly ironic they're being?
It's mental gymnastics.
A sense of collectivization and solidarity become strong when it means we band together to fight the "other".
The moment the "other" are no longer in the equation it is **** the feckless poor. Cut welfare and so on. People on here like BillyDisco who constantly moan about welfare and giving away things fro free all of a sudden become champions of the homeless once immigrants become involved.
The extreme of this is Golden Dawn in Greece where they would provide help to the homeless providing they were not an immigrant or foreign or <insert that which we do not like>
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Historicity
No, I'm not, but if you put forward an argument, don't expect people to criticise you for not backing it up reasonably. When people call you out on this, don't then try and switch it to them.
Shockingly, the right isn't a unified cohort and they do disagree on the specifics. Whilst IDS is as deplorable as he is, I think for most, even on the right, he's a bit too much.
With that in mind, because you asked so nicely have a look at this report on charitable giving in the UK last year : https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default-source/about-us-publications/caf-ukgiving2014
Go to page 8 specifically, you'll find that young people are least likely to be involved in charitable giving at all, the same age group that traditionally votes left. If you look just below that, you'll find those in the highest socio-economic have participated the most in charitable giving, across all forms of it, by about 33%. The same group that overwhelmingly votes right.
That took me all of one google search to discredit the line of argument you're making, I just presumed it was so obvious that you wouldn't actually think you were 100% correct. I won't respond again, but feel free to continue the narrative that completely isolates those on the fence from the left who completely deplore the self-appointed moral warrior status.
Shockingly, the right isn't a unified cohort and they do disagree on the specifics. Whilst IDS is as deplorable as he is, I think for most, even on the right, he's a bit too much.
With that in mind, because you asked so nicely have a look at this report on charitable giving in the UK last year : https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default-source/about-us-publications/caf-ukgiving2014
Go to page 8 specifically, you'll find that young people are least likely to be involved in charitable giving at all, the same age group that traditionally votes left. If you look just below that, you'll find those in the highest socio-economic have participated the most in charitable giving, across all forms of it, by about 33%. The same group that overwhelmingly votes right.
That took me all of one google search to discredit the line of argument you're making, I just presumed it was so obvious that you wouldn't actually think you were 100% correct. I won't respond again, but feel free to continue the narrative that completely isolates those on the fence from the left who completely deplore the self-appointed moral warrior status.
Except I have backed it up reasonably. You still haven't said anything about the fact right wing individuals vote for policies and parties which directly harm the poor.
Wow, really? That's your big analysis? hahaha. Shock horror, younger people who have less money, donate less. Brilliant journalism on your part. What you going to tell me next? Footballers care more about the needy than anyone else because they donate the most amount of money?
I like how you ignore that correlation and instead ensure to make the point that the young are traditionally left. I can counter your fallacies with your own source. According to 2.0 table 1, Women are more likely to be involved in charitable giving or social action, the same group that is more likely to vote left.
Ahh and the creme de la creme of internet arguments. "I wont respond again". A typical safeguard of someone knowing they don't have a credible argument and therefore provides an excuse for not replying.
Original post by Historicity
There's a further great irony of you telling me I'm being anecdotal and then asking me if any right leaning individuals ever help the poor or donate to charity. I'm honestly not sure how somebody can be so oblivious.
When you grasp reasoned debate and move beyond hating certain words and hugely incorrect stereotypes I'll grace you with a proper response. Until then, your faux outrage and your moral high horse probably aren't worthy of a detailed post because you'll only dismiss it to further sling your own mud and feel sanctimonious about it.
PS. You're also using these events to further your own views.
When you grasp reasoned debate and move beyond hating certain words and hugely incorrect stereotypes I'll grace you with a proper response. Until then, your faux outrage and your moral high horse probably aren't worthy of a detailed post because you'll only dismiss it to further sling your own mud and feel sanctimonious about it.
PS. You're also using these events to further your own views.
Well said
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by IamJacksContempt
It's just funny how it's the people who are voting for the conservatives, the people who've never donated or thought about the poor, who avoid beggars like the plague who are preaching this.
That's a sweeping generalization if ever I heard one.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
