Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)

    If they are right wing they aren't evil neoliberal right wing. Or maybe they are just morons,
    What on earth is a "neoliberal" right winger? And what makes them evil?

    You don't really think that your political opponents are "evil", do you?

    And that your political views make you morally superior to someone who disagrees???

    It is a deeply unpleasant characteristic, labelling anyone who doesn't totally subscribe to the narrative, in quasi religious terms.

    As wicked, and evil and presumably going to hell?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolate hottie)
    What on earth is a "neoliberal" right winger? And what makes them evil?
    Word on the street is they eat babies.

    a neoliberal is someone that adheres to some form of neoliberlsim (politician and economic ideaolgy) or it's various spin offs. Often it is used to justify crony capitalism which isn't really that neoliberal.

    The word deosn't get sued too much in mainstream discourse since people having any kind of understanding of politics or economics is a bad thing, unless of course you are goign to run the country. God, don't teach people things.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Word on the street is they eat babies.

    a neoliberal is someone that adheres to some form of neoliberlsim (politician and economic ideaolgy) or it's various spin offs. Often it is used to justify crony capitalism which isn't really that neoliberal.

    The word deosn't get sued too much in mainstream discourse since people having any kind of understanding of politics or economics is a bad thing, unless of course you are goign to run the country. God, don't teach people things.
    I thought it was an insult used by the Corbynistas of Blairites...

    Why do so many on the left assume this stance of moral superiority though?

    I am a right winger and I don't feel that way at all towards my opponents. More in touch with reality, obviously, but not morally better. :-)

    We just have different views of human nature, and how the world actually works rather than how we might like it to work.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolate hottie)
    I thought it was an insult used by the Corbynistas of Blairites...

    Why do so many on the left assume this stance of moral superiority though?

    I am a right winger and I don't feel that way at all towards my opponents. More in touch with reality, obviously, but not morally better. :-)

    We just have different views of human nature, and how the world actually works rather than how we might like it to work.
    It depends what you are referring to by the left. They aren't a monolith and they include millions of people.

    People like ChaoticButterfly, for example, aren't evil. They are probably perfectfully good people who are just misguided and overly emotionally driven. We can't really criticise them too much when all that has happened is that they succum to the propaganda and nonsense of our age.

    However many of the most influential leftists who enact these policies are evil, twisted people with nefarious agendas.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    . They are probably perfectfully good people who are just misguided and overly emotionally driven. .
    I agree with that.

    It is impossible to have a rational discussion about say the "refugee" crisis with a lefty without your interlocutor emoting.

    Try and point out the impossibility of this country accepting everyone in who has left Syria, and all reason is lost under an avalanche of emotion and drowned babies.

    Clearly it is more about them feeling better about themselves than anything else. Maybe that goes for all leftish thought?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    By election results - around 5% swing to the tories
    Ah the council elections, not the actual membership. I know it is only one CLP but mine has reported a lot of old members coming back and the constituency has never been Labour. Corbyn has only been in the job less than a month and there is also Dugdale to factor in. Give him time.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Midlander)
    Ah the council elections, not the actual membership. I know it is only one CLP but mine has reported a lot of old members coming back and the constituency has never been Labour. Corbyn has only been in the job less than a month and there is also Dugdale to factor in. Give him time.
    Yeah, one small step at a time. He only needs 106 seats to win and a 9.5% swing in the marginals, and with the promise of that magic money tree, unlimited immigration and no cap on welfare, it looks like the darkness before the dawn...

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ed-study-finds
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolate hottie)
    Yeah, one small step at a time. He only needs 106 seats to win and a 9.5% swing in the marginals, and with the promise of that magic money tree, unlimited immigration and no cap on welfare, it looks like the darkness before the dawn...

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ed-study-finds
    The Tories are already splintering on tax credits, they will splinter more on the EU and even more than that on the race to succeed Dave. Tony Blair faced the very same 'magic money tree' accusations before he became PM (just see all the funny Spitting Image parodies) but in the end succeeded against a Tory government splintered on Europe and mired in sleaze.

    Whatever he did afterwards, Blair won the election on a 'hope' ticket and it resonated with huge numbers of people. Corbyn can do the same. Granted, it is going to be harder without the 40 seats thrown away in Scotland, but at the Tory conference we have already seen a difference of opinion between the clown and the chancellor.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I think Scotland is a very different place politically to England now, although it didn't used to be.
    On a superficial level, it is, yes. Nationalism is the flavour of the week and discussing the constitutional issue ad nauseum is far more interesting than discussing the actual state of affairs. People actually want to rally round the ruling party, rather than a constant, mild dislike, and take it criticism against it rather personally.

    But at its deeper down it's almost exactly the same, a small 'c' conservative silent majority and a generally middle-ground middle class being the key to electoral success. Labour, talking about tax rises and being somewhat more left-wing than recent renditions, got absolutely slaughtered at the recent election. The SNP daren't talk about tax rises, or what they're actually going to do with the new powers that're heading their way (or even the ones they've already got). One of the keys to their recent success has been in winning the middle-class, politically quite centrist, small 'c' conservative types, the same sort of people that many assert Corbyn has to win over if he is to make Labour electable again.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Midlander)
    The Tories are already splintering on tax credits, they will splinter more on the EU and even more than that on the race to succeed Dave. Tony Blair faced the very same 'magic money tree' accusations before he became PM (just see all the funny Spitting Image parodies) but in the end succeeded against a Tory government splintered on Europe and mired in sleaze.

    Whatever he did afterwards, Blair won the election on a 'hope' ticket and it resonated with huge numbers of people. Corbyn can do the same. Granted, it is going to be harder without the 40 seats thrown away in Scotland, but at the Tory conference we have already seen a difference of opinion between the clown and the chancellor.
    Blair was the most successful leader in Labour history (although by no means the best Prime Minister), in that he won three elections. By taking Labour to the right, holding the historic Labour vote and winning over enough Tory voters to achieve landslides.

    In what way is Corbyn comparable? He is way to the left and repels swing Tories. He isn't as bright, he isn't as personable or telegenic, he is unable to command his own Shadow Cabinet and had to make huge policy concessions to even get many of them to serve under him.

    As a lifetime rebel himself, he can expect no loyalty, and now we now have chaos with his own utterances contradicted by his subordinates.

    He is Michael Foot, not Tony Blair. But a second rate, pound shop Foot. The latter had held high Cabinet Office, was an intellectual and great orator, Corbyn is none of these. In fact as far as oratory goes he recycled a passage from a forgotten aide of Dennis Healey's (who sadly died the other day). Written in the 1980's. And that was the best part of his speech!

    It doesn't matter what happens to the Tories (and you may well be right in forecasting their problems), you won't win power under Corbyn. Your best hope (and it isn't great) is to ditch him as soon as possible. But the problem with that is that the left will never forgive such an act...

    Corbyn is going to disappoint a lot of people, and it seems you will be one of them. You seem a bright enough chap, I am amazed you have fallen for him.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolate hottie)
    Blair was the most successful leader in Labour history (although by no means the best Prime Minister), in that he won three elections. By taking Labour to the right, holding the historic Labour vote and winning over enough Tory voters to achieve landslides.

    In what way is Corbyn comparable? He is way to the left and repels swing Tories. He isn't as bright, he isn't as personable or telegenic, he is unable to command his own Shadow Cabinet and had to make huge policy concessions to even get many of them to serve under him.

    As a lifetime rebel himself, he can expect no loyalty, and now we now have chaos with his own utterances contradicted by his subordinates.

    He is Michael Foot, not Tony Blair. But a second rate, pound shop Foot. The latter had held high Cabinet Office, was an intellectual and great orator, Corbyn is none of these. In fact as far as oratory goes he recycled a passage from a forgotten aide of Dennis Healey's (who sadly died the other day). Written in the 1980's. And that was the best part of his speech!

    It doesn't matter what happens to the Tories (and you may well be right in forecasting their problems), you won't win power under Corbyn. Your best hope (and it isn't great) is to ditch him as soon as possible. But the problem with that is that the left will never forgive such an act...

    Corbyn is going to disappoint a lot of people, and it seems you will be one of them. You seem a bright enough chap, I am amazed you have fallen for him.
    For me it is less about Corbyn the man and more that at the last General Election my voting choice was not about who I wanted to get in, but who I wanted to keep out. In a previous Lib Dem safe seat I had a choice between the SNP and the Lib Dems, I voted for the latter and it (just) didn't work. I would have been happy to vote for Labour if I wanted Ed as PM, but I didn't. Hand on heart nobody could say he would have been a wise choice.

    You see I have often been told I have an idealistic view of the world, and I do. When I hear someone saying that deep cuts to public services while big corporations are given a free ride is wrong, I agree with it. When I hear someone simply expressing their honest opinion, I applaud them whether I agree with it or not. I don't want spin doctors and I don't want people purporting to be something they're not in order to win votes.

    I voted Corbyn less because of his chances as PM and more in the hope that his election would make politicians speak with genuine conviction, would start to debate based on issues not on personalities and that the political process as a whole would benefit from it. More fundamentally, he was the only one there who was espousing the values and ideals I expect from a Labour politician. He may well fail and fall short, I am not oblivious to that fact, but damn it, he is at least trying to show that politics can be about principles and issues, rather than spin and scaremongering.

    If this has any bearing on the next generation of politicians, my vote for him will have been worth it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolate hottie)
    I agree with that.

    It is impossible to have a rational discussion about say the "refugee" crisis with a lefty without your interlocutor emoting.

    Try and point out the impossibility of this country accepting everyone in who has left Syria, and all reason is lost under an avalanche of emotion and drowned babies.

    Clearly it is more about them feeling better about themselves than anything else. Maybe that goes for all leftish thought?
    If you think there no emotion against immigrants you are deluded. People get ****ing angry about immigrants stealing their jobs and generally talking over like some kind of plague.

    You and mighty bush are self righteous and arrogantly assume your superiority. The fact you can only see all the problems you describe on the so called left says a lot.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Midlander)
    Ah the council elections, not the actual membership. I know it is only one CLP but mine has reported a lot of old members coming back and the constituency has never been Labour. Corbyn has only been in the job less than a month and there is also Dugdale to factor in. Give him time.
    Membership doesn't really convert to votes though. So is totally irrelevant. Especially because no one who supports Corbyn seems to have any intention of pulling their weight, in my CLP at least.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    If you think there no emotion against immigrants you are deluded. People get ****ing angry about immigrants stealing their jobs and generally talking over like some kind of plague.

    You and mighty bush are self righteous and arrogantly assume your superiority. The fact you can only see all the problems you describe on the so called left says a lot.
    I'm not self righteous. Unlike the left I don't think simply holding certain political positions makes you a good person.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Midlander)
    For me it is less about Corbyn the man and more that at the last General Election my voting choice was not about who I wanted to get in, but who I wanted to keep out. In a previous Lib Dem safe seat I had a choice between the SNP and the Lib Dems, I voted for the latter and it (just) didn't work. I would have been happy to vote for Labour if I wanted Ed as PM, but I didn't. Hand on heart nobody could say he would have been a wise choice.

    You see I have often been told I have an idealistic view of the world, and I do. When I hear someone saying that deep cuts to public services while big corporations are given a free ride is wrong, I agree with it. When I hear someone simply expressing their honest opinion, I applaud them whether I agree with it or not. I don't want spin doctors and I don't want people purporting to be something they're not in order to win votes.

    I voted Corbyn less because of his chances as PM and more in the hope that his election would make politicians speak with genuine conviction, would start to debate based on issues not on personalities and that the political process as a whole would benefit from it. More fundamentally, he was the only one there who was espousing the values and ideals I expect from a Labour politician. He may well fail and fall short, I am not oblivious to that fact, but damn it, he is at least trying to show that politics can be about principles and issues, rather than spin and scaremongering.

    If this has any bearing on the next generation of politicians, my vote for him will have been worth it.
    And you're willing to sacrifice peoples jobs and even lives I the process by locking labour out of power for the foreseeable future?

    Way I see it is this we are at an incredibly critical time politically. The Tories are carrying out higher levels of cuts and privatisation that even in thatchers time, trying to literally destroy the trade unions and public services (and on top of that the environment but I won't even start down that route. They are literally a party that hates science and evidence). Another 10 years and there'll be nothing left, labour literally cant afford to lose the next election because in 10 years time there'll be nothing left to fight for - no public sector to speak of, no NHS, no welfare system, no social housing or even housing associations, crushed and useless unions with no power. This is what we will see happening in the UK unless labour can turn it round and become electable in the net 5 years, which I highly doubt will happen, but I do feel Tom Watson at least will give it a good go. (More surprising than Corbyn getting in in the first place was Tom as deputy!! Who the hell voted for both those people?!)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    And you're willing to sacrifice peoples jobs and even lives I the process by locking labour out of power for the foreseeable future?

    Way I see it is this we are at an incredibly critical time politically. The Tories are carrying out higher levels of cuts and privatisation that even in thatchers time, trying to literally destroy the trade unions and public services (and on top of that the environment but I won't even start down that route. They are literally a party that hates science and evidence). Another 10 years and there'll be nothing left, labour literally cant afford to lose the next election because in 10 years time there'll be nothing left to fight for - no public sector to speak of, no NHS, no welfare system, no social housing or even housing associations, crushed and useless unions with no power. This is what we will see happening in the UK unless labour can turn it round and become electable in the net 5 years, which I highly doubt will happen, but I do feel Tom Watson at least will give it a good go. (More surprising than Corbyn getting in in the first place was Tom as deputy!! Who the hell voted for both those people?!)
    If this level of evil is happening how could the Tories be re-elected upon it? Don't be so ridiculous, nobody will die as a consequence of me voting for Corbyn. A leader calling this out for what it is is 'unelectable' but Jeremy 'We will make them work like in China' Hunt, Matthew 'Under 25s don't deserve the living wage' Hancock, Iain 'The disabled should work their way out of poverty' Duncan Smith, Dave 'Oil for Saudi human rights abuses' Cameron and co are the electable ones?

    Really what is so unelectable about criticising these people?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Midlander)
    I would have been happy to vote for Labour if I wanted Ed as PM, but I didn't. Hand on heart nobody could say he would have been a wise choice.
    Can you, hand on heart, say that Corbyn would be a wise choice as PM??

    And even if you could, the problem is that only a tiny percentage of the population, the Labour left, think that. Good God, even members of his own Shadow Cabinet are briefing journalists off the record that, in terms of the national interest, they would prefer Cameron to him!

    He is hopeless, hapless, way out of his depth, a nice man maybe, but utterly unfit for the Highest Office. And although we don't have a Presidential system that matters. In fact it is a show stopper.

    Do you know how many Labour Leaders have won an absolute majority for the party at a GE since they replaced the Liberals? Three. Out of eleven. And some of them were really great statesmen, hugely clever men, consummate politicians. Prime Ministers. That is the scale of Labour's problem under Corbyn.
    (Original post by Midlander)
    You see I have often been told I have an idealistic view of the world, and I do. When I hear someone saying that deep cuts to public services while big corporations are given a free ride is wrong, I agree with it. When I hear someone simply expressing their honest opinion, I applaud them whether I agree with it or not. I don't want spin doctors and I don't want people purporting to be something they're not in order to win votes.

    I voted Corbyn less because of his chances as PM and more in the hope that his election would make politicians speak with genuine conviction, would start to debate based on issues not on personalities and that the political process as a whole would benefit from it. More fundamentally, he was the only one there who was espousing the values and ideals I expect from a Labour politician. He may well fail and fall short, I am not oblivious to that fact, but damn it, he is at least trying to show that politics can be about principles and issues, rather than spin and scaremongering.

    If this has any bearing on the next generation of politicians, my vote for him will have been worth it.[/QUOTE]

    This is so touchingly naive, it is almost heart breaking to read. :-(

    Listen I totally agree with all your criticisms, I feel them too. Politics in this country is disgusting, and we deserve better, we have been let down as a nation.

    But I am afraid the world isn't how we both might wish it to be. Corbyn will be sucked in, chewed up and spat out.

    And Labour will go back to on message statements, spin doctors, cynicism and lies, just like the Tories.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Midlander)
    If this level of evil is happening how could the Tories be re-elected upon it? Don't be so ridiculous, nobody will die as a consequence of me voting for Corbyn. A leader calling this out for what it is is 'unelectable' but Jeremy 'We will make them work like in China' Hunt, Matthew 'Under 25s don't deserve the living wage' Hancock, Iain 'The disabled should work their way out of poverty' Duncan Smith, Dave 'Oil for Saudi human rights abuses' Cameron and co are the electable ones?

    Really what is so unelectable about criticising these people?
    Of course they will, its not a ridiculous thing to say at all. People will die because the Tories are now completely unfettered, they have no credible opposition and can carry out more and more right wing policies.

    Wake up - that's the way the world works - the vast majority of the general public look down on and resent people on benefits. The vast majority of voters are over 59 and yes, do believe under 25s are u deserving and lazy, and that most people on disabilities are scroungers. It's like you've never met anyone outside some weird left wing bubble you seem to be living in...

    Of course theyre electable, theyre saying views a large proportion of people agree with. Unlike Jeremy who is saying uncapped benefits and immigration.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolate hottie)
    This is so touchingly naive, it is almost heart breaking to read. :-(

    Listen I totally agree with all your criticisms, I feel them too. Politics in this country is disgusting, and we deserve better, we have been let down as a nation.

    But I am afraid the world isn't how we both might wish it to be. Corbyn will be sucked in, chewed up and spat out.

    And Labour will go back to on message statements, spin doctors, cynicism and lies, just like the Tories.
    Spare me the condescending tears. I am quite aware that my position as an anti-monarchy, Corbyn voting unionist is a niche one. It is a position at odds in a country where spin and BS gets more votes than substance, where there is an unholy obsession with class and where the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude is king. If I had the chance, and if I spoke fluently enough, I would head off to Deutschland where it is not perfect but a damn sight more in line with the kind of society I want. Predictably, our national media portrays it as public enemy number one.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    If you think there no emotion against immigrants you are deluded. People get ****ing angry about immigrants stealing their jobs and generally talking over like some kind of plague.

    You and mighty bush are self righteous and arrogantly assume your superiority. The fact you can only see all the problems you describe on the so called left says a lot.
    That's a fair point. We all of us have our intellectual opinions informed by our emotions, that is human nature.

    BUT the general point stands, and in fact you have not addressed it, which perhaps means you accept it?

    Let's take the "refugee" crisis, as a good example, since we have been referring to it.

    My position is that this country should not accept more "refugees" than the 20,000 agreed to by Cameron.

    You disagree, of course. And, you think your position makes you morally superior to me, a better person. Do you deny this?
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.